The same is always the case. In politics, it's not good to be so ingenious, if you don't fool us over and over again. What am I talking about? Look, recently, and after a long and complicated negotiation, we were led to believe that in Catalonia, at last, an independent government was formed, handing over responsibility to fifty-fifty and agreeing to the office of president. "It was time! At the end of the day, the logical mandate from the results of the n elections has been fulfilled: An independent government belonging to the independence majority has been formed!”

Because a few days after the pot broke out, from jail to waiting for pardon, the letter was opened by ERC leader Oriol Junqueras, causing an earthquake that buried the possibility of independence. The following reactions, both in Catalonia and Madrid, have given us the measure of earthquake. In Euskal Herria, on the contrary, silence has been absolute throughout the day. Perhaps this position by ERC has placed in a very uncomfortable place those who had previously been considered close allies and had embraced it. Now nobody wants to appear in Oriol's mirror junqueras.

That is understandable. From intellectual honesty, because that last attitude of junkies is absolutely unacceptable. Not only because it is quite the opposite of what he and his colleagues advocated until recently with firmness. Beyond that, because this current political position does not have any logical coherence, it has to know as such and Junqueras has to know as well. If you announce that you are totally rejecting the unilateral initiative and say that you are going to resolve the conflict with the Spanish State through dialogue, with whom it has no effect. Forget about independence. Forget about the referendum. Forget about any objective that Spain does not want. Pardon and a little more. And period.

If all this is so obvious, how has ERC played its political role so far? Well, through the theory that can be called the independence of the second time. We still have no objective chance of leaping into independence, but now we have to expand the number of supporters, and on a second occasion, let us say 20 years later, the possibility is going to be. This curious and unfounded theory has also been found lately in our home, among ERC’s allies or followers. What happens in practice in the development of this “theory”? For political behaviour and even language itself are changing, there is no longer so much talk of independence, but of sovereignty, sovereignty, decision-making capacity and concepts of this more ambiguous kind. In the end, one or other government in the State, and helping it, helps to stabilize the State, and thus in practice forgets the claim of our own State. This is not considered necessary. Instead, improvements to the most dramatic situations, whether pardons, or the elimination of the situations of prisoners, are negotiated with the Government on duty.

What, then, is it to make promises of independence to the citizens, especially on the eve of the elections? What is it about forming governments with independence majorities? How to praise the fact that there are sovereign majorities in the parliaments? Let us be clear: without forceful street mobilizations, without destabilising the government of Madrid’s turn or putting it to dance, without firmly maintaining our national values and objectives, independence will never be a real option and will not be credible. We will be subdivided from that existing State if we do not want to go to independence.