Talk:Spanish Socialist Workers' Party

Felipe Gonzalez

Regarding the PSOE and how they handled NATO and corruption. Historical facts (not opinions): Dec 1981 - Spain applies to join NATO (under UCD rule ..centrist government)) The PSOE hands in to the Moncloa Palace a protest against NATO supported by 600.000 signatures

May 1982 - Spain becomes a member of NATO (UCD rule)

Oct 1982 - General election. The PSOE wins an overall majority in both houses

Dec 1982 - Felipe González voted in as new prime minister PSOE promises to retire Spain from NATO Devaluation of the peseta (spanish currency)

Feb 1983 - RUMASA, one of Spain's largest holding is socialized for supposed financial and fiscal irregularities

This reflects a fact but the phrasing of it implies an opinion. Miguel 22:40, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

June 1983 - Several figures in the PSOE speak against Spain remaining in NATO

Sep 1983 - Attacks in the French Basque country by GAL (GAL is a pseudo-terrorist organization created and mercenaries supported by the PSOE with the intention of using the same tactics ETA uses against them).

Supported by "the PSOE" is going a little too far and wide. Miguel 22:40, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

1983 is the year Spain gains interest in joining the EEC (European Economic Community). PSOE promised that Spain would join the EEC, but the EEC wants Spain to stay in NATO. The PSOE is broken in two: those who want think joining the EEC is more

Spain had for the longest time wanted to join the EEC but as long as it was not a democracy (1978) it had no chance. "Gains interest" does not explain whether it was Spain or the EEC or both or neither that was interested. Miguel 22:40, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

1984 - Year that nationalist (separatist) regional parties in Spain gain popular support in their respective regions

This seems to imply that they had very little support previously, which I don't think is correct. Miguel 22:40, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

June 1985 - Spain signs treaty of accession to the EEC

Nov 1985 - Huge demonstrations (more than half a million in Madrid) against NATO membership - PSOE and Communist party militants

May 1991 - National newspapers report about FILESA, the mysterious company used to finance the PSOE's electoral campaign (illegaly)

Feb 1992 - The Ibercorp case, a financial scandal involving the governor of the Bank of Spain, comes to light (PSOE is involved) ... The Bank of Spain is not really a "bank" ..it is the national monetary institution of the country ..controlled by the government.

The Bank of Spain is the central bank, equivalent of the US Federal Reserve. Ironically, there was a "Banco Central" which was a private bank. Miguel 22:40, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

Mar 1992 - The government increases to a year the period of employment required before being eligible for unemployment benefits (the "socialist" party ... right.)

May 1993 - The government is forced to devaluate the Peseta in the run-up to the election

June 1993 - General election. Fourth consecutive socialist victory, but the PSOE needs to reach an agreement with the Basque and Catalans nationalists ETA kills seven people in Madrid.

Dec 1993 - The Bank of Spain takes over Banesto, one of Spain's largest banks, and dismisses its chairman, Mario Conde

"takes over" or "bails out"? Again a matter of opinion, like RUMASA. Miguel 22:40, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

Apr 1994 - M. Rubio, governor of the Bank of Spain, is accused of insider dealings and other illegal activities

June 1995 - E. Alonso Manglano, head of Secret Services (CESID), resigns over accusations of telephone tapping Two senior ministers, N. Serra and García Vargas, tender their resignations in the wake of the CESID scandal PSOE had been using the Spanish Secret Service to obtain info on political contenders

Nov 1995 - Congress grants Supreme Court authority to open proceedings against J. Barrionuevo, PSOE ex-minister of the interior, for his possible part in organising the GAL, the counter-terrorist group involved in the "dirty war" against ETA during the 1980s

Jan 1996 - Barrionuevo and Vera are charged with directing the operations of GAL

March 1996 - General election. The PP emerges as the largest party but is dependent on the support of minorities parties, with who negotiations begin

"minorities" is the same "Basque and Catalan Nationalists" that PSOE had negotiated with in 1993 and which the PP had spent three years lambasting. On election night, 1996, PP supporters insulted the Catalan president Jordi Pujol with "Pujol, you midget, speak in Spanish". That must have made Aznar's negotiations to secure the support of Pujol's party reaaally easy. Miguel 22:40, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

---

Primo de Rivera

I read somewhere that PSOE (and others) somehow supported the dictatorship of Miguel Primo de Rivera to get rid of the corrupt turno system. But during the dictatorship, parties were banned (except for the artificial Unión Patriótica (?)). What was the relationship then between Primo de Rivera and PSOE.

This page claims that "from the beginning Monarchic parties, Republican parties, PCE, CNT and 'the parliamentary branch of PSOE' opposed Primo de Rivera". It seems that the Socialist union UGT collaborated with the regime, which maybe explains the cryptic phrase "parliamentary branch". It should be noted that, until relatively recently, UGT membership was required for PSOE membership. Also, the page claims that the intent of Primo de Rivera was actually to prevent the replacement of the turno with a more democratic system, although his public retoric was of course different. Miguel 21:53, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

This other page claims that the CNT was repressed, but there was an understanding between the Regime and the UGT/PSOE. PSOE leader Largo Caballero was appointed to the consejo de Estado. The collaboration of the socialists allowed them to achieve gains for workers such as health insurance, sunday rest, public housing and professional training. Primo de Rivera attempted to create a corporatist system like the one in Fascist Italy, or the "vertical syndicate" of Franco's time. Miguel 21:59, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

I knew the PSOE was rife with internal strife through 1939, and that Largo Caballero was the leader of one of the factions, so I dug up this profile of Indalecio Prieto. Largo Caballero and Prieto were archrivals during the Spanish republic, even though they were both in the same party. The page shows that Prieto was the leader of the "leftist" branch of PSOE, which did not wish to cooperate with Primo de Rivera. Miguel 22:25, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

Largo Caballero, Besteiro and Prieto

The second paragraph of the article needs to talk more about the interaction of Largo Caballero, Besteiro and Prieto, which determined a lot of internal PSOE politics as well as important turning points of Spanish politics in the 1920's and 30's. Among other things, I don't know that the "right" and "left" designation of the various factions within the party is very enlightening. Miguel 22:30, 2004 Mar 25 (UTC)

Removed

In 90's has become a bit fascist, mainly due to the facts in Asturies (a northern region of Spain). They have created and ambient of frustration and desolation because of unemployment and youth emigration.

It is POV, and underexplained. --Error 01:26, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Translation

this will be where I will translate text from the Spanish article, so the text may change or may be removed.

The PSOE was one of the first socialist parties founded in Europe, celebrating its first Congress in 1888, though not obtaining parliamentary representation until 1920, when the El PSOE fue así uno de los primeros partidos socialistas que se fundaron en Europa, celebrando su primer Congreso en 1888, aunque no logró representación parlamentaria hasta el 8 de mayo de 1910, cuando la Conjunción Republicano-socialista permitió a Pablo Iglesias obtener 40.899 sufragios obteniendo así el título de diputado a Cortes, siendo reelegido en 1914, en vísperas del asesinato de Jaurés, con 21.956 sufragios, esta vez presentándose por Oviedo. El 9 de abril de 1916 repitió escaño con 18.054 sufragios. El 24 de febrero de 1918 Iglesias obtuvo 27.694 votos, y por primera vez estuvo acompañado por otros socialistas: Julián Besteiro, Andrés Saborit, Francisco Largo Caballero, Daniel Anguiano e Indalecio Prieto, perseguidos en 1917 por su participación en una huelga general revolucionaria.

Ha estado presente en la vida pública española desde sus inicios, con una participación directa en la lucha revolucionaria contra el régimen de la Restauración, caso de la la huelga revolucionaria de ferroviarios de 1917, ahogada en Vizcaya, Asturias y Madrid.
Asimismo, el PSOE fue el único partido al que se le permitió permanecer en la legalidad durante la dictadura del General Miguel Primo de Rivera, pues aunque Pablo Iglesias firmó el 13 de septiembre de 1923 el manifiesto contra la dictadura, como presidente del partido y de la UGT, se produjo una división en el seno del mismo ante la actitud que debía mantenerse frente al régimen militar. Por un lado Largo Caballero y Saborit eran partidarios de una cierta colaboración para permitir el funcionamiento del sindicato, mientras que Indalecio Prieto y Fernando de los Ríos eran contrarios a esa colaboración. La crisis finalizó con la dimisión de la Comisión Ejecutiva de Prieto tras el nombramiento de Largo Caballero como Consejero de Estado de Primo de Rivera.

Con el advenimiento de la II República el PSOE formó parte del gobierno en el Primer Bienio, habiendo obtenido 117 diputados en las primeras elecciones republicanas, convirtiéndose en la fuerza política más votada. Durante el segundo bienio o Bienio Negro, algunos dirigentes del partido se involucran en los sucesos revolucionarios de Asturias, conocidos como Revolución de 1934 y ya no volvería al gobierno hasta después de comenzada la Guerra Civil, al ser nombrado Largo Caballero, presidente del mismo.

El PSOE fue ilegalizado por el bando franquista durante la Guerra Civil, como lo fueron todos los demás partidos y organizaciones políticas a excepción de las pertenecientes al denominado Movimiento Nacional (el partido único FET y de las JONS y su sindicato vertical la Central Nacional Sindicalista).

En 1942 se reorganizó en el interior con 300 comités locales en los penales y campos de concentración. En 1944 se formó la primera Comisión Ejecutiva en el interior detenida cuatro meses después. Hasta 1953, las seis ejecutivas del interior fueron desmanteladas por la policía y encarcelados sus dirigentes, año en el que era asesinado el Presidente, Tomás Centeno, en la sede de la Dirección General de Seguridad, hoy sede del Gobienro de la Comunidad de Madrid.

Muchos socialistas permanecieron exiliados durante la dictadura franquista. En España, el PSOE tuvo una actividad clandestina muy inferior a la del PCE. --Revolución (talk) 02:03, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

The PSOE in Catalonia has established censorship!! Freedom of speech is being abolished

The hand of Catalonia's infamous "CAC" (Catalonian Audiovisual Committee) is also reaching the internet!! Whatever news goes against the interests of the Catalan government is being eliminated.

Read the words of E. Markham Bench, the Executive Director of The World Press Freedom Committee writing to Mr Maragall and Ernest Branach the speaker of the Catalan Parliament. This letter is located at http://www.wpfc.org/Protests.html:

December 23, 2005

His Excellency Pasqual Magarall i Mira President Generalitat of Catalonia Plaça de Sant Jaume, 4 (Palau de la Generalitat) 08002 Barcelona, Spain

His Excellency Ernest Benach Chairman Parliament of Catalonia Parc de la Ciutadella, s/n 08003 Barcelona, Spain

Your Excellencies:

On behalf of the World Press Freedom Committee, an organization representing 45 press freedom groups in six continents, I wish to express my consternation for the “report” by the Catalan Audiovisual Committee (CAC) in which, under the guise of an alleged moral authority, uses an arbitrary mandate in an attempt to censor and silence the opinions of a whole radio network.

CAC —a censoring entity established in September by the Regional Parliament of Catalonia in order to detect “untruthful information”— had already recommended, a day after its inception, to revoke the broadcasting license of the COPE network for “exceeding the limits of freedom of speech.” On Dec. 20, the CAC report accused the network of failing to fulfill “its prerequisites of constitutional veracity.”

Further, this entity —unique in Western Europe and the European Union, which offers perhaps the world’s most exemplary press freedom environment— concluded that COPE fails to meet its journalistic and editorial duties, calling its opinions “most grave accusations,” “insulting” and “public humiliations.”

Regardless of the veracity or “insulting” intentions of the network’s speech, we find unjustifiable that a state entity, bestowed with censoring powers typical of painful autocratic regimes of the past, be the arbiter of the behavior of a media outlet. COPE or any other media outlet in Spain has every right to express their opinions in an atmosphere of liberty consecrated in the Spanish Constitution.

The mere existence of CAC is in direct contradiction with the democratic and freedom of expression norms adopted by the European Union, the European Court of Human Rights and the vast majority of the world’s democracies. In fact, we have not seen anything similar to this ever since the Franco dictatorship’s censoring committees, which, with extraordinary zeal, controlled the country’s media for almost 40 years.

CAC is not a court of justice but a political body controlled by the ruling majority of the Catalonian Parliament. As such, it is neither independent of political considerations nor equipped with the procedural mechanisms required to offer an accused party a fair trial when charged. It just happens that COPE’s opinions are in opposition to the political goals of such a parliamentary majority. The political antagonism of both entities, in a true democracy, should not bear any relevance. What we find extremely grave is the fact that a government — whether it is national, regional or local— abuses the power emanating from its constituents in order to silence the voices that such a government finds strident or uncomfortable.

It is unacceptable that a censoring organ should receive the blessings of a democratic parliament in order to outright silence a media outlet.

Therefore, I urge the Catalan judicial power to dismiss the CAC calls to revoke COPE’s license, and the Catalan Parliament and the Generalitat to take the appropriate measures in order to dismantle CAC, and thus adhering to international norms of freedom of expression and of the press.

Respectfully,

E. Markham Bench, Executive Director World Press Freedom Committee

• I don't know who represents this "freedom comittee", but the Generalitat and the Parliament of Catalonia are fully legitimate democratic elected institutions. Of course, the CAC is controlled by the Parliament, and submited to Catalan, Spanish and EU laws. This guarantees its democratic behaviuor. I dont't know a best way to control such an entity, do you?.

Similar entities are established in most countries, in order to asign frequencies and regulate the market. Of course CAC is not a court. This letter is a protest against a mere report.

Your references on CAC as a "censoring entity" are biased. Your comparisons to Franco dictatorship are biased and offensive. Your publication here of such a letter is a biased act, with the intention of damaging these institutions. Your publication here of such a letter is a biased act, since its an individual opinion, and this is not a forum. This is an enciclopaedia, not a place for opinions, but for facts. --Joan sense nick 10:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

So is not a fact that CAC reserves the right to determine what is and what is not truthful and that this has been regarded as censorship by a couple or very relevant international institutions? Besides that, should be noted that a popular campaign against CAC has reached european instances becoming the largest protest of this kind the european institutions had ever witnessed by a wide margin (700.000 signatures, with the former largest one reaching a mere 15.000 signatures). The article is obviously not biased.

No, it is not a fact. Actually, the CAC stands only against libellous and hate speech against Catalonians and other minorities, something that seems to be an specialty of that COPE radio station. MaeseLeon 12:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of whether this is true or not, this is not a discussion forum. If you wish to express your opinion on that no one is stopping you but you need to set up a blog first. These talk pages are for improving the articles and suggesting possible changes. Please see [[1]] Consequently I hope an admin removes this section. Valenciano 18:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

---

MaeseLeon wrote:

Actually, the CAC stands only against libellous and hate speech against Catalonians and other minorities, something that seems to be an specialty of that COPE radio station.

That´s a grave accusation against the COPE, MaeseLeon.

Could you please source that?. Thank you. Randroide 09:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Spanishsocialist.gif

Image:Spanishsocialist.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I am new to wikipedia, but I think a date is wrong

I think that Spain joined nato in may 1982, and the European union in 1986 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.37.34.135 (talk) 19:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I see data: ok at the article, now

• 1986 – Accession of Portugal and Spain = History of European Union enlargements, at Timeline of European Union history#Key events
• NATO (Spanish: OTAN) Member states of NATO#Member states by date of accession : 30 May 1982
  • And : PSOE ( Spanish Socialist Workers' Party ). The González administration (PSOE) organised a referendum on the question in 1986. Result: not to go out.
    Cfr: A symbol of this U-turn is Javier Solana who campaigned against NATO but ended up years later as its Secretary General.
    You read this, here ( at this article ) : opposed to NATO, then an U-turn = flip-flop. --PLA y Grande Covián (talk) 18:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

This talk page is for suggesting changes to the article, not a forum for your personal views on the PSOE. See WP:TPG and WP:NOTFORUM. Valenciano (talk) 18:52, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Privatisations

Why not to say spanish socialists privatised part of the economy? [2] 87.89.44.229 (d) 26 janvier 2011 à 23:03 (CET) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.89.44.229 (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Issue with Regional Governments

I saw there are 9 regional governments in the bar on the right of the page. I compared it with another parties e.g. SPD in Germany and it is the number of regional parliaments where the president, or minister, etc. is from the party. In the case of PSOE it should be 7 Autonomus Communities where the President is a member of PSOE, (not 9) because it is including regional pacts with other parties (e.g. Canarias).

If the same criteria must be followed in all cases, then I would suggest to change the number of regional governments from 9 to 7 in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.24.96.246 (talk) 12:20, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Spanish Socialist Workers' Party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040401174817/http://www.psoe.es/ambito/actualidad/home.do to http://www.psoe.es/ambito/actualidad/home.do

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:46, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Edit warrying

Regarding this edit pushed by edit warrying by User:Karusoru94, what's the point in introducing a tautology (besides of introducing something none of the sources states, so also WP:SYNTH)? Can they also explain this one?. The phrasing could indeed be adapted better to what the source apparently states, but the removal seems somewhat non-constructive.--Asqueladd (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Seems POV-pushing at best. Impru20^talk 14:53, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Seems so. In any case this thread (particularly if "Karurosu94" and the users editing through the IPs 88.8.157.13, 88.8.153.101, 81.110.252.10, 80.39.53.87, 88.9.248.50 care to pay a visit) can be used to determine whether other infobox labels are justified by sources or not.--Asqueladd (talk) 17:12, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment: Let' get things straight. This article is being subject to heavy POV-PUSHING editing via an asinine "use" (to call it something) of sources, involving WP:SYNTH, original research, and failed verifications galore. Now we are witness to a user inserting for the umpteenth time the OR statement "centre left to left wing" (pretty much a tautology, centre left is already a subset of left-wing politics!) by citing a random statement from the Britannica ("and the political strength of other left-wing competitors" in the context of the (lack of) growth of the PSOE in the late-19th to early-20th century, complemented by citing a slogan from a political campaign. And we are not reached the point of discussing WP:UNDUE, WP:SECONDARY, WP:BESTSOURCES!--Asqueladd (talk) 19:35, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

First: Definition of political positions , including left-wing and centre-left entries, are defined by consensus. Furthermore, consensus tells these two are different political positions and not a subgroup of each other. WP:BESTSOURCES Then: we are witnessing continuous attempts on this and similar entries trying to influence the public definition of the listed Spanish political parties with individual opinions. According to the history of the entries, these attempts are always carried out by the same two accounts joining efforts to prevent any discrepant voice to be heard WP:UNDUE. Finally: the Spanish-Socialist-Workers-Party, in dispute, holds a social-democracy ideology and hence it falls, by consensus, on the left-wing side within the political spectrum . Furthermore, the official website of the party claims that "we are the left" and their most recent congress motto and latest news published on the party's website less than a month ago confirms the fact that they see themselves as "left-wing". Pretending alternative naming to describe the party (centre-left) with alarming lack of verifiable, trustful sources is, to say the least, of questionable independence. The continuous attempt to change the entry towards the individual opinion of the mentioned users against the fact is an assault to neutrality. The Spanish-Socialist-Workers-Party is a left-wing party because they define themselves as such. There is nothing bad with that. Pretending otherwise and making up the fact with biased opinions WP:SECONDARY shall be prevented and eventually banned.WP:POV-pushing --Nadirebme (talk) 01:12, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment: UPDATE ON MY PREVIOUS COMMENT: I would like to publicly call my previous message back and to apologise to Asqueladd and Impru20. You were right on your correction. After carefully reading the consensus on Political spectrum, the claim that center-left is a subset of left-wing seems correct. Following the same rational and looking at the List of political parties in Spain, I would appreciate your comments on this other entry as it seems inconsistent with the tautology rational. The list uses the main group (left, center, right) to define some parties while using subgroups to define others with no apparent logic behind. This should be corrected for the shake of clarity and neutrality. Asqueladd, Impru20 looking forward to your comments re. the other entry. Thank you.--Nadirebme (talk) 17:33, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, it only took you to openly accuse both Asqueladd and myself of somehow concerting ourselves to introduce biased opinions and of harassing you throughout several articles, even after our pleas for you to stop the edit warring and instead come here to seek a consensus for your edits, before realizing that you were wrong the whole time. Never, ever, do this again. Thank you. Impru20^talk 17:49, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Sure, I'm accountable for what I say, hence I openly apologized. Based on the tautology rational used here and for the shake of consistency and neutrality, I will proceed to update the entries on Podemos using the subgroup where they belong (far-left). I will also update the List of Spanish political parties accordingly. I take it that both of you will be supporting this with your same argumentation

@Nadirebme: Doing that without a consensus for it (considering that it has been a disputed issue in pages like Podemos) would be nigh to POINTy behaviour, which I strongly discourage. And frankly, you are not in a position where you can risk breaking many more Wikipedia policies and/or guidelines. Thus, it's your call whether you go on a reckless and disruptive behaviour on other articles to prove your own wrong point, but that will probably end up badly for you. Cheers. Impru20^talk 18:29, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

@Impru20: Just to be clear here. I have NOT broken any wikipedia rule here. Rather I was being polite in order to further discuss and seek consensus which you are confusing with some short of weakness. However your tone was, and still is, border harsh WP:HA with too much of an attitude and a tiny bit of rational, so I ask you to STOP this now and hold the horses before it gets nasty. I simply accepted the argument brought up by Asqueladd stating that introducing both the main group (left-wing) and subgroup (centre-left) according to the political spectrum might be redundant. I accepted this seeking for consensus, so don't overreact here. Consensus is a two-way road. Furthermore, if the tautology argument is taken as valid then it should be valid for every other political party, including Podemos, where the subgroup far-left is not taken whilst it is taken for Vox (far-right). So either showing the group+subgroup is accepted for all parties or for none, otherwise we will be witnessing strong bias and lack of consistency.--Nadirebme (talk) 18:47, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Asqueladd: So let's focus on content. An argument challenging the tautology reasoning is that on the political spectrum there are 2 centre-left subgroups belonging to different main groups left-wing and centrism. Hence, adding the main group will bring important information to the reader that otherwise would be missing. Unless we want to imply that PSOE falls in the centrism politics, which is not the case, we should include both main group and subgroup to avoid misleading information.--Nadirebme (talk) 18:47, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Nadirebme: This is not "being polite". This is not "being willing to discuss and seek consensus". Accusing others of harassment is very serious and shouldn't be taken lightly; doing so without evidence and just for the sake of casting aspersions on others is typically considered a uncivil behaviour and a personal attack. Thus, a breach of Wikipedia policies. This not counting the edit warring through multiple articles (and seemingly editing while logged out to avoid WP:3RR?), which is yet another breach of WP policy. What you suggest for a second time in a row (that we should act in a particular way in other articles because a decision contrary to your wishes was taken for this one) goes against WP:POINT, so at the very least a tentative attempt to breach another guideline. For your information. Cheers. Impru20^talk 19:10, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Impru20: This is my last request asking you to STOP the personal attack WP:PA and your intimidating behaviour WP:HA. None of my comments or corrections go against any Wikipedia policies. You keep seeking for confrontation rather than discussion and consensus. You are making unproven accusations aganist me with the aim of silencing my contributions without reasonable argument. If you have any proof of me breaking the policies report it accordingly. For the time being the only one breaking rules and trying to intimidate other editors is you. I will ignore your comments from now on until you apologize for your behavior. Any further accusation you throw at me, as the one you just did above, will be reported WP:DR WP:ASPERSIONS.--Nadirebme (talk) 20:23, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Asqueladd:, I look forward to your feedback on my comment aiming at updating the political position of PSOE to include both, main group + subgroup according to the political spectrum consensus and hence avoiding misleading information--Nadirebme (talk) 20:23, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Nadirebme:: Bring your request to WP:ANI if you have the evidence that any behaviour on my part or on the part of Asqueladd constitutes harassment (but beware of WP:BOOMERANG, though, since your own behaviour will be scrutinized as well). Otherwise, further accusations from you in this sense will be considered as openly disruptive and will prompt the issue being brought to the proper venues. PS. Stop flooding this talk page with comments and let time for the people you ping to answer you. Cheers. Impru20^talk 20:43, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

The insertion of "to" is original research, but discussing any other modification on the basis of the current provided "evidence" is ridiculous. C'mon, you need to do a level-up with both the nature of sources (in topic for current PSOE, scholar, secondary, authoritative) as well as the point they are making (if they are actually refuting anything whatsoever, allowing the edit not to draw improper WP:SYNTH) to merit a discussion, also needing to consider WP:DUE weight. For a general understanding about how labels and taxonomies work (as well as some comparative European classifications) you could check works by Luke March, for example. For this article, there are plenty of sources about the PSOE dealing with it. Scholars have long labeled the PSOE as a mainstream centre-left party. I also recommend to start modifying the body of the article with content based on sound secondary sources, rather than starting by modifying the infobox (dissociating the infobox from the article, only paying attention the infobox, et. al... are often red flags in Wikipedia indicating POV-driven editing). By the way, as the stream of edit warring also involved other parametres, are we discussing only the positioning in the political spectrum or also the convenience or unconvenience of the "europeanism" label (which comes and goes from the infobox of this article, along with its very bad sourcing)?--Asqueladd (talk) 08:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your constructive feedback. We agree that insertion of "to" is original research and hence an argument to keep it. I'm not judging the content of the article nor the labeling of PSOE as centre-left. I'm just concerned about the criteria followed to label parties within the political spectrum. As the label centre-left is used as a subcategory for both left-wing or centrism, the insertion of "to" (centre-left to left-wing) seems necessary in this case (either in the article or the infobox). This is important to keep consistency while labeling other parties. For instance, there is enough evidence that Podemos is positioned at the left of PSOE, hence referred by consensus as the left of the left aka, "far-left" within the political spectrum definition. Podemos infobox states, however, that they are positioned on the left-wing without the necessary "to". Please note that they are labeled as "left-wing to far-left" as members of the GUE-NGL group they represent within the European Parlament. All of that suggests that a revision of the labels is recommended. Re. your question about "europeanism": I'm not involved on any edition concerning that matter. The term "pro-europeanism" seems correct to me in this case.--Nadirebme (talk) 10:13, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Fist and rose

If someone has reliable sources on the party’s use of the fist and rose emblem, do contribute to Fist and rose#Spain. At present, it is mostly news articles. Keriluamox (talk) 10:57, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Is the historical ideology necessary?

The PSOE used to be a much more Marxist-influenced party than it is today, and this needs to come through in the article as it does now. But isn’t it a little strange to include it in the main infobox of a currently active and major party? I don’t think it needs to be in the infobox, simply because it’s not very relevant to the current party. The infobox otherwise only contains current information like current seat shares, current leadership, and recent membership numbers.

A majority of these old labor parties were communist or at least Marxist-influenced in the past but we generally don’t list all previous ideologies in the infobox. It makes much more sense to do that only with defunct historical parties which, because of their inactive status, currently have no ideology at all and thus show historical information by default. Not with current parties that don’t support those ideologies anymore. Μαρκος Δ 14:38, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Complete translation of Spanish version

The Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) is a political party in Spain that positions itself in the center-left of the political spectrum. Since June 18, 2017, it has been led by the general secretary, Pedro Sánchez, who was proclaimed during the celebration of the party's 39th Congress.

Founded in 1879 by Pablo Iglesias Posse, for a hundred years, it defined itself as a working-class, socialist, and Marxist party until the Extraordinary Congress of 1979, when it abandoned Marxism as its ideological definition. It became one of the two major political parties in Spain, along with the People's Party, having governed the country for the majority of the constitutional regime initiated in 1978, with the presidencies of Felipe González (1982-1996), José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero (2004-2011), and Pedro Sánchez (2018-present).

The PSOE has been in power in the Spanish government since June 1, 2018, after obtaining the support of other parliamentary formations to pass a motion of no confidence against the government of Mariano Rajoy. Following the general elections in 2019, it is the party with the most seats in the 14th term of the General Courts, holding a plurality in the Congress of Deputies and a simple majority in the Senate. As of 2019, it also governs autonomous communities such as Aragon, Asturias, Navarra, La Rioja, Valencia, Balearic Islands, Extremadura, Castilla-La Mancha, and the Canary Islands. It is also part of the executive branch of Cantabria in coalition with the Regionalist Party of Cantabria, as well as the Basque Government and the three provincial councils of the historical territories of the Basque Country in coalition with the Basque Nationalist Party. It also participates in the government of the autonomous city of Melilla. Its youth organization is the Spanish Socialist Youth, and it is a member of the Party of European Socialists and the Socialist International. Surgical0371 (talk) 23:51, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

The Spanish Socialist Workers' Party was founded in Madrid on May 2, 1879, by the Ferrol-born typographer Pablo Iglesias Posse. It is one of the oldest workers' parties in Europe, surpassed only by the Social Democratic Party of Germany. From its beginnings, it aimed to unite the Spanish industrial proletariat under Marxist ideology. However, its implementation was very uneven: its main centers of development were in Madrid, Asturias, and the Basque Country, with little presence in Catalonia, Spain's major industrial hub. The backwardness of Spanish society and fragile industrial development, as well as the strength of anarchism and anarcho-syndicalism among the Barcelona working class, explain the limited relevance that the PSOE achieved in the early years after its foundation, unlike its European counterparts.

The PSOE held its first congress in Barcelona in 1888, although it did not achieve parliamentary representation until May 8, 1910 when the Republican-Socialist Coalition allowed Pablo Iglesias to obtain 40,899 votes and a seat in the Cortes. He was reelected in 1914, on the eve of the assassination of Jean Jaurès, with 21,956 votes, this time running in Oviedo.

Through the alliance with the Republicans and their entry into parliament, their presence and importance in Spanish society increased, both through their own party activities and the strength of the General Union of Workers (UGT), a socialist union founded by Pablo Iglesias in 1888 in the city of Barcelona and intimately linked to the PSOE. Until the 1980s, membership in the UGT implied affiliation with the PSOE and vice versa.

Although historically the struggle against clericalism had not been seen by socialist leaders and ideologues as the cause of the labor movement, contact with Republican political culture, along with the growth of Catholic "yellow" unions, led them to adopt an anticlerical stance, as evidenced in the 1918 program. In addition to advocating for the "elimination of the clergy's budget and confiscation of their assets" and "free and secular education" (demands that appeared in the 1888 program), they also supported "the dissolution of all religious orders" (the main anticlerical demand of republicanism). Precisely when the wave of anticlericalism of the early 20th century subsided, the socialists became "the best custodians of the secularist tradition of the Spanish left."

On April 9, 1916, Pablo Iglesias retained his seat with 18,054 votes. Due to their active role during the general strike of 1917, future socialist leaders Francisco Largo Caballero and Julián Besteiro were arrested, tried, and imprisoned with life sentences, although that did not prevent all of them from being elected deputies in the Spanish general elections of February 1918. In 1919, Pablo Iglesias began to withdraw from his political duties due to health problems and passed away in 1925. Surgical0371 (talk) 23:53, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Like the rest of the workers' parties, the PSOE was seriously affected by the so-called "crisis of the Internationals." The triumph of the Russian Revolution in 1917 and the creation of the Communist International (separate from the unified Socialist International) led to a split within the party between those who supported joining the Comintern (who eventually formed the Communist Party of Spain in 1921) and the more moderate and majority sectors that remained within the Second International. Surgical0371 (talk) 23:54, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

The dictatorship of Miguel Primo de Rivera, which replaced the turnist government in 1923, adopted repressive measures against workers' organizations such as the CNT but tolerated the activities of the UGT, which became the first labor union in Spain. The regime also promoted extensive social legislation, some of which was included in the Labor Code (1926), the success of which depended on the collaboration between the regime, the PSOE, and the UGT.

The socialist collaboration with the dictatorship was heavily criticized by anarchists and is considered "difficult to understand from today's perspective" by historian Javier Tusell. Primo de Rivera's propaganda insisted that the PSOE was the only honest party from the previous era and even stated that he intended to create a new turnist system with the PSOE and the Unión Patriótica. Francisco Largo Caballero even took office as a councilor of state on October 25, 1924, a move opposed by Fernando de los Ríos and Indalecio Prieto.

In 1929, as the dictatorship was in decline and willing to accept five freely elected representatives from the UGT in the Assembly, the PSOE broke ties with the regime and declared its support for the republic. Although on a personal level, a party leader participated in the Pact of San Sebastián to proclaim the Second Republic.

In February 1931, Besteiro submitted his irrevocable resignation as president of the PSOE and the UGT. Surgical0371 (talk) 23:56, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

When the Primo de Rivera regime fell, the PSOE was the most widespread and well-organized political party in the country. In April 1931, Remigio Cabello was elected as the party's president, a position that would later be succeeded by Francisco Largo Caballero with the new executive formed after the October 1932 Congress. The PSOE became the majority party in the republican Cortes in 1931, obtaining 131 seats.

Shortly after the proclamation of the Republic, the party already had several newspapers, such as El Sur in Córdoba, Democracia in Jaén, La Tribuna Socialista in Barcelona, La Lucha de Clases in Bilbao, and more. In Madrid, the historical organ El Socialista, under the direction of Julián Zugazagoitia, stood out. In addition to these publications, the newspapers El Liberal in Bilbao and Claridad in Madrid—respective organs of Indalecio Prieto and Largo Caballero—also remained close to the party.

During the first biennium (1931-1933), the PSOE was a fundamental force in the coalition that supported the governments of Manuel Azaña, managing various ministries and collaborating with parties such as Acción Republicana and the Partido Republicano Radical Socialista. Surgical0371 (talk) 23:57, 14 June 2023 (UTC)