Skip to content

One year after the Catalan Republican October a balance sheet and some conclusio

Marxist Theory · 2026-05-13

Core Argument

The central thesis is that the Catalan "Republican October" of 2017 represented a genuine revolutionary moment — the abrupt entry of the masses onto the political stage — but was ultimately defeated because the petty-bourgeois nationalist leadership of Junts pel Sí (JxSí) was structurally incapable of using revolutionary means to defend the republic it had proclaimed. The article argues that the mass movement, through self-organised Committees in Defence of the Referendum (CDRs), student strikes, and the general strike of 3 October, repeatedly demonstrated the capacity to defy state repression and break the principle of authority of the 1978 regime. However, the nationalist leadership vacillated, sought negotiations with a state that had no intention of conceding, and ultimately proclaimed a republic it had no plan to defend. The conclusion is that the struggle for Catalan self-determination cannot succeed without a revolutionary leadership willing to link the national question to social demands, to build democratic organs of mass power (soviets), and to appeal to the working class across the Spanish state in a common struggle against the 1978 regime.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis draws on classical Marxist approaches to the national question, particularly the distinction between the revolutionary potential of mass movements for self-determination and the limitations of petty-bourgeois nationalist leadership. The article situates itself within the tradition of Lenin and Trotsky on the relationship between democratic demands and socialist revolution, arguing that the Catalan republic cannot be won through appeals to the European Union or negotiations with the bourgeois state, but only through the self-organisation of the working class and the use of revolutionary methods — general strikes, factory occupations, and the formation of democratic committees of struggle.

The concept of the "1978 regime" is deployed as a category of analysis: the post-Franco constitutional settlement is understood not as a genuine democracy but as a bourgeois monarchy that preserved the repressive apparatus of the dictatorship, including the Franco-era penal code and the National Court. This framing allows the article to reject reformist illusions in the Spanish state's capacity for democratic reform.

The analysis also draws on the Marxist theory of the state, particularly the understanding that the state is not a neutral arbiter but a class instrument. The article shows how the Spanish state, the Catalan bourgeoisie, and the European Union all acted in concert to defend capitalist property relations and the territorial integrity of the Spanish state against the threat of mass mobilisation.

Conjunctural Relevance

The article was written in September 2018, one year after the referendum, and addresses a conjuncture defined by the failure of the unilateral declaration of independence, the imprisonment of independence leaders, and the application of Article 155 of the Spanish constitution to suspend Catalan autonomy. The article identifies several specific conjunctural features:

  • The character of the 1978 regime: The article argues that the regime's response to the Catalan challenge revealed its true nature — a bourgeois monarchy that inherited the repressive apparatus of Francoism, including the crime of sedition copied from the 1944 Francoist penal code, and the National Court as the direct heir of the Franco-era Public Order Tribunal.

  • The role of the European Union: The EU consistently defended "the rule of law" in Spain, meaning the indivisible unity of the state as guaranteed by the armed forces. The article treats this as a structural feature of the EU as a capitalist body, not a contingent political choice.

  • The class character of the confrontation: The article notes that the Catalan bourgeoisie — all business organisations and employers' associations — came out firmly against the referendum and organised a campaign of corporate flight from Catalonia. This demonstrated that the national question could not be separated from class interests.

  • The role of organised workers: The dockers who refused to handle ferries carrying police reinforcements, the firefighters who stewarded demonstrations, and the general strike on 3 October are identified as the most advanced sectors of the working class, whose action was decisive but ultimately not generalised or led politically.

  • The failure of the Spanish left: Podemos and United Left are criticised for hiding behind legalistic arguments about the referendum's lack of "guarantees" and de facto siding with Spanish nationalism. The exception noted is Albano Dante-Fachin, then leader of Podemos in Catalonia, who was removed in an internal coup organised by the state leadership.

Where the Argument Continues

The article is a balance sheet that points forward to several strategic questions that are developed elsewhere in the IDOM corpus:

  • The strategy of the CDRs and the question of dual power: The article argues that the CDRs should have been transformed into soviets — democratic organs of mass power with elected delegates at national level. This argument is developed in subsequent IDOM articles on Catalonia, particularly those discussing the need for a revolutionary constituent assembly and the relationship between the national struggle and the class struggle.

  • The critique of the CUP's role: The article notes that the CUP, while critical of Puigdemont's hesitation, ultimately accepted the suspension of the declaration of independence rather than organising an alternative leadership. This critique is deepened in later IDOM analyses of the CUP's trajectory and its limitations as a left-nationalist formation.

  • The internationalist dimension: The article argues that the Catalan struggle must be linked to the struggle of the working class across the Spanish state against the 1978 regime. This connects to broader IDOM analyses of the Spanish state's crisis and the need for a revolutionary party capable of uniting the struggles of the different nations and nationalities within Spain.

  • The question of revolutionary leadership: The article's central conclusion — that the movement must give itself a leadership willing to use revolutionary means — points to the broader IDOM argument about the necessity of a Marxist party capable of providing such leadership.

Connections

This article should be read alongside:

  • Lenin, "The Right of Nations to Self-Determination": The theoretical foundation for the Marxist approach to the national question that underlies the article's analysis.

  • Trotsky, "The Permanent Revolution": The framework for understanding how democratic tasks (national self-determination) can only be completed through socialist revolution and working-class leadership.

  • IDOM articles on the Spanish state and the 1978 regime: Particularly those analysing the crisis of the Spanish monarchy, the role of the PSOE, and the limitations of Podemos.

  • IDOM articles on the Catalan question from 2017-2018: The article is part of a series of balance sheets and strategic interventions; earlier articles from the period of the referendum and the declaration of independence provide the immediate context.

  • Against the Stream episodes on Catalonia: The podcast has covered the Catalan question extensively, including interviews with activists and analysis of the ongoing political situation.

Key Quotes

  1. "The 20th of September marked a decisive turning point. The masses had entered the scene and had done their job in order to guarantee the holding of the referendum. Meanwhile, the leaders of the Catalan government hesitated."

  2. "The organised people had broken the principle of authority of the state. The revolutionary implications of this fact cannot be underestimated."

  3. "The problem faced by the government and the leaders of JxSí was that they themselves had voted for a law that said the results of the referendum were binding and that the republic should be declared within 48 hours in the event of a YES vote. They never believed that the referendum would be held, and now they faced an unsolvable dilemma."

  4. "The conclusion that the petty-bourgeois leaders of JxSí drew from this is that it was impossible to defend the republic. They expected, in vain, that in the face of the threat of state violence (and its use on 1 October), the European Union would intervene. Insofar as it did not, they thought everything was lost. But this is not the only possible conclusion. Far from it. There is another: in order to exercise the right of self-determination, revolutionary means must be used."

  5. "The movement for the republic must give itself a leadership worthy of the accomplishments and sacrifice of the people; one willing to use the revolutionary means necessary to achieve victory."

  6. "In all revolutionary situations in history, there comes a time when the apparatus of the state breaks down. We are now celebrating 50 years since May '68 in France, when a general strike of 10m workers engaged in factory occupations paralyzed the country. At that time also, De Gaulle and the French ruling class thought of using the army. Finally, they did not do it for fear that, in the first confrontation, the army would have split and the soldiers would have fraternised with the strikers."