> It has little power to legislate but he has colonized all institutions with people of his own. I think you are not really understanding what is going on. It is not purely as chamber representation the problem.

This is still the same circular reasoning. How is it that he can "finger-name" positions now that they are in a minority government, and he could not before that when he actually was in a majority one? What exactly is that gives him the power to be the autocrat that you claim he is? "he is an autocrat because he is an autocrat" is not really a valid argument.

> This amnesty hides the first step for a change of regime. I hope they are not successful.

So the problem is with a political amnesty? That certainly looks like an unquestionable mark of a dictatorship (/s).

This is just yet more evidence of a minority government that has to make concessions everywhere. They are going to be a ridiculously weak government, like every other such government in the history of the world. Amnesties are not the mark of a strong dictatorship; I believe they prefer the part where they get to put people in prison.

Also, I am going to bet that to do that he requires support from the chambre. Which means that, yet again, this _is_ about chambre representation: a majority of the chambre must be in favor of this amnesty.

> About being fragile the government: you underestimate what this president is capable of doing to maintain the power

This again keeps assuming that for some reason being minority is going to bring him more power to maintain his power, and not significantly less.

> he just put 15 billions of debt from Cataluña into the rest of spanish besides the amnesty. Probably there is more to come.

OK it seems you do not understand what it means to keep Cataluña as a region of Spain. You _have to take care of their debts_. The idea that Cataluña can have "billions of debt" separate from Spain's one is an optical illusion. Whichever amount you claim it is it must _already_ be part of the Spanish large debt and therefore it already comes out of your pocket _no matter what_. To assume otherwise is to have your cake and eat it too, _both_ for Spain and Cataluña, as Spain reaps the profits but allow Cataluña to go bankrupt on its own, which is nonsense possible only in politician's dreams (I have seen that very frequently here).

In another comment here I was saying that France has let some regions do self-determination referenda, making it appear to me as more progressive than Spain. I also admitted this was an over-simplification because a lot of people want to get rid of these regions, while I was assuming that Cataluña is a core province (sorry for the EUIV lingo) of Spain and therefore no one wants to get rid of it.

Do you want to know why France wants to get rid of these regions? Because they cost friggin' money ! Patriotism is nice and all but it brings you exactly zero tax savings.

If you claim that Cataluña is costing you money, let them do their auto-determination and go away !

(I really doubt Cataluña is costing Spanish' tax payers any money whatsoever: my goal here is not to encourage to vote for independence, but to point out an argument that does not appear to be coherent).

> The power is accumulated here by the head of each party and once you vote you are in the hands of the party no matter what they do (this was always like that).

I really do not understand the point that you are trying to make here. I am quite sure that "the head of the party" has exactly the same power over a member of the chambres as in any other democracy of the world.

EDIT: I was googling around and most definitely representatives in the Spanish Congreso can vote against the party and cross the floor, same as representatives in the UK parliament, and frankly, same as in every other representative democracy of the world.