Lay Spain 2011

AOG, Madrid

Spain these days likes to present the World its best non-religious face. Its Prime Minister, Mr. Zapatero, is a well known atheist who, nevertheless, attended a religious service when it visited the US in the company of the Obamas. 

And that is probably the best example of how this country tries to do away with religion in its institutions, while kow-towing to religion time and time again. Something which many people in Spain wish did not happen.

The best example of this is the recent controversy an atheist group has presented Madrid’s (Socialist) Government Representative in the city. A group known as AMAL - Asociación Madrileña de Ateos y Librepensadores (Madrid association of atheists and freethinkers)-, requested permission from the Town Hall to stage a public demonstration in favor of atheism on Maudy Thursday. And this hot potato has gone from the Conservative ruled Town Hall straight to the (Socialist) Government representative in Madrid, with the media in tow all along the way.

The problem is that on that very day, Madrid, and most of Spain, is deep in the midst of Easter Week, with daily processions of religious figures, Saints, Virgins and crucified images of Christ, which the faithful congregate on the streets to see. 

Madrid’s Easter processions are relatively low key compared to the religious pomp and circumstance of cities like Valladolid and the über Catholic processions of Seville, in the South of the country but nevertheless as a popular religious expression.

It is fair to say that the Catholic Church is allowed to take over the streets of Spain at this time, and that the whole country sort of shuts down for the duration.

Of course, Spain 2011 is not the same as Spain 1911. These days, many people, even many religious people, are not entirely sure that the Church should be given such a free hand when it comes to public spaces, and Easter, or Holy Week as it is known, can certainly be a nuisance for many people since it entails increased levels of noise, public crowds, traffic cuts and delays, etc.

But that is not exactly the point of the demonstration. It had more to do with an incipient, yet eternal, movement towards atheism.

The Government’s regional representative argued up to 11 reasons for which it denied the demonstration which it quickly called “an atheist procession”, alluding to an anti-religious sentiment and the intention of AMAL to promote its “atheist ideology”. AMAL, as well as the local organisation La Playa de Lavapies however, never called it a procession and insisted it was a public demonstration.

It is worth noting that AMAL is a group from the neighborhood of Lavapies, which is a small melting pot of different nationalities in Madrid. 

In fact, it would be fair to say that about half the population of Lavapies is not of Christian origin, coming as many of them do from places like North Africa or the Indian subcontinent, although no religious group asked for this demonstration, quite the opposite. 

Unfortunately, the controversy was served as soon as the Town Hall started to pass the buck. 

Many other atheist groups in Madrid and in Spain have joined AMAL and it has the right of appeal before Madrid’s Superior Justice Tribunal since the demonstration’s denial is seen as a violation of the fundamental right of public demonstration and assembly, enshrined in Spain’s legal system.

However, it seems like they had no time to do this since they are being sued by 10 citizens -7 of them lawyers- on the grounds of "religious derision". 

The fact that "religious derision" can be counted as a punishable crime in Spain has many people in the country up in arms.

Furthermore, they are also being sued by a Christian Lawyers Association for “extolling terrorism” and an NGO (HazteOir.org ) for “genocide” –it seems AMAL allegedly used pre civil war arguments for their demonstration and maybe “justified” their actions by so doing, and thus allegedly broke a law on Spain’s Penal Code, (unfortunately, a lot of priests and nuns were killed before the Spanish Civil War of 1936-39 and it is against the law to justify or deny their deaths) which forbids “The diffusion by any means of ideas or doctrines which deny or justify the crimes of genocide… or pretend the rehabilitation of regimes or institutions which shelter any practises which generate said crimes”.

It seems like the people who wanted to carry out the demonstration never thought it would all end up like this and they still want to carry out their demonstration, although it does not look like they will.

Mr. Luis Vega, president of AMAL, has stated that prohibiting this demonstration is a “worrying” fact and one that “means a withdrawal of the country’s liberties” since the city’s Administration uses the same arguments as those used by religious authorities to forbid the public demonstration. 

This is one of the few public declarations they have made since they went public with their request given the fact that they have, allegedly, been “threatened” ever since. “We were trying to criticise the Church as an institution, not any religious belief. We meant it to be like a neighborhood band type of thing”.

Madrid’s Government Representative has denied the petition on these grounds:

- The procession’s (sic) route “curiously” presents names related to catholic symbology

- The chosen date: Maudy Thursday

- The chosen time coincides with that of various Catholic processions

- The denominations of the participating “brotherhoods” (AMAL never said there would be any “brotherhoods”, but it seems that other atheist groups slightly hijacked their initiative and announced there would be brotherhoods akin to those found on Catholic processions with names such as the Pope’s Brotherhood of the Holy Larceny or the Brotherhood of the Holy Paedophile)

- It takes place in a zone with various parish churches

- The content of the group’s posters and public declarations

- It coincides with the route taken by Catholic processions “well-known for years”

- The presence of radical and antagonistic groups

- Massive public affluence and the need to protect Madrid’s touristic image

- Enclave of a very high artistic and historical value

-The Police, Town Hall, the Public Defender’s Office, and the Government’s representative coincide in that it should not take place

Of course, part of the problem lies in the fact that it was the Government’s representative that denied the petition. 

The Government is ruled at present by the Socialist Party, a political organisation which continuously tries to present its lay credentials but which often falls short in the eyes of many.

For its part, AMAL and La Playa de Lavapies have issued statements whereby they declare that they abide the Government's ruling and will not carry out any public demonstration on said date. 

However, it remains to be seen if nothing beyond the religious processions will take place. 

Many in Spain see this as another example of their non-denominational Government bowing to religious pressure and as a victory for the Catholic Church, an institution which in Spain, surprisingly, has of late been playing the victim continuously, especially since the Socialists came into power in 2004.

Iran 2009

AOG, Madrid

The past few days have shown the less friendly face of the Islamic Republic of Iran. I have read testimony after testimony of the protesters in Iran regarding their Government. Many of them, perhaps most, are amazed at the actions of their Government. Some say that they cannot believe that an Iranian would ever harm another Iranian. Disbelief seemed to permeate the early stages of the, in my opinion, soon to be aborted Iranian version of the Orange Revolution.

Certainly the people in charge will ensure that they remain in charge for a long time to come. As with China and Tiananmen Square 20 years ago last month, so with Iran.

It everything points towards that being the ultimate outcome of this national happening, if that is the word that can be allowed to describe the recent events in that country.



Today it surfaces that president elect Ahmadineyad is asking the US for a formal apology, all the while the G8 condemns and threatens to isolate Iran even further.

My question is, how much can one isolate a country already isolated? And what purpose will this solve?

I wonder what kind of brainwashing must go on in authoritarian regimes that its own population seems to believe time and time and again that it is somehow impervious to the greater evils of its Government?

Time after time History has shown that authoritarian, as well as pariah, states are the first to turn their might against their own citizens. True, democracies are known to do this as well, but never like these countries do. Never on that scale.

So I wonder what it is that people get told to make them think that their form of Government is benign, when the rest of the planet seems to think otherwise.

Where is the criteria that allows people to understand that any state which calls for the destruction of another (like Iran and Israel and, lately, North Korea and the US), is far from benign. Far from just. And far from sane.

Perhaps it is a sign of weakness the fact that the Ayatollahs endeavour to harm their citizens so freely. However, as with China, I’m sure that just as they can fool people into thinking they are a force for the greater good, they can also fool them into thinking that they are still powerful. And that Iran will not withstand, under any circumstances, any more revolutions other than the 1978 Islamic one.

Nevertheless, according to French philosopher and writer Bernard Henri-Levy, "Whatever happens, the people know, from this point on, that they are the people and that there is not a regime on earth that can remain in power against the people", as he wrote for the Huffington Post in reference to Iran's situation.

I wish he were right, but then I think of China, Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe, and a host of authoritarian regimes intent of maintaining power no matter what, and I can't help but disagree.



PS: According to today's Guardian, Mousavi is defying the Government's crackdown and accuses his opponents of an "evil conspiracy". Is there hope yet for change, positive change, in Iran?

G20 Summit, part 1

AOG, London

The night before the G20 Summit in London, I thought of traipsing over to check out the premises and pick up my press pass, but reading the instructions, it would have been useless: it had to be turned in the minute you left the premises. So no.

I was in the City, just outside of Liverpool Street Station, jabbering away when I overheard a man telling a couple that they would be "better off" walking since no buses were getting through due to the protest down the street.

I glanced over but saw nothing, so I continued to talk and make my mind up as to how best to get back home: bus or train?

When I finished talking, I walked back to the station’s entrance, and there, in the distance, I could see and hear the protest.

Some of the people around me were intrigued by it and decided to get a closer look. I too was tempted, but chose against it. But there is definitely something very vertigo-like about a large group of people trying to get to where you are.

I remember reading once that the definition of vertigo at great heights was not the fear they caused, but rather the desire to jump when we see the void in front of us. Something like this is what I felt when I saw that mob. And, of course, I let it be.

I had a long day ahead of me (just how long it turned out to be I had no idea), and for a minute thought if I should go to the West End.

Once again thinking about next day’s events made me go home and do some reading so as to be prepared for the G20 Summit.

I took the escalator down and popped into WHSmith. I bought a copy of Newsweek and The Economist and took the train replacement bus back home. I remember hearing the crowd outside as I left the newsagents.

In the end, I’m glad I did not witness what happened. RBS, just across the street from the station, was attacked by the protesters.

I have never been one to enjoy violent forms of protest. I never see the point. You don’t like bankers? Fine, do something constructive about it.

Rioting seems hardly the best way to put your point across. I am not saying they don’t have a valid point. It is just that the delivery does away with the content.

I read in the press that many protesters, when demonstrating across the city, were shouting “Jump” at the bankers who were leering at them from their glass towers and, as the press said, “taunting” them waving 10 pound notes at crowd. Childish and unnecessary.

So I went home, and the next day had a very early morning. Made my way down to the Excel, in East London as fast as I could, and I can’t say that I had any problems getting there. Except, of course, that the venue is very far from my place.

And the rest of civilization.