Had social media sites not played a role, we would not have an ongoing independence process in Catalonia. The opposition to independence by the hegemonic media —mainly TV networks and print newspapers, in a ratio of about 6:1— has only been countered thanks to the grassroots work by civil society, encouraged —to a great extent— by a very intense social media buzz. Criticism, humour —which drives out fear— and even epic have found on the internet the best possible channel to express themselves. This is a fact that will need to be kept very much in mind when future historians write about the impressive political movement that has been rocking Catalonia for ten years. Furthermore, it is no accident that the new Catalan president, Carles Puigdemont, has been an active member of this space of political dynamism. I will not claim that he has become president thanks to that, but I do think that being an active actor has afforded him a more comprehensive overview and a better understanding of the current political dynamic.
SO IT IS FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE that I would argue against the recent claims by Zygmunt Bauman, the prestigious sociologist. On January 9 he wrote in Spain’s El País that social networks are a pitfall since they construct a false community where dialogue does not occur because controversy is avoided: “many use social media to lock themselves within their comfort zone, rather than unite and broaden their horizons”. Nevertheless, the opposite is true. By definition, the net is a space for controversy. Also for serene dialogue, of course. But it shines especially in confrontation, like in a tavern brawl, and with the informalities that have traditionally accompanied that … but, fortunately, without being able to come to blows! Therefore, social media never protect. Rather, they expose; nor do they tame, but provoke. And while there may be cases of what Bauman scornfully calls “armchair activism”, in our case it is evident that this sort of activism has actually got us off our armchair to take to the streets in a civilised manner.
IT WILL ALSO BE THE NETWORKS that will allow, for the first time in the political history of nations and in a manner completely unheard of, the drafting if a new Constitution that will not be borne out of a meeting of a small elite who is awarded the capacity to write it up in the name of everyone else and then put it to a vote. Rather, here we will first have a bottom-up debate and, once it is taken onboard by a constituent parliament, it will travel from top to bottom again to be voted in a referendum. It will not be a bed of roses, to a great extent because, as the picture of what the new country will look like becomes sharper, it will be harder to preserve the common ground typical of the phase of demands which the formation of the government has closed off. But it will be precisely its dynamic of open controversy what will encourage broader social participation than was elicited by the previous stage.
THE SOCIAL NETWORKS, then, will not be a mere container to spread documents or the main communication channel among the participants of this Catalan constituent process. Rather, they will also determine the nature of the dialogue and the negotiation and, therefore, the nature of the agreements, too. Indeed, a moderating intervention of experienced political scientists will be required. But, likewise and to a greater extent, we will need experts who can analyse these networks, who can uncover —and so, make transparent— the internal logic of the debate so that we can sort what is useful from what is not, and to evaluate its consistency and representativity. Yes: in Catalonia, social networks will drive emancipation.
