By Claire Spangler

On October 8, 2017, one week following the Catalonian independence referendum, pro-union demonstrators flooded the streets of Barcelona to protest Catalan separatism.[i] The demonstration, organized by the pro-union group Societat Civil Catalana (SCC), was comprised of 350,000 demonstrators by police estimates, or one million by the organizers’ estimates.[ii] Such an outpouring of support is notable, as pro-union Catalans were previously not mobilized and largely silent on the issue.[iii] The large-scale mobilization of 2017 stands as an anomaly, leading this research to investigate the main catalyst for pro-unity Catalans to break their prior “silence” and attend the October 8 demonstration.

That year marked a turning point for the independence movement as Catalonia’s parliament unilaterally declared the referendum binding despite opposition from the Spanish government, which forcefully attempted to shut down polling stations.[iv]  The pro-independence movement was highly mobilized, vocal, and, for the first time, actively preparing for secession. This intensified the perceived threat to Spanish unity, prompting the less-engaged pro-union camp to organize the October 8 demonstration in response to the independence referendums.

Social mobilization occurs when the perceived “opportunity for action” is paired with a “threat.”[v] Opportunities and threats can manifest in two distinct mobilization tactics: resource mobilization and threat framing. This research examines whether the pro-union camp mobilized primarily due to increased resource mobilization, facilitated by enhanced opportunities for action through greater access to resources such as social, political, and legal support, or due to the increased threat of independence.

To evaluate the influencing factors and identify the main impetus of the unprecedented scale of the October 8 demonstration, this research evaluates trending terms on Twitter and individual tweets from Spanish leaders. Tweets are categorized according to the two mobilization tactics and examined to determine which tactic was more effective. Ultimately, while the threat of secession in 2017 was significant, this study finds that the impact of resource mobilization was more influential than threat framing in driving the October 8 demonstration.

Context 

The Parliament of Catalonia

Understanding the motivations behind the body issuing the referendum and how it represents the populace’s wishes provides deeper insight into the recent referendum results, their significance, and the historic shift on October 8. The electoral system in Catalonia is structured to favor less populated rural areas, where the independence vote is typically higher.[vi] The proportional representation electoral system is unbalanced because rural areas require far fewer votes per parliamentary seat (21,000–30,000) compared to urban Barcelona (48,000).[vii] The overrepresentation of sparsely populated areas increases the influence of pro-independence parties in parliament, as rural regions often lean more toward pro-independence views.[viii] As a result, pro-independence parties are disproportionately represented in the Catalonian parliament. Additionally, Catalan party elites often hold more-radical positions on independence issues than the general population. Barrio and Juan Rodríguez-Teruel find that:

“ [...] since the late 1990s [...]party leaders held more radical positions than rank-and-file party members and voters when it came to Catalonia’s political status […] These surveys also show that support for independence among nationalist party elites was prevalent before the mobilization of the Catalan society.” [ix]

This  parliamentary system benefits vocal radicals and effectively blocks “…the articulation of preferences and interests of many members of society.”[x] Colomer finds that the structure and make-up of the Catalonian parliament encourage the self-radicalization of parties as they vie for support, and more-extreme party elements consequently dominate the political conversation.[xi] Due to these structural features of the parliament, individuals with pro-independence stances —including the leadership of these parties— are well-represented and often hold more-radical views on independence than the general population across the autonomous community.

The 2014 and 2017 Referendums

Existing scholarship on Catalan voting patterns and identity elucidates that Catalonia is a divided society with persistent cleavages manifesting around the issue of independence, which divides the population into the pro-union and pro-independence camps.[xii] The pro-union camp is referred to as a “silent majority,” inferring both their size and lack of mobilization or vocalization.[xiii] Both factors of the moniker “silent majority” are evident in the 2014 referendum for independence. During the 2014 referendum, which the Constitutional Court deemed unconstitutional and occurred as a symbolic vote, 2.3 million of 5.4 million eligible votes (38 percent of the voting population) turned out.[xiv] As illustrated by Figure 1, while the vote found 80.9 percent of participants in favor of independence, the majority of the electorate did not turn out.

Then, in 2017, the Catalonian parliament called a second referendum and illegally declared it binding.[xv] The parliament did not set a participation threshold to make the outcome binding, opting instead to rely on a majority vote. Notably, 42 percent of the parliament walked out of the legislative session in protest.[xvi] The approval of the referendum was declared a “constitutional and democratic atrocity” by the Spanish government, which later mobilized to close polling stations.[xvii] The referendum was interrupted by violent clashes as Spanish police raided polling stations, forcibly removed voters, and closed voting centers. Such interruptions made the final numbers impossible to validate. Nonetheless, the Catalan government claimed it had earned the right to secede after 90 percent of voters supported independence with an overall turnout of only 42 percent.  Figure 2 illustrates the breakdown of the vote share among pro-independence voters, anti-independence voters, and abstainers. The low turnout and the continued insistence on calling the referendum binding could amplify abstainers' concerns about the risks of independence, as they were effectively disenfranchised. The resulting chaos and Spanish government interventions spurred the October 8 demonstrations.  

Considering the significant data limitations of the 2014 and 2017 referendums —one symbolic and the other illegal and disrupted— it remains unclear whether those who abstained leaned toward unionism, neutrality, or disengagement, or what motivated their decision. They may have deemed it unnecessary to participate in a symbolic vote or illogical to engage in a legally contested referendum —especially since the parliament seemed biased toward pursuing independence despite population and voter turnout trends— which further fueled feelings of disenfranchisement.

In the absence of representative voting data, a poll conducted by the Centre d'Estudis d'Opinió (CEO) in July 2017 provides insight into public opinion on independence.

As seen in Figure 3, when asked, “Do you want Catalonia to become an independent state?” the largest share of respondents answered “No.”[xviii]

Later, following this poll and the parliament’s decision to move forward with the 2017 referendum, Barcelona Mayor Ada Colau accused the Catalan government of “ignoring half the Catalan population,” highlighting the deep polarization and the challenges of moving forward with the referendum amid such stark divisions.[xix] This is further reflected in voter data, which consistently shows that at least half of the population either abstains or opposes independence, reinforcing the notion of a profoundly divided society.

Exploring the Silent Majority’s Role

Two main factors could correlate to the pro-union population’s voting trends. Firstly, in the years preceding 2017, the Spanish government had not substantially acted to quell independence efforts and instead issued “…warnings to respect the democratic law and calls to the Constitutional High Court.”[xx] Such relative inaction indicated to pro-union Spaniards that the independence movement was not legally threatening and therefore not worthy of counteraction or vocal opposition. Thus, the pro-union side would risk little by remaining silent, as expressing their position would only incur costs by drawing attention to or legitimizing the independence cause through public discussion.[xxi]

Notably, the 2017 independence referendum was vehemently opposed by the Spanish government, which responded by forcefully closing polling stations.[xxii] Shortly after, on October 8, an estimated 350,000 pro-union demonstrators vocalized their stance in the first large demonstration of its kind; 2017 thus marks a critical juncture, evident in both the Spanish government’s actions and the mobilization of pro-union demonstrators. Such radical change implies that either the increase in Spanish government attention, active support, and resources or the amplified threat of independence incited such mobilization.  

Literature 

To analyze pro-union demonstrators’ motivations to mobilize, this research differentiates resource mobilization from threat framing. Resource mobilization theory helps explain the scale of popular mobilization, as individuals evaluate their perceived costs and benefits of attending a demonstration through a lens of the “resources” backing their position. [xxiii] Benefits might include advancing their goal (remaining in Spain), gaining solidarity, or feeling empowered, while costs could involve time, money, or social risks. Resources—namely social, political, and legal resources—can lower these costs and encourage participation. Participation, in turn, affects expectations of the movement’s outcome, or expectancy value.

In the case of the October 8 demonstrations, changes in resource availability enabled widespread mobilization. Organizers and participants emphasized available resources such as solidarity, social support, legal backing, or even tweets from supporters of the Spanish government. By invoking such resources, they aimed to strengthen motivation and confidence among participants, making mobilization feel worthwhile.

Threat framing is also a powerful incentive for mobilization. Tarrow uses framing as a “…generalization of a grievance [that] defines the ‘us’ and ‘them’ in a movement’s structure.”[xxiv] A grievance mobilizes a group in opposition to another. Importantly, Gamson identifies that the narrativized framing must clearly target a “them” that it is in opposition to as a target of the narrativized framing. [xxv] In the case of 2017, the “grievance” of independence forced upon a significant non-supporting portion of the population by overly radical pro-independence political leaders serves as the threat framing motivation for the October 8 pro-union demonstrations. As will be discussed, the “target” or “them” can either relate to the pro-independence crowd or to an individual who symbolizes the movement.

Methodology 

To investigate the main cause of the mobilization of the pro-union demonstrations, this analysis examines both hypotheses through discourse analysis of trending social media terms and tweets from the leaders of the two largest political parties in Spain, both of which are against Catalonian independence. These leaders are chosen based on their significant influence within the political landscape. Their tweets are selected based on their use of top trending hashtags and high engagement levels (each tweet has at least 2,500 retweets and 5,000 likes). This research examines these tweets from both the resource mobilization and threat framing frameworks. For the former, this analysis looks for tweets referencing resources or social capital available to the pro-union camp. For the latter, this study identifies tweets using threat framing by their content targeting a group or individual on the pro-independence side.

While trending terms come from Spain as a whole and cannot be isolated to Catalonia, this research uses nationwide trends to capture the broader social dynamics that influence pro-union sentiment within Catalonia. Additionally, some trending hashtags investigated in this analysis are in Catalan. These Catalan-language trending terms appear in tweets otherwise written in Spanish, but they rely on the Catalan term to contextualize the content and connect with a Catalan-speaking audience. Both the leaders’ influential positions and the alignment of their rhetoric with trending Catalan terms help reveal the dominant mobilizing narrative coming from the Spanish government.

This research aims to identify large-scale trends that motivated pro-union Catalans to participate in the October 8 demonstrations. Although there is not a single definitive reason for the mobilization, the analysis reveals likely motivations that align with the pro-union population’s mobilization in Catalonia. This way, the study offers meaningful insights into the factors that drove the October 8 demonstrations.

Findings and Analysis         

Resource Mobilization 

The influence of resource mobilization is evident from trending hashtags in tweets from leaders of the two largest Spanish political parties: Mariano Rajoy (then-Spanish president and leader of the People’s Party) and Pedro Sánchez (then-leader of the Spanish Socialist Worker’s Party). Trendinalia, a website that tracks and publishes social media trends within Spain, reported on October 8 that #RecuperemElSeny (recover common sense)[xxvi] was the top trending hashtag. [xxvii] 

#RecuperemElSeny was indicative of three major discursive patterns of pro-union Spanish leaders. Firstly, the hashtag itself was in Catalan, yet it trended across Spain, which is largely Spanish speaking. While the tweets selected for analysis are in Spanish, the use of a Catalan hashtag indicated an intention to engage a Catalan-speaking audience or those in Catalonia involved in this subject. The resource found here was attention, as political leaders went out of their way to engage in Catalan, fostering unity between the two languages and within the autonomous community, as well as among all voters involved.

Second, seny is a significant and historic component of Catalan identity, embodying “ancestral” wisdom, integrity, and level-headedness; it is traditionally associated with legalist and democratic ideals. [xxviii]  Seny is contrasted by rauxa, or madness, which is linked to impulse and violence.[xxix] In recent years, opposing sides of the independence debate have co-opted these terms. Examining the usage of these concepts in 2014, Vaczi notes that “pro-independence ‘madnesses’ was contrasted to the ‘reasonable majority’ who chose to stay silent and did not vote.”[xxx] The pro-union side often claims seny, aligning themselves with legality and restraint and asserting a position of rationalism. Meanwhile, the pro-independence camp has embraced rauxa to assert a need for action, with some supporters lamenting that there is “‘too much seny’ and ‘not enough rauxa’ in Catalan politics.”[xxxi] #RecuperemElSeny therefore was an effort to save Catalonia from falling into rauxa—or the madness of independence.

By “recovering” Catalonia, the discourse framed the community as being saved from the brink of separation, reinforcing unity and keeping Catalonia as part of Spain. This dynamic led some to frame the political shift toward independence as a transition from seny to rauxa, with each side strategically using these cultural ideals to reinforce their stance.[xxxii] The relational meaning of seny was evident in the discursive pattern of Mariano Rajoy's tweet: [xxxiii]

Rajoy stated that the recovery of seny was essential to the legal conceptualization of democracy; thus, the maintenance of Catalonia as a region of Spain as promoted by the pro-union camp was essential for the preservation of Spanish democracy. This connection effectively put the full weight of Spanish law and democracy behind the pro-union cause.

Importantly, Spain’s transition to democracy in 1975 established the primacy of the Constitution, which symbolizes unity and stability. According to Balfour and Quiroga, the Constitution is viewed as essential to the very existence of democratic Spain, establishing Spain as the only “nation” while designating the autonomous communities, including Catalonia, as “nationalities.”[xxxiv] This construction of the Constitution lends enduring legitimacy to the idea of Spanish unity over any regional opposition; in many ways, the preservation of national unity is legally, culturally, and socially tied to the preservation of Spanish democracy. Consequently, the illegality of secession is framed as essential to upholding Spanish democracy. Thus, the political and legal structure of Spain is discursively situated as a resource of the pro-union camp.

Rajoy invoked unity both in his tweets’ text (“preserve the unity”) and in the hashtag #NoEstáisSolos (“you are not alone”). The plural form of “you are” suggests that Rajoy was addressing all Catalans, particularly the “silent majority” who may be seeking his support; his message reassured those wishing Catalonia to remain part of Spain. Rajoy’s references to unity were a call to arms to protect a unified Spain. This call motivated all Spaniards and Catalans to rally around the cause: the ultimate call to collective mobilization. Pedro Sánchez (then-leader of the Spanish Socialist Worker’s Party) affirmed this resource: [xxxv], [xxxvi]

Sánchez's statement also served to rhetorically unify Spain while framing the pro-independence movement as exclusionary. By advocating for “an integrated Catalonia” and “without exclusions,” Sánchez suggested that Catalonia belongs in Spain, in contrast to the divisive or exclusionary stance that Sanchez and Rajoy attributed to pro-independence Catalans. This distinction was further underscored by the seny/rauxa dichotomy in the hashtag #RecuperemElSeny, symbolizing a preference for unity and stability over separatist impulses.

Rajoy and Sánchez’s tweets positioned the pro-union cause as central to democracy and Spain’s unity. Their messages emphasized that pro-union supporters were not alone; they were embraced with understanding and inclusivity. The tweets also implied that the pro-independence movement sought to isolate or marginalize pro-union supporters and that the movement displayed a weak commitment to democracy and democratic ideals. Overall, their statements attempted to bolster the pro-union movement through social and legal support, and called for a mass mobilization of all Spaniards, reinforcing pro-union Catalans’ countrywide support.

The two tweets lent the resources of the Spanish government and legal system to the pro-union movement, offered democratic legitimacy, and called for collective mobilization. Such resources or social capital of legality and unity countered the previous marginalization of pro-union Catalans, who had faced limited political representation within Catalonia and had been overshadowed by a more vocal and overrepresented pro-independence movement. The tweets offered a level of nationwide support that was previously unseen. Thus, both the tweets and trending terms highlighted resources that suggested widespread unionist support, effectively addressing the two main challenges faced by pro-union Catalans: limited representation in government and a lack of national backing, issues compounded by the lack of supportive Spanish government actions before 2017 and their general disenfranchisement by the Catalan parliament. These tweets from nationally recognized political representatives helped restore some of their representation in government. Both factors greatly decreased the individual cost of participation and increased the expectancy value of the pro-union movement, plausibly provoking higher levels of collective action among the previously “silent” pro-union Catalan majority.

Threat Framing 

Threat framing was also evident in #RecuperemElSeny as it framed the dialectical opposite pro-independence rauxa as a threat to Catalonia, making it necessary for the region to “return” to Spain. However, while #RecuperemElSeny had identifiable threats, threat framing was not the main narrative in tweets. Instead, these tweets stressed legality and unity, with the central message being a call for constitutional cohesion.

Rajoy and Sánchez were careful not to frame the independence movement as a threat that would undermine the legitimacy of Spain’s government system. This is important given the complex balance of power between the central government, regional autonomous communities, and local governments. However, they did position it as an existential threat to national unity and the Constitution, arguing that secession was not in defense of democracy, the Constitution, or liberty. Their rhetoric carefully balanced describing independence as a threat while asserting that it was ultimately untenable.

It is possible that threat framing was used less than resource mobilization due to expectations about the seriousness of the independence movement. Given the symbolic nature, and subsequent low turnout, of the 2014 referendum, many may have seen the 2017 referendum as similarly non-threatening. However, the next move for independence by the Catalonian government was significantly more threatening than a second referendum: On October 19 the Catalan government announced their preparation to break from Spain.[xxxvii] On this day threat framing spiked in the form of the third highest trending hashtag: #ProuPuigdemont (“enough [of] Puigdemont”).[xxxviii]  The identified threat in this case was Carles Puigdemont (then-president of the Catalan government). Puigdemont symbolized the pro-independence movement in many ways, as he vocally advocated for independence; as president, he also approved the law permitting the 2017 referendum.[xxxix] Nonetheless, the timing of the “threat” framing, marked by the trending hashtag identifying Puigdemont as the threat, peaked after October 8. Therefore, the 2017 referendum alone was not sufficiently threatening to justify threat framing as a rhetorical device for general mobilization, but the Catalonian government’s subsequent actions did seem to provoke this response from the pro-union side. However, this only occurred after the October 8 demonstration, and therefore was not relevant to the factors that had motivated that event.

Conclusion 

The unprecedented pro-union mobilization on October 8 was a departure from prior pro-union Catalan and national silence on the independence issue. While threat framing was a factor, it was far less significant than the dominant tactic of resource mobilization. #RecuperemElSeny rhetorically signaled legal, national, and popular support for the pro-union cause, benefiting the demonstrations by lessening individual costs, and increasing collective behavior and expectancy value. While there were threat-framing communication efforts when the Catalonian government later began preparations for secession, these communication devices did not appear before October 19. Therefore, the October 8 mobilization was primarily made possible through resource mobilization. This conclusion suggests that the most influential reason for pro-union Catalans to mobilize was that the new resources afforded to the movement provided previously unavailable assets, such as means of political articulation and national support.

This finding underscores a broader lesson in understanding political mobilization in contentious movements. The success of pro-union mobilization in Catalonia should be understood as an example of how access to new resources—including communication, mobilization, and collective action—significantly alters the dynamics of a movement. Ones that rely too heavily on threat framing risk overlooking the more effective power of resource mobilization, thereby neglecting to provide a more stimulating basis for mass participation and political support.

About the author

Claire Spangler is currently an analyst at Resonance, having completed multiple contracts across the UNICEF, UNHCR, and IFRC. Claire has an MPhil from the University of Cambridge and a Masters International Conflict Studies from King’s College London.

Endnotes

1. Sam Jones and Stephen Burgen, “Catalonia: Hundreds of Thousands Join Anti-Independence Rally in Barcelona,” The Guardian, October 8, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/08/catalonia-spain-prime-minister-refuses-rule-out-suspending-autonomy.

2. Ibid.

3. Pablo Ordaz, “The Silent Majority Opposed to Independence in Catalonia,” El País, September 11, 2017, https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2017/09/11/inenglish/1505120363_478469.html.

4. Jones and Burgen, “Catalonia: Hundreds of Thousands Join Anti-Independence Rally.”

5. Sidney Tarrow, Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 72, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813245.

6. “The Catalan Regional Election – Everything You Need to Know.” The Guardian, November 13, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/13/the-catalan-regional-election-everything-you-need-to-know.

7. Ibid.

8. “The Catalan Regional Election – Everything You Need to Know,” The Guardian, November 13, 2017.

9. Astrid Barrio and Juan Rodríguez-Teruel, “Reducing the Gap between Leaders and Voters? Elite Polarization, Outbidding Competition, and the Rise of Secessionism in Catalonia,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 40, no. 10 (2017): 1778, https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2016.1213400.

10. Thomas Jeffrey Miley, “Blocked Articulation and Nationalist Hegemony in Catalonia,” Regional & Federal Studies 23, no. 1 (2013): 13, https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2012.754356.

11. Colomer, Josep M. “The Venturous Bid for the Independence of Catalonia.” Nationalities Papers 45, no. 5 (2017): 957.

12. Miley, “Blocked Articulation and Nationalist Hegemony in Catalonia.” 8.

13. Ordaz, “The Silent Majority Opposed to Independence.”

14. Adolf Tobeña, “Secessionist Urges in Catalonia: Media Indoctrination and Social Pressure Effects,” Psychology 8, no. 1 (2017): 4, https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2017.81006.

15. Jones, Sam. “Catalonia to Hold Independence Vote despite Anger in Madrid.” The Guardian, September 6, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/06/spanish-government-condemns-catalonia-over-independence-referendum.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid.

18. Torregrosa, Iñaki Pardo. “El ‘no’ a La Independencia Se Impone Con Un 49,4% a DOS Meses Del Referéndum.” La Vanguardia, September 17, 2017. https://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20170721/424277059818/no-independencia-impone-ceo-catalanes-barometro.html. 

19. Burgen, Stephen. “Catalonia Divided as Controversial Poll on Independence Sparks Conflict with Madrid.” The Guardian, September 16, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/16/catalonia-collision-course-with-spain-independence-vote.

20. Tobeña, “Secessionist Urges in Catalonia.” 13.

21. Boylan, Brandon M. “In Pursuit of Independence: The Political Economy of Catalonia's Secessionist Movement.” Nations and Nationalism 21, no. 4 (2015): 767.

22. Sam Jones and Stephen Burgen, “Catalonia: Hundreds of Thousands Join Anti-Independence Rally in Barcelona,” The Guardian, October 8, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/08/catalonia-spain-prime-minister-refuses-rule-out-suspending-autonomy.

23. B. Klandermans, “Mobilization and Participation: Social-Psychological Expansions of Resource Mobilization Theory,” American Sociological Review 49, no. 5 (1984): 584.

24. Sidney Tarrow, “Contentious Politics and Social Movements,” in Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics, Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 31.

25. William A. Gamson, Talking Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 33.

26. All Catalan terms are translated using online tools (e.g., DeepL) and then cross-referenced with other sources and literature for validation and cultural, social, historical, and political nuances. All Spanish terms, tweets, and phrases are translated by me.

27. Trendinalia España (@trendinaliaES), Twitter post, October 8, 2017, 3:27 p.m., https://twitter.com/trendinaliaES/status/917021719004561408.

28. Mariann Vaczi, “Catalonia’s Human Towers: Nationalism, Associational Culture, and the Politics of Performance,” American Ethnologist 43, no. 3 (2016): 360, https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.12310.

29. There is no direct translation for seny and rauxa that fully captures their cultural significance; seny refers to reason, while rauxa denotes madness or irrationality.

30. Ibid, 363.

31. Ibid, 362.

32. Baron-Gandarias, Alejandro. “Why Public Finance Matters: Evolution of Independence Movements in Catalonia and the Basque Country during the Twenty-First Century.” SAIS Review of International Affairs, Johns Hopkins University 35, no. 2 (2015): 91. doi:10.1353/sais.2015.0025.

33. Mariano Rajoy (@marianorajoy), Twitter post, October 8, 2017, 12:12 p.m., my translation, https://twitter.com/marianorajoy/status/916969599333208064.

34. Balfour, Sebastian and Quiroga, Alejandro. The Reinvention of Spain: Nation and Identity since Democracy. Oxford Scholarship Online. History Module. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.

35. Joseph Borrell, the former president of the European Parliament, was a vocal critic of Catalan secessionism. He played a key role in the October 8 demonstration where he delivered remarks strongly supporting Spanish unity.

36. Pedro Sánchez (@sanchezcastejon), Twitter post, October 8, 2017, 1:33 p.m., my translation, https://twitter.com/sanchezcastejon/status/916989871234977792.

37. Minder, Raphael. (2017) “Spain Sets Stage to Take Control of Catalonia in Independence Fight.” The New York Times. The New York Times, October 19. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/world/europe/catalonia-independence-referendum.html.

38. Trendinalia España (@trendinaliaES), Twitter post, October 19, 2017, 10:59 p.m., https://twitter.com/trendinaliaES/status/921118630690963456.

39. Said-Moorhouse, Lauren. “Catalonia’s Independence Referendum: What to Know.” CNN, September 28, 2017. https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/27/europe/catalan-referendum-explained/index.html.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author and do not reflect the opinions of the editors or the journal.