Spanish politics has many problems. But most of it doesn’t just happen here. This is shared by most Western countries.

Before Hamas carry out its terrible attacks, for example priority Israeli government is to reduce autonomy and judge’s power, especially the Supreme Court, which he accused of playing with politics in its decisions. In the Sweden and Finlandboth governments led by traditional parties also depend on it radical partners which results in persistent instability. In the Belgiumdifficulty for the parties to reach an agreement delayed the coronation process: on one occasion, it was passed 589 days with the Government in office. In the United States of Americaa senator named Joe Manchin He was considered “the most powerful man in Washington”, as he was firm in passing legislation and always demanded that it provide real benefits for the small state he represented. W.V (1.8 million people), which turns out to be more decisive, for example, than California (40 million people).

In many ways we believe we are unique, yes, we are just like everyone else. Which are actually Spanish political anomaly is a very large number match with representation in Congress who opposes to a greater or lesser degree to the Constitution and the level of influence they have on the Executive. In this case, we can hardly compare them.

Complicated differences

In many countries there are parties who oppose the constitutional order. In British House of CommonsFor example, there are two major parties represented they want their territory to be independent From England, Sinn Féin and the Scottish Nationalist Party, but they are almost irrelevant in national politics (they control only 7.5% of the seats). In most countries, parties that openly conflict with the existing order are prohibited: in GermanFor example, Communist partyapart from a few characters neo-Nazis.

Italy and France They also prohibited formations that conflicted with the Constitution, but not the League when it was still an independence party or the Party of the Corsican Nation. Perhaps a case similar to that in Spain is that of the nationalist parties New Flemish Alliance, which promoted progressive self-determination in Flanders and participated in the Belgian national government. But as reminded me Ignacio Juradopolitical scientist and professor at Carlos III University, most situations like this are ambiguous: maybe just independence party They can be considered very contrary to the constitution, to the point that they deny the “demos”, namely society in accordance with the Constitution.

Anyway, in Congress of Deputies Spain is represented four pro-independence parties who actively sought to end the Spanish Constitution (ERC, Junts, Bildu and BNG) and perhaps nine (those belonging to Sumar plus the PNV) who opposed its central parts, such as the monarchy or territorial organization. Together they number more than one 15% seatsall of them are necessary for the coronation of Pedro Sánchez and for the approval of related laws such as the budget, and Sumar will direct several ministries.

Liberal or ungovernable?

This makes Spain one of the most liberal countries with dissenting opinions, which provides institutional representation without any obstacles and whose role in government has been completely normalized. Spanish democracy has many problems, but no one can blame them the most representative and open in the world.

But this, as we see more often now than in previous times, also produces a constant institutional instability. Some representatives of democracy do not consider heads of state to be legitimate, they do not swear to obey the Constitution when assuming office, and they seem to consider that their institutional responsibilities are a tool for eroding institutions. This has also given rise to feelings of justified grievance: in some areas they gain disproportionate benefits because they have nationalist party, but this does not happen because of electoral opportunities, as in the case of Senator Manchin from West Virginia, but rather it has become something structural. In many countries there is strong polarization between competing parties, but this has always been the case within the system: even the most radical formations in the German, French or Italian parliaments adhere to the constitutional order.

In Spain, on the other hand, there is a dual polarization: the party that brings together those who support the system, and the party that brings them together with those who want to end it. It is common for democratic parties to ignore the biggest thing – the form of the state – and debate the smallest thing – concrete political steps. In Spain, the opposite is true. As we have seen in pact that PSOE and Junts have signedEven system parties buy into anti-system stories to gain power. Contrary to what some socialists say, this is not irrelevant or temporary. This has become structural. Those who oppose this system become important to this system.

Resisting the worst temptations—sometimes expressed by Voice or by Isabel Diaz-Ayuso—, the solution is not to reduce the great ideological permissiveness of the Spanish system and prohibit those who oppose the Constitution from participating in lawmaking. Democratically, maintaining such a situation is a good thing. The challenge is to allow these parties to freely represent the citizens who voted for them and exercise their influence in the system, but they cannot do that. very important inside it.

However, the PSOE has decided to strengthen its structural character in government. The pitch is that there is no other alternative: not only so that Pedro Sánchez can maintain his power, but also so that Spain becomes a truly inclusive country. That is wrong. Therefore, the question is: how to ensure that Spanish institutions remain perfectly representative, but that this does not lead to the collapse of the system? PP must provide a partial answer to that question. But PSOE must start by recognizing that this is the biggest question we face. And then try to answer it credibly.