To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The enormous amount of grumbling among politicians and intellectuals in Spain over how to classify the Estado de las Autonomías (State of Autonomies) – and specifically, over whether it qualifies as a ‘federal’ state or not – might appear incomprehensible, and inconsequential to an outsider. The significance of these debates only becomes clear when they are situated within the horizons of political discourse in Spain and recognized as attempts to legitimate and/or contest existing constellations of material and social power relations. The fact that the typological debates over the nature of the Estado de las Autonomías are so hotly contested only makes sense once it is recognized that the people who espouse the different positions in this often incredibly technical and legalistic debate are simultaneously engaged in advancing competing and contradictory substantive and normative ‘stories of peoplehood’.
As a rough first approximation, it can be said that the debate about the federal or, alternatively, ‘unitary decentralized state’ has two ideological roots and political functions. One on the part of some nationalists in the periphery to question the present Constitution and Estatutos, question its legitimacy since it has not been enacted by agreement of original independent units – nations – seeking a federation. Indirectly it is a way to argue for de facto independence ending in some loose confederation, since independence may not be feasible. The other ideological position is that the present asymmetrical federalism creates privileges and tension and that federalism – a la U.S.A. – would lead to an equal treatment of all the component units.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.