The Great Nordic Thread

[politicus]

LLR still says there is no reason to close the border or reintroduce control.

So it seems that it becomes less likely that Denmark will reintroduce border control? Does this mean that DF's pressure has been in vain?

How does the official cooperation between V and DF take place? Does DF, at this moment, have special negotiations with V in which it can demand concrete policy changes, or does it have exactly the same position as LA and the Conservatives?

All Blue Bloc parties have the same status in principle, but of course DPP has more leverage due to size and being able to make deals with the left in more areas (though not this one, of course), but LA has proven quite unpredictable and LLR also has to please them.

Not really sure what is going on right now. In principle DPP should have a lot of pressure possibilities, but it seems LLR is banking on them not having the guts to pull the plug on his government so soon after an election and under these circumstances.

While SPP was being run over in the HTS government DPP always said they would never accept to be treated like that, but it seems they are right now (with the difference they are not in the government, but still somewhat comparable).

A recent poll showed a 56-36 majority for taking more refugees. Maybe just too small a sample (it is a big swing from the reverse 3 months ago), but maybe a genuine change after seeing refugees on the road and a very lopsided and emotional media coverage  - so maybe DPP is afraid of an election, but on the other hand if they give in now they will lose credibility.

If there is a swing it is most likely unstable. Given how unpopular Palestinians/Iraqis and Somalis are and how low their labour market participation rates are I doubt Syrians and Eritreans/Sudanese will be well revived in the long or even medium run. If there had never been a Palestinian and Iraqi immigration this might have been different, but the "guilt by association" factor will play a role for the Syrians (as well as for Eritreans and Sudanese).

The media are fickle and will return to negative angles at some point. So maybe DPP is just waiting for the tide to turn and can then accuse LLR for everything bad thats going to happen (there are bound to be some crime/horror stories they can use).

tl;dr: I dunno

[politicus]

The Reykjavik City Council has decided the city will boycott all Israeli products as long as Israel occupies territories beyond the 1967 borders. Iceland was the first Western European country to recognize Palestine back in 2011. Back then it inspired other Scandinavian centre-left parties to pursue this and Iceland has often been first movers on stuff like this (recognizing the Baltic countries fx.). Wonder if we will see other centre-left dominated cities in Scandinavia go for a full boycott. Copenhagen currently only boycotts products from settlements.

[politicus]

DPP now does exactly as I had expected. Suggesting refugees should go to Greenland.

Deputy Chairman Søren Espersen thinks the abandoned naval base Grønnedal in Southern Greenland is just the perfect place to house refugees.

"We advocate that the state should take over the refugee centers. And it is quite obvious - instead of buying single-family houses, which local authorities are doing right now - to use a location which has rooms for 3-400 people and clinics and so on. There is everything that the refugees need"

"We want to find somewhere else than exactly here, if we can. Australia transfer - without comparison (yeah, right..) - their refugees to Papua New Guinea"

Espersen also says that Greenland has something special to offer the refugees.

"Peace and security may be the most important. I don't know what it's like to be a refugee, but to come up to the peace and security in Greenland, must surely be wonderful - instead of staying in the middle of a city."

Reporter: "It sounds like you think it is a true retreat?"

"It is. It is just the right place. I think anyone who has been there, think it is wonderful place where refugees can feel good until they go back to their home countries. It must be about the refugees having peace, tranquility and protection. And they can get that on Grønnedal."

According to Søren Espersen locating a refugee detention center in Greenland would be a big win for the country.

"There must be deliveries of goods to the camp, and it will then provide employment for the whole local community".

No news from the Greenlandic government yet, but DPP sure are predictable.

Besides that Grønnedal is located in a magnificent area, but hardly what your average Syrian migrant
is looking for.

[politicus]

There are several other places in Southern Greenland that could be used (the North would be too rough). A couple of smaller abandoned US military installations (though they may be too polluted), lots of abandoned settlements (especially in the far south) and something like old cryolite mining town Ivittuut near Grønnedal:



Some of the buildings are a bit dilapidated, but other could work. The refugees might even repair them themselves.

So in principle not a bad idea, but obviously also a ploy to scare economic migrants away - and Greenlanders are always sensitive about being used as a "penal colony".

[politicus]

Have Norway recommended the Svalbard Islands?

Only some local politician from the Progress Party and he was widely condemned for it.

Southern Greenland has much milder climate than Svalbard. It is more comparable to coastal Finnmark if you want to compare to Norway and the Norwegians send refugees up there - I met some while I was in Alta in August (an Eritrean teenager, some Iraqis), they seemed to be doing fine. Only major problem was the high price level.

It is more the remoteness than the climate that might make it too harsh.


EDIT: The guy who suggested it was Christian Eikeland, PP group chairman in Vest-Agder county council in the SW. His Labour colleague Randi Øverland had an incredible naive comment:

"The idea of ​​sending so many refugees (10.000) to a small town, (in a) vulnerable society like Svalbard is incomprehensible. For me it seems as if some people only want refugees the furthest away possible"

Well spotted Randi..

[politicus]

@Diouf:

1) Wonder how this would have played out with DPP in government? Would they just have been forced to resign or would LLR have had to cave in?

2) With no government takeover of asylum centers/no stop to integration programs and no border control DPP is screwed. They would have needed at least one of those things. Will be interesting to see what they do next.

3) Too bad about Holst. He seemed like the best the Libs had, but apparently he is a little to greedy.

[politicus]

The non-integration plan Løkke could hardly accept.

Why? It is a domestic version of the camps in the near areas Venstre has toyed with themselves. Too much pressure from DI?

[politicus]

Some background for the DPP/Liberal fight:

The dilemma of the Danish government is that DK will likely either be forced into the coming refugee quotas and thereby lose control of its own immigration policy, or will have to leave the Dublin Convention, which will likely make Denmark an "asylum magnet" because asylum seekers can not be sent back to other countries.

DK is not an actual member of the Dublin convention due to our "legal reservation", but associated by a so-called parallel agreement. According to this Parallel Agreement, Denmark must notify the Commission whether DK intends to implement the regulation change. If this is not done within a specified time limit, DKs participation in the Dublin and Eurodac regulations will been terminated,

If Denmark chooses not to join the quotas and is thus eliminated from the Dublin agreement, it will no longer be able to expel asylum seekers to other European countries where they have previously rejected thad heir applications rejected and this could make DK into a haven for human traffickers.

From a right wing POV there are two solutions to this:

1) Put armed police on ferry lines with orders to repel all refugees and shut down the border completely Orban style (this is pretty easy with the short Danish-German land border and could be supplemented with sea mines north of Sylt and in Flensborg Fiord if it was circumnavigated, but would piss off the Germans and Danish Industry/the agricultural lobby etc. (the Liberal base and sponsors) (+ all the additional international criticism, but the aforementioned is the important).

1a) Try a standard border closure and see if it works. Would still piss off the aforementioned, but less international criticism/pressure.

2) The (other) DPP proposal of making it undesirable to go to DK via 1) Threaten with Greenland 2) If that is not possible - government run refugee camps in DK with no possibility of integration.

The Liberals, however, can not accept any of this, but are still not willing to take a large inflow of (Muslim) refugees, so LLR is caught between a rock and a hard place and trying to suck up to Merkel to get a "voluntary" refugee quota without giving up the legal exception (which will come in handy in the future and has great symbolic importance) and preferably a reduced quota (starting out with a mere 1,000 is a bit optimistic).

[politicus]

The non-integration plan Løkke could hardly accept.

Why? It is a domestic version of the camps in the near areas Venstre has toyed with themselves. Too much pressure from DI?

I just mainly thought about what seems to be the general unworkability of such a system. Thousands of people, which there are no guarantee you can ever send home, stuck for years in a system without help to learn the language or get into the labour market. The hope is of course that it would keep people away or make them leave, but that is by no means certain. You could imagine quite a lot of tensions as well, with bunches of refugees completely isolated culturally from the rest of the population. I think the international pressure against camps like that would be pretty big as well.
In the near areas, the refugees are in a similar culture plus of course they are far away from Denmark, so no culture clash and its way cheaper per person. Wouldn't attract the same international outcry either.

Nah, you are right. I just thought he would temporarily accommodate DPP on this and then try to soften it later. That would seem to be the pragmatic response. I assumed your "no way he can" referred to moral objections and since most of the Liberals left liberalism behind on this issue long ago I thought that odd (there is Bertel Haarders notorious statement that "there are two areas were Liberalism doesn't work: child rearing and foreigner policy").

[politicus]

The dilemma of the Danish government is that DK will likely either be forced into the coming refugee quotas and thereby lose control of its own immigration policy, or will have to leave the Dublin Convention, which will likely make Denmark an "asylum magnet" because asylum seekers can not be sent back to other countries.

Given the fact that Dublin is already dead/not enforced anymore, do you think it is likely that Denmark will really become an "asylum magnet"?

Theoretically, migrants can currently as well get a fake passport, jump on a Greek plane and fly to Denmark - I know this because this literally happened to the Netherlands, and in practice, these people aren't being sent back. And even though Denmark is a rich country and a wonderful country to live in, it seems like it has a "bad rep" among migrants because of its relatively tough citizenship/immigration/integration laws. Even if Denmark leaves Dublin, I think it is more likely that migrants will opt for countries like Germany, Sweden, Austria, and the Netherlands. What's more, traveling through Schengen areas will soon be easier again. Governments won't hold on to these temporary border control measures forever. That will make it easier for migrants to go to other rich countries.

The experts and top civil servants in the relevant ministries think so, which is what matters.

Personally I would prefer Denmark to just leave Dublin, reestablish adequate border control and deal with it ourselves. I find this shoveling refugees and migrants back and forth undignified.

[politicus]

Danish SD right wing leader Henrik Sass Larsen calls it "a tragedy", that "Blair's successful New Labour has now been taken over by a Syriza-like freak".

Party chairman Mette Frederiksen says that Corbyn is far away from the Scandinavian SD tradition the (Danish) party is anchored in and that Labour has a completely different tradition".

Apart from foreign policy (which obviously is a big deal) I am not sure that is actually true. Corbyn seems pretty close to a traditional Scandinavian SD line on most other issues - while Danish SD has moved away from that. The Labour Soft Left has always seemed pretty similar to (a big part of) the classical Scandinavian SD tradition to me. Former SD chairmen Anker Jørgensen and Svend Auken would have been Soft Left in Britain, Poul Nyrup in the more "soft" part of Trad Right and HTS in Progress. Not sure about Frederiksen. Soft Left moving to some "Brownite" position likely.
(ironically - but fairly classic for middle class leftists - HTS started as far left as teenager)

Fully expect Antonio to repost the "Danish SD should be euthanized" line here  - if he reads this thread.

[politicus]

SD and DPP both have party conferences in these days. SDs membership keeps sliding, despite a temporary upswing before the election. They are still more than twice as big as DPP and on the #2 spot behind the Liberals, but the difference is narrowing rapidly. DPP has gained 5000+ in two years. They might pass the 50% of SD mark next year.

SD membership
2015: 38.595
2014: 39.345
2013: 42.091
2012: 44.764
2011: 44.948

DPP membership:
2015 17 122
2013: 12 064

[politicus]

Just ftr, we should probably avoid the acronym "SD" on this thread.

Why? Sweden isn't included in the topic. I always use SD for Social Democrats anywhere in the world, and the context in Denmark is clear.

As a Dane I refuse to let Swedish norms and terminology influence my vocabulary in any way - so it is a no go. You gotta remember Sweden is our traditional archenemy since medieval times.

[politicus]

Reykjavik now backs down from the total boycott of Israeli goods, which is lifted at a special meeting tomorrow. Mayor Dagur B. Eggertsson (SDA) calls it "a hasty and ill prepared decision". The boycott is now reduced to cover only goods from the occupied territories and they will consult with Copenhagen on how to implement this before they go ahead. Of course the IP/PP opposition says no even to this.

Reactions have been quite sharp. In the US retail chains have removed Icelandic goods from the shelves, the Simon Wiesenthal Center has called the boycott racist and anti-Semitic and urged Jews not to travel to Iceland and the Icelandic government has condemned the boycott as both ill-conceived, legally dubious and not compatible with Iceland's foreign policy. The Foreign Minister has argued that as a capital Reykjavik has a special responsibility to follow the main line in Icelandic foreign policy.

Eggertsson says he expected reactions, but not so strong. "This seems to me to be much bigger reactions than when Iceland declared its support for Palestine's independence." Which is a bit naive, a total boycott of Israel is a much more radical step than merely recognizing a Palestinian state. Could damage Eggertsson's chances of becoming SDA leader next year, not the boycott itself, but not realizing it was a huge step and having thought it through + appearing wimpy.

IP says the mistake is so serious that Eggertsson should consider resigning. In a counter-proposal they want the City Council to state that "the boycott was ill-conceived and it has harmed Iceland and Icelandic interests". So really trying to exploit this to the limit.

The Left Green youth wing "deplore Eggertsson's lack of political courage", but otherwise it seems most agree it was a bad idea.

Among the Icelandic company that suffered a backlash on the US market were brewery Einstök and bottled water Icelandic Glacial. In the tourism industry there were "a number of cancellations" because of the decision. Israelis only represents 1% of foreign visitors in Iceland, so mainly Americans I would assume.

[politicus]

Just ftr, we should probably avoid the acronym "SD" on this thread.

You are my hero! ^^

He may be, but why should I change the acronym always used for the Danish Social Democrats because some upstart right wing populist party in Sweden uses it too? Especially in a thread, that doesn't cover Sweden. The Danish party is after all much older and still more important in their country.

Besides Sweden Democrats is an obvious pun on Social Democrats. Swedish media allowing them to be referred to as SD is the problem. They should have been SVD, which sounds less good and doesn't help them establish the positive connotation to social democracy. If anything the forum should stop using SD for the Sweden Democrats and switch to SVD.

[politicus]

the acronym always used for the Danish Social Democrats

Isn't their short form A? I've actually only seen them referred to as SD in international texts.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not much of a connotation as the Social Democrats have never been referred to by the acronym SD in Sweden. Actually, I can hardly think of any countries where Social Democratic parties acronyms are "SD" It's SDP in the UK, SPD in Germany, SPÖ in Austria, and so on. Even in the Nordic countries,  it's SDA in Iceland, SDP in Finland, S in Sweden, and AP... in Norway. Clearly the Danes are the odd birds out, and as noted above SD isn't even their official acronym. 

Giving the Sweden Democrats the acronym SVD, would also not fit with the established tradition of how acronyms for political parties in Sweden are formed. Three letter acronyms for parties are almost unheard of for any major party, except the very historically outdated SAP.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You shouldn't, I just like to grind your gears.

A is the letter on the election list, not the acronym. They are never referred to as A, once in a blue moon Liste A, but that is very old fashioned.

I know SD was never used for Socialdemokratiska Arbetarpartiet in Sweden, but SD gives associations to Social Democracy as a concept. The name Sverigedemokraterna was clearly constructed to give that association in a country where Social Democracy as an idea is popular. It wasn't just a random pick.

SD is not the acronym for most individual Social Democratic parties, but it is a logical and fairly widespread short hand for Social Democrats and Social Democracy in general.

[politicus]

@Johan: Since I am not Swedish I have to take your word for it that the acronym SD doesn't give Social Democratic associations in Sweden, but when they chose the name Sverigedemokraterna back in 1988 that was a deliberate attempt to draw a parallel to Socialdemokraterna and an attempt to try to usurp the Folkhem legacy and focus on a (ethno-)national Folkhem for the Swedes with the positive associations to safety, comfort, national solidarity and community etc. that term gives (or at least gave back in 1988). After they started copycatting DPP the parallel is more directly to being the "True SocDems", claiming SAP has been taking over by aloof academics and multiculturalists with no connections to ordinary Swedes.

[politicus]

My opinion of Iceland has gone down drastically due to the boycott saga. Such morons. I'm flying to the US next month, hope I don't have a layover in that country because I don't want to visit it anymore.

Keep in mind, the mayor of the city has condemned the resolution and called for it to be repealed, so it's not Iceland as a whole, just their insane city council.

The resolution is also in violation of WTO statutes, so it's likely to bite them in the butt.

Not really accurate. The resolution was passed by a broad four party centre-left/alternative progressives majority (SDA, LG, BF and Pirates). The Mayor, who is from SDA, and his colleagues then got cold feet after the strong reaction and the parties behind it decided to change it to a boycott of products from the occupied territories, as I described in the long post above (#668).

There is no rift between the Mayor and the majority in the City Council, that passed the resolution (which Eggertsson was part of) and he hasn't "condemned" it, just said it was a hasty and ill prepared (= not fully thought through) decision.

I doubt it is in violation of WTO for a subnational entity to boycott another treaty country. What is your source for that?

[politicus]

After having been quite stable since the election a new Megafon poll has the Liberals dropping 3% and a Red Bloc majority for the first time since the election. DPP and LA gains 1.8% combined. Venstre says its the refugee crisis, but I that hardly explains a small shift to the left. Unless the small gains to RV and SPP are pro-refugee votes from SDs, which thens gains a few centre-right votes. Few go straight from V to RV these days and I really doubt Venstre is losing votes to the left on refugees.
Well, at least first post-election poll of any interest. Lowest Venstre share since the chairmanship debacle in early 2014.

Last Megafon poll in brackets.

Enhedslisten: 8,7 pct. (9,1 pct.)
Alternativet: 5,5 pct. (4,9 pct.)
Socialistisk Folkeparti: 4,8 pct. (4,0 pct.)
Socialdemokraterne: 26,1 pct. (26,4% pct.)
Radikale Venstre: 5,1 pct. (4,4 pct.)


Kristendemokraterne: 0,3 pct. (0,4 pct.)
Dansk Folkeparti: 20,9 pct. (19,8 pct.)
Venstre: 17,0 pct. (20,0 pct)
Det Konservative Folkeparti: 3,1 pct. (3,2 pct.)
Liberal Alliance: 8,3 pct. (7,6 pct.)

Blue bloc: 49,6 pct. (87)
Red bloc: 50,4 pct. (88)

[politicus]

Oh my

Well there's a minor scandal in the government where minister of defence Carl Holst who's former Chairman of the Region of Southern Denmark used a employee in the region (Christian Ingemann Nielsen) as a personal assistant in the election campaign and now he work for him as a so called "spin doctor". It's in itself a minor scandal. The problem is that Carl Holst have handled it in the worst possible way including lying to the press and being caught in doing so.

It doesn't help that Christian Ingemann Nielsen is a complete idiot, who's a walking disaster on his own, and Holst have handled two other media storm badly since the election, and that no one get why he has become minister of defence including himself (he should become minister of heath a area he do have experience in).

"Oh my" was a comment to a post showing a picture from the cartoon "Scandinavia and the world", which I have deleted because someone reported it. Not the poll result.

[politicus]

The race is on to fill the vacant gap to the right of DPP. Three National Conservatives from the Conservative People's Party's right wing have founded a new party called We Conservatives, the only really interesting about this is that one of them is called Peter Seier Christensen, lives in überwealthy Rungsted and might be related to Saxo Bank co-founder, tax exiled billionaire and LA bankroller Lars Seier Christensen. Also, what a lame name when they could have gone with the historical Højre ("the Right"), the only decent name for a Danish National Conservative party.


Chairman Pernille Vermund

Meanwhile Danish Unity is still trying to recruit the cream of the National Conservative/counterjihad public intellectuals and professional debaters/talking heads.

On the less respectable part of the right wing two other groups are trying to get on the ballot:

On is the shirt and tie clad ("we are totally not Nazis, but coincidentally all our members used to be") "patriots" in the Dane's Party under leadership of affable Århus middle class boy Daniels Carlsen (whose permissive Liberal parents thought Nazism was just a phase...).


Carlsen & Co

The other is the continuity part of the old Progress Party, which has become an umbrella organization and invited other micro parties to join collectively. The North Jutland movement Stop the Islamization of Denmark (SIAD) and Free Denmark (led by known Fionian nutcase and police shooter Michael Ellegaard) are among them, but in addition 2-3 others, which they refuse to name despite collecting signatures for the party (really dubious practice...), but stating it is totally not the Dane's Party or other Nazi-affiliated groups, which is a bit puzzling because there isn't really other active far right non-Nazi affiliated groups left out there AFIK. Unless it is LA right wingers/MRAs or Danish Pegida is somehow still alive. The most moderate group left otherwise would be the Glistrup loyalist part of the Progress Party, which changed it's name to the Freedom Party (sic!) in 2013, but that has been joined by Lars Grønbæk and his "Nordic cultural association" Vederfølner with ties to racist/neo-Nazi  AGF hooligan group Ultra White Pride (Århus leading soccer team AGF plays in white jerseys, but obvious alternative meaning is obvious). So doesn't really qualify as non-Nazi. Besides the two rival Nationalist (pseudo-)Libertarian groups hate each other from their fierce 2010-13 infighting for control of the Progress Party.


Michael Ellegaard

So either the Progress Party are boasting and no further orgs have joined them, they are lying and colluding with neo-Nazis, or there are some groups out there I don't know/can't remember. Which might be MRAs/anti-feminist Libertarians.

So two questions to fellow Danish posters:

1) Is Peter Seier Christensen related to Lars?
2) Any idea which micro parties/orgs may have joined the Progress Party?

[politicus]

Poll about the Danish governments refugee policy shows massive cleavage between the under 30s and the rest of the population. Whereas the right wing 90s generation is more positive than the elderly. Interesting if this pattern will remain or change as the youngs grow older. People in their 30s grow up with multiculturalism as well and were pro-immigration, but turned more skeptical when they got established. But the difference is bigger now than 10 years ago.


"The policy harms Denmarks reputation abroad"

Yes-share:

18-29: 60%

30-39: 37%

40-49: 24%

50-59: 34%

60-70 år: 33%

70+: 29%

 
"The policy harms the integration of refugees in Danish society"

Yes-share:

18-29: 60%

30-39: 20%

40-49: 15%

50-59: 24%

60-70: 19%

70+: 20%

[politicus]

They simply look too much alike for it to be a coincidence:

Peter Seier Christensen:



Lars Seier Christensen:

[politicus]

SD has, as pointed out, never been used for the Social Democrats in Sweden so the acronym does not give those connotations. The full name is probably supposed to imply that but the confusion is something I only hear from non-Swedes, I've never met a Swede who find it hard to tell them apart.

I did not indicate the name was "confusing" or hard to tell apart in any way, but that it gives associations to Social Democracy, which was the intention. And such things mostly work on a subconscious level.

[politicus]

Peter Seier Christensen is the brother of Lars Seier Christensen and even if LSC is a self made billionaire (son of a high school history teacher), this contact probably makes it possible for the new Conservative party to self finance, at least to some extent, which will put them ahead of competitors. PSC says he has no private money, but the Seier Christensen brothers are apparently fairly close, so he does have  access to his brothers business network. I doubt he would try something like this without having the financial side in order. He spoke at a Pegida demo in Malmø earlier this year, but says he was never a member of the organization.

The silly "We Conservatives" is just a working title, so they might still come up with a decent name. Its coming chairman Pernille Vermund is an architect and Elsinore city councillor. She is bright, likeable, fairly good looking, gets her points across and doesn't give off an extremist vibe, so this might be the best ticket for the National Conservatives (so far, there are stronger names out there, but they may not want to enter politics). Her worst rival Morten Uhrskov Jensen from Danish Unity is very knowledgable and a sharp debater, but he does come off as a curmudgeon and often looks like a dork.

The new party basically tries to combine the economic policy of LA with the immigration, law and order and EU policy of DPP.

Looking into their economic agenda (which seems to be LA lookalike), but the rest is:

- EEC membership instead of EU
- Only Western immigration, unless very specialized qualifications - sorting by cultural compatability
- Some UN quota refugees, but no to all spontaneous asylum seekers.

Political observers think this will be a bigger problem for the Conservatives than DPP, because Vermund and Seier Christensen dares challenge EU membership (even if they are still a bit iffy, but EEC is the logical consequence of their "only trade arrangement" position) and take the consequence of Papes half-assed flirt with anti-Islamism. Not so sure myself, there is a genuinely "all right wing" segment in DPP hidden behind all the former SDs.

Politics aint fair. Uhrskov is done:





and once in a while he looks like this:



Danish Pegida folded earlier this year btw, but the members founded an organization called For Frihed (For Freedom), which might be one of the micro orgs going into the Progress Party, which seems to try to become a sort of Unity List (Enhedslisten) for the non-Nazi far right. But I think that will fail - too many nutters in already.