Spain is preparing for general elections, and the party known as Podemos has found itself at the center of the latest political dispute. As a progressive movement, Podemos has started out by considering Basic Income (BI) in its political framework, namely in the latest elections for the European Parliament. More recently, however, BI has been left out from a more recent economic draft forming the basis of the present party platform. However, that fact has not dissuaded Círculo Renta Básica, a BI-focused group within Podemos, which has opened an initiative to reinsert BI into Podemos’ platform. (These latest events are summarized here).
Círculo Renta Básica’s official presentation took place on the June 8th, and despite that politically, two months is a great deal, it is important to register what exactly was presented at this event.
At this meeting, Podemos member and founder of Círculo Renta Básica, Héctor Zapata, spoke on the Spanish social situation and presented the case for BI, after being introduced by Raquel Carrasco, a member of Podemos Citizen Group in Madrid (Consejo Ciudadano de Madrid). Héctor started by establishing BI as a human rights matter with respect to the Spanish Constitution, in which human subsistence is designated as a basic right. He then listed BI’s main advantages, such as eliminating poverty, reducing inequality, reducing crime (as most crimes are co-related with poverty), enhancing workers’ bargaining power and boosting local economies. As for financing, Podemos’ Círculo Renta Básica adopted the proposal published by Daniel Raventós et al. Raventós states that, overall, financing BI can be accomplished with only €35 billion, or 3.5% of Spain’s gross national product. Calling for support for his group’s proposal, Héctor stressed that if this initiative is successful, Spain will be the first country in the world to eradicate poverty.
One of Podemos’ founders, political scientist and college professor Juan Carlos Monedero, highlighted the political, as opposed to technical,nature of BI discussions. Hence, he argued, it’s up to the people to decide the issue, not a very narrow subset of “specialists”. He stated that BI can have a positive effect on today’s global problems, such as climate change and high-finance terrorism, making the case that all these societal challenges are related. Monedero reasoned that it is senseless to maintain inequality and then spend public funds in police and jails, when the truly intelligent investment would be to bury poverty altogether by implementing BI. Clearly agreeing with Héctor on the BI benefit of empowering workers when dealing with employers, he also pointed out to another benefit of BI: rewarding women for all the unpaid work they contribute to society. He concluded that the BI is a necessary tool for each person to participate in society in a meaningful way, a crucial piece of social policy to restore democracy and minimum living standards.
As for Daniel Raventós, he emphatically reminds us that other revolutionary ideas have been resisted and ridiculed, until they are finally adopted and “obvious”. He recalls that it is not possible to merge great fortunes and democracy, so we must choose the one we really want for our society. Raventós also dives into the usual criticisms of BI, the first one being: if BI is so wonderful for most people (over 70%), then why such resistance? The first reason stems from the fact that the people who are supposed to pay for the BI are the richest, with greater power and influence, casting their perspective over the populace through the media. Another reason comes from lack of information, leading many to conclude that BI will just make people give up work, or that it will only feed lazy people, or that its financing is impossible, or even that it will cause degeneration into social disorder. In his view, the greatest obstacle to implementing BI is the fact that it would considerably enhance most people’s freedom, which when seen from the rich elite’s point of view, is catastrophic. He argues that humans are all different but some differences cannot be allowed. The smallest fraction of people impose their interests on millions of others, who get restricted and conditioned in their access to even the most basic necessities. It is because BI will break what he calls a “disciplining effect” that elites struggle so hard against it.
With 20 days left till the Podemos Círculo Renta Básica BI proposal ends, 4.17% support has been achieved, with 10% as the target minimum.
More information at:
In Spanish (event streamline):
Liam Upton, “SPAIN: Efforts Within Podemos to Ensure Basic Income is a General Election Policy“, BI News, July 8 2015
At the end of the day, I really do think this (rather than concerns about inflation, wages, or justice) is the fundamental ideological basis for elite resistance to even taking BI seriously as a worthwhile goal to pursue.
People made versions of many of the same arguments against the abolition of slavery in the US, which resulted in what has to rank up there as one of the the greatest mass forfeitures of “property” in recorded history. Would anyone now seriously claim we shouldn’t have emancipated slaves then because the hit slaveowners took was too great and led to serious economic consequences? I hope not.
Progress can be messy, and the adoption of BI will undoubtedly result in some people seeing their assets’ relative value decline, or their leverage with employees lessen. There might be inflation, and some people will end up paying more in taxes. But, especially if the vast majority gain, won’t it have been worth it?
Dear Shirley,
Thanks very much for your comment.
Your reasoning completely hits the target. It will be somewhat as Guy Standing says: what now seems impossible for some people, will be obvious after it gets done.
Best regards,
André