Professor at the University of Berkeley, Ramón Grosfoguel, answers in an article from ARGIA to Juan Carlos monedero. The article addresses the concept of plurinationality and tries to explain the electoral defeat of Podemos from the national issue, because it has set aside the right of stateless nations to exercise their sovereignty.

The article begins by assigning the imperial pride of the colonizers to the wallet. On the one hand, for saying that EH Bildu and BNG have been demized and, on the other, for affirming that Podemos was the first to implement the concept of plurinationality that they have introduced in their discourse. In any case, it is clear that EH Bildu has changed his discourse and introduced concepts such as the relationship of bilaterality, the fund of power gathered in a political concert, the right to decide the level of relationship with the State, even national recognition… within a confederal framework! All of this was reflected in his latest electoral programme. The truth is, I don't know if that change has been for the influence of Podemos, but there's one clear thing: Eh Bildu wanted to take the votes of the non-nationalist left of the Basque Country, leaving aside the traditional discourse of the Basque left (as evidenced by the existence of numerous Basque dissident groups).

The author also points out that the imperial colonial left considers it normal that the peoples subjected to its imperial policy do not have the capacity to generate their own thought, which he calls "epistemic racism". The main idea is that political thinking has copyright. In this case, a people understood as a human group with a homogeneous culture and a common history. It is true that ideas are generated in a given context, but also that thought about political forms and social organization must be shared, as it is inevitable to share them. What is more, the Left must have an obligation to learn from other experiences, from other struggles. It's not a vacuum extraction. On the contrary, epistemic racism is a doctrine that claims that, according to its cultural uniqueness, ideas belong to a single human group. Furthermore, he argues that the right to decide is based solely on that. So where is the political will of the citizens?

On the other hand, Grosfoguel does not understand that Euskal Herria is a plurinational nation in every way, not only because there is more than one language and cultural sensitivity here, but because the political will of its inhabitants over the territorial model is clearly divided. Beyond the rupture with the state, the fundamental thing is that people here talk, express themselves and understand each other. It is very easy to give a quick opinion from Berkeley University, which will have to assume the consequences of political decisions when you are not yourself. After all, Grosfoguel’s analysis, in addition to being erroneous, only delves into the division of the Basque left for the benefit of the PNV.

It cannot be left without independence in the Basque Country, in Galicia and in Catalonia, that is the main idea that can be taken from its article. This idea highlights the total ignorance about the political reality of these nations, in which it is precisely a national problem that has historically prevented collaboration between the organizations representing the working class. Many people are working on these different national sensitivities, not only to find effective ways of enabling the right to decide in all areas of life, but also to create a transformative political subject that changes the material conditions of our existence.

Grosfoguel accuses Monedero of colonial paternalism, but what is more paternalistic and colonialist than to answer Monedero on the Basque issue? Or what is more paternalistic and colonialist than to say that the representatives of Podemos in the Basque Country, Galicia and Catalonia are only the resources of power of Pablo Iglesias? Why has he not analyzed the statements and intentions of the representatives of Podemos in those stateless nations? Miren Gorrotxategi, spokesman for Elkarrekin-Podemos in the Basque Parliament, spoke about a referendum in the Québécois style (as Scotland did) in the last EITB electoral debate to break the immobilism with the national issue and thus guarantee the democratic principle of the right to decide.

Mr. Grosfoguel: Colonial paternalism is that part of Basque citizenship thinks that it has no political thought of its own. It is intellectually dishonest to interpret a phrase from a Monedero rally to write an article on the Basque political situation. In this way, you only confirm your own prejudices. A world-renowned theorist should investigate, analyse and show interest in the ideas and political activity of the Basque left before pronouncing. To get to the bottom of the matter is to understand the idiosyncrasies of Basque citizenship without the ideology itself distorting reality.

*Ander Jiménez is a political scientist