The Great Nordic Thread

[politicus]

Former Reykjavik Mayor Jon Gnarr plans to unite the Icelandic left wing by reestablishing the People's Party (Alþýðuflokkurinn), which was Iceland's trade union based SD party 1916-2000. Ironically the People's Party was dissolved after the party merged with three other leftist parties (the feminist Women's List, democratic socialist People's Alliance and breakaway SD left wing National Awakening) in 2000 to transform the 1999 Social Democratic Alliance (SDA) into a party, but after most of the members of the three latter parties broke off and founded the Left Greens half a year later the new SDA became more right wing than the old People's Party.

Uniting the Icelandic centre-left seems like an impossible dream, but then again Gnarr has done the impossible before. Even so, he would have to persuade two well established parties to unite and accept a whole new structure + overcome the fact that the experiment has already been tried in 1999-2000.

He also plans to reestablish the old SD daily (in its later years a monthly - closed in 1998) Alþýðublaðið (the People's Paper) to break the right wing media monopoly in Iceland (except the public broadcaster RUV). He plans to create it in a 3D version, which sounds silly, but then again Gnarr wouldn't be Gnarr if there wasn't some crazy twist to his plans.

[politicus]

After three interest rate cuts in 11 days the National Bank of Denmark has stopped issuing government bonds to prevent further increases in the value of the Danish krone.

[politicus]

"DPP should be part of a "blue" government if they get 20% of the votes"
 - Agree: 51%
 - Disagree: 28%
 - Neither: 10%
 - Dunno: 11%

DPP voters:

55% Agree
30% Disaagree


DPP would get more political influence in government than outside?

 - Agree: 48%
 - Disagree: 36%
- Neither 8%
 - Dunno: 9%

[politicus]

Okay, what I don't understand is the following. What kind of people vote for the Liberal Alliance? Why do these people not simply vote for the Radikale Venstre, or, when they are more suburban and richer, for Venstre?

In the Netherlands, the country that has a political landscape probably most similar to Denmark, progressive urban cosmopolitan highly educated people vote for D66. Of course, it would be more difficult for D66 if they would be in the government like Radikale Venstre, because now D66 is clearly to the right of the VVD-PvdA government on economic issues. But still there seems to be an electoral "vacuum" on the progressive right in Denmark that has been filled by I. Is Radikale Venstre too left-wing on economic issues? Is Venstre perceived as too centrist? I'd love to hear a reply from Danish people on this.

The Dutch and Danish political landscapes are not particularly similar - taking that as you point of departure would lead you astray.

The average Radikale voter is richer and better educated than an average Venstre voter. Venstre is especially in its core areas in Jutland a genuine peoples party with a social profile as broad as SD and lots of people with low education and average incomes. Being suburban would not make you more likely to vote Venstre than Radikale - being rural or from a small town would, but having a blue collar job would be an even stronger factor.

Liberal Alliance is the most economically right wing party in Denmark and attracts affluent private sector functionaries and libertarian students. It is significantly to the right of Radikale (and Venstre) on economics and far more libertarian on social issues than Venstre.

[politicus]

I think based on policy, VVD and Venstre are quite similar; our SP might be between your SF and the Red-Greens on the left-right scale; the social democrats obviously played a different role in the past in both countries but are still somewhat comparable; Radikale Venstre and D66 are - correct me if I'm wrong - alike; PVV and DF also share some similarities apart from DF's leadership obviously being smarter and less extreme, which makes them at least "toleration" material for coalitions - which is not going to happen anymore in Holland, obviously.

However, conservative voters in Denmark might actually be the type of people that vote VVD in Holland, while Venstre voters in Denmark might be more similar to Dutch CDA voters (except for the fact that these people don't vote for the CDA anymore nowadays). I think the political landscapes do have differences, but I really can't imagine a country with a political landscape as similar to Holland as Denmark.

But I think I've looked too much at policy and not enough at historical voting patterns, which are in Denmark indeed very different from those in Holland. I now understand that, with the (both ideological and electoral) decline of the Conservatives and its move to the center (while accepting the Danish People's Party's policies on immigration, unpopular by a cosmopolitan bourgeois elite), the Liberal Alliance isn't (and hasn't been) as much a threat for Venstre as for the Conservatives. Which makes sense. I now understand the gap that I fills. Thanks.

(And thanks for the maps, Sibboleth!)

You can not really say that the Danish Conservatives are in ideological decline (at least not in the way you seem to think) or have moved to the center. They are more or less where they have always been, but they lost the battle of being the mainstream centre-right party in the 90s and after that poor leadership made them unattractive to voters, while Liberal Alliance captured the low tax message. In addition young people from the bourgeois upper midddle class segmens that used to vote Conservative do not care about "God, King and country" (and if they do, they vote DPP). Being the party of culture, relatively green and supporting urban and landscape planning (which used to be consevative differentation points toward the Liberals) are things the Conservatives have either given up on or toned down, but that can hardly be seen as a move towards the center.

DPP is an alliance between National Conservatives and nationalist/xenophobic (former) Social Democrats. It is not akin to PVV apart from both being right wing populist. The old Progress Party was much closer to PVV.

Liberal Alliance are actually quite tough on immigration, but focused on economic usefulnes rather than ethnic and religious background. It is more no poors, elderly and sick, than no Muslims.

[politicus]

The Dutch and Danish party systems have a lot of apparent similarities, but some of them are deceptive. One of the main differences is that Christian Democracy has been a fairly strong ideology in the Netherlands and totally marginal (+ ”foreign”) in Denmark. Catholicism (even when just a sizeable minority) influences political culture quite a bit – part of it indirectly by affecting the way Protestants act.


Centre-right/right wing

PVV = old Progress Party (although less anarchistic/crazy). Much more economically liberal than DPP and also less authoritarian
SGP = nothing comes even close
VVD = both Venstre and Conservatives (which are almost identical by now)
CDA = no parallel. Its Christian (and partly Catholic) roots seets it apart. The old Anti-Revolutionary Party would have been part of the Conservative coalition, but quite marginal. Most CDA voters would be in Venstre
CU = pretty good fit for our Christian Democrats
D66 = fits Radikale pretty well, but has anti-establishment roots, whereas Radikale is as establishment as you get. Seems to incorporate people to the left of Radikale


Centre-left/left wing:

PvdA = Social Democrats, but (even) more ideologically washed out than their Danish brethren
GL = right wing of SPP (”Green wing”)
SP = Red-Green Alliance + most of the SPP left wing. More traditional party organization than Red-Greens


Odd parties:

PvdD= Fokus (created by former DPP MP ”Animal  Christian” Hansen) – extremely small
50+ = no such party

No Dutch parallel to Liberal Alliance


I made a description of the Danish party system in the election thread on IE.

[politicus]

I agree with the larger part of your analysis. However, the PVV is not economically liberal at all anymore. They were in 2006, and probably still a bit in 2010, but now definitely not at all. In that sense, the PVV is at least now definitely comparable to DF. And less authoritarian? Wilders has said a lot of crazy things about Muslims/Moroccans that DF politicians wouldn't say. He would definitely not be welcome in DF's ECR group. Furthermore, Wilders decides everything in the PVV. There are only two party members: Wilders and the "Foundation for the Friends of the PVV" which is run by... Geert Wilders.

D66 has anti-establishment roots but is nowadays the party that is by many considered the ultimate "regent's party" (as opposed to the PVV).

Must admit I do no know what sort of economic policies Wildes advocate these days, but DPP has incorporated a lot of SDs along the way and their views on economics and welfare are increasingly old school Social Democratic. I would have thought Wilders was still substantially to  the right of that.
DPP is less radical and more "sane" than Wilders. By authoritarian I did no refer to their internal structure or level of xenophobia, but the opposite of libertarian. I thought Wilders still had a libertarian streak on many issues. He seems anti-conservative, whereas DPP is (among other things) a genuinely conservative party.

D66 may very well have become similar to Radikale.

[politicus]

After advice from the Criminal Law Council the Danish government has decided not to abolish the blasphemy paragraph in the criminal code. This is a U-turn for especially the Social Liberals, who have been eager to get rid of what they saw as a dated special status for religion.

No one has been convicted for blasphemy since 1933, while the last trial was in 1971 and legal scholars generally consider the paragraph invalid because it conflicts with free speech protection, but the CLC says it protects against something like burning or urinating on holy scripture such as the Bible and Koran.

The council stated that legalizing blasphemy could be twisted by foreign media and religious groups and be (mis)interpreted as a general anti-religious act or an act against specific religions, which might provoke a violent reaction.

This is of course controversial as it is basically giving in to the threat of Islamic terrorism or a new cartoon-crisis.

[politicus]

Protests from the Red-Greens, DPP and Justitia (libertarian/conservative think tank). This incl. critique of the CLC even addressing non-judicial matters.

Also, two years ago DPP suggested banning the burning of Dannebrog (Danish national flag) and the Ministry of Justice said that would violate the protection of free speech, which makes the assertion of legal relevance of the blasphemy ban a bit strange.

[politicus]

Busch is the charismatic leader of KD in Uppsala.  

Really... ?I will have to disagree with you here Gustaf.  If Busch seemed any more cold she'd be the ice queen from Narnia. Busch might be charismatic for KD, but really, that's not saying much.

Cmon Johan, you are the one that wanted a separate Sweden thread. No need to answer him here.

[politicus]

MMR poll for Iceland has PP up nearly 4% from the last poll. The Pirates remain on their record level from mid-January and are close to the rest of the non-IP parties.

IP 25,5 (-1,8)
Bright Future 15,0 (-1,9)
SDA 14,5 (-1,4)
PP 13,1 (+3,7)
Left Greens 12,9 (+1,0)
Pirates 12,8 (-)

[politicus]

Forum for Kritiske Muslimer (Forum for Critical Muslims) led by Finnish-Syrian Sherin Khankan has announced they will start a mosque in Copenhagen, where female imams will deliver the sermon and the prayer for both women and men. Their project is called Femimam - Female Imams. They got four academically (Islamic theology) trained women ready for the positions.

http://www.information.dk/526088

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_as_imams

[politicus]

A cross-party motion signed by representatives of all six parties in the Althing now propose compensation to the victims of abuse on a Catholic school using state funds. The measure is justified, by the fact that the school was under state supervision, which failed miserably for decades.

The Left Greens argue the state should also be able to claim back the money from the Catholic Church.

Between 1959 and 1984 a number of students at Landakotsskóli in Reykjavík were subjected to rape, other sexual abuse, beatings and humiliation by the school management. But the Catholic Church claims they only have an obligation to compensate the victim in one case. Now a further 29 former pupils get compensation.

Although both victims and witnesses on several occasions emerged the Catholic Church chose not to investigate and made sure that all testimonies were destroyed or disappeared.

At the center of the assaults on Landakotsskóli stood a couple - Pastor Ágúst Georg who worked as principal and the teacher Margret Müller. Both worked at the school for over 40 years. Together and separately exposing the students to constant sexual abuse with sadistic overtones. Students were also beaten and humiliated systematically.

In the wake of a so-called "Truth Commission" about sexual abuse within the State Church the Catholic Church decided to (= was forced to) carry out a similar investigation. The report showed that testimony of abuse were waved away by church leaders and notifiers slandered. Several bishops chose not to investigate the allegations at all. The report testified about abuse of 30 former pupils of at Landakotsskóli. Of these, eight had been victims of sexual abuse.

After the church report was published in November 2012 Bishop Pétur Burcher wrote that the Catholic Church should thereafter follow Icelandic law and report any suspected abuse to the police, but less than a year later he stated in a letter to his priests that they could not report suspected sex crimes within the church. Instead, suspicions should still only to be handled within the church - a procedure which blatantly violates Icelandic law.

Pétur Burcher recently announced that he is resigning as bishop claiming he suffers from pneumonia and needs to be staying at southern latitudes where the climate is warmer than in Iceland...

(you can not make this stuff up..)

[politicus]

A late February poll from Sentio in Dagens Næringsliv (business daily) shows the Norwegian Progress Party at it's nadir since 1995, while Labour is above 43% and the combined left wing above 52%, with the Greens just below the threshold. The Progress Party has been polling miserably for a long time after having to compromise on a wide range of issues. Norway seems to be a good case for strangling right wing populists by giving them responsibility.

Progress Party 9,2 (16,3 in the 2013 election)
Conservatives 21,4

Christian People's Party 5,4
Liberals 4,6
Centre Party 5,8

Labour 43,4
Socialist Left 4,3
------------
Greens 3,6
Red 1,0

source

[politicus]

A late February poll from Sentio in Dagens Næringsliv (business daily) shows the Norwegian Progress Party at it's nadir since 1995, while Labour is above 43% and the combined left wing above 52%, with the Greens just below the threshold. The Progress Party has been polling miserably for a long time after having to compromise on a wide range of issues. Norway seems to be a good case for strangling right wing populists by giving them responsibility.

Progress Party 9,2 (16,3 in the 2013 election)
Conservatives 21,4

Christian People's Party 5,4
Liberals 4,6
Centre Party 5,8

Labour 43,4
Socialist Left 4,3
------------
Greens 3,6
Red 1,0

source

What has caused this massive rebound for DNA? Is the government already unpopular?

Their first budget has been criticized by basically everybody - incl. economists and the two centrist centre-right parties. Instead of making the public sector more efficient - as promised during the campaign - it focused on tax cuts to the most wealthy and cut benefits to the disabled and unemployed etc. Also some grants to rural areas.

Especially young people, women and voters from the periphery have switched from PP and Conservatives to Labour.

[politicus]

Well partly because Norway is suffering because of the oil price cratering. I notice that the state oil company is starting to shed jobs and mothball planned projects, which is a disappointment to Norway's coffers especially as Progress wanted to splurge the oil fund on infrastructure. At the moment, the government seems to be leaning on stimulus to get past the dark spot, which Jensen does not want at all.

The two small liberal parties - Venstre and the Christian Democrats - are causing increasing ruffles amongst the Progress ranks with their pro-refugee stance. When they agreed to support the government the Immigration minister promised to soften its attitude towards child asylum seekers, which turned out to be a barefaced lie, as the minister simply instructed the police to carry on as they were. Increasingly angry words are being exchanged over that issue, despite a public apology by the minister in question.

Other problems exist. The Progress Party loathes the wealth tax for example, which appears to still exist (I'm unsure about this though). There was also amusingly farcical scenes surrounding a plastic shopping bag tax.

And of course general bleeding of centrist voters back to Labour over a regressive and unpopular budget.

Well, let's wait and see what Lurker says, but I get the impression from the Norwegian press that the budget is the no. 1 reason with the quarrels about immigration being significantly less important.

Norway is not generally that vulnerable to oil prices, it has enormous reserves and does have other sources of income. The petro-state narrative is fun to throw around, but is often exaggerated a bit.

Also, the Christian Peoples Party isn't liberal.

[politicus]

The Pirates keep advancing in Iceland and are the third largest party in a new Capacent poll with 15,2% - their highest level ever:

IP 26,1
PP 11,0

SDA 17,1
Pirates 15,2
Bright Future 13,3
Left Greens 11,2
Others  6,0

37,1% say they support the government - exactly ther same number as IP + PP combined.

[politicus]

Internal power struggle under way in Icelands small Muslim community after Saudi-Arabia has promised one million dollars to the commencing mosque building - which would cover almost half the costs.

Deputy Chairman for Félag múslima á Íslandi Salmann Tamimi calls Saudi-Arabia a fascist state and refuse to accept any Saudi donation, whereas Chairman Ibrahim Sverrir Agnarsson seems inclined to accept the donation.

The allocation of a plot for a mosque in Sogamýri became a bone of contention in the last municipal election when PP in Reykjavik launched an anti-mosque campaign. The opposition is likely to resurface if it is build for Saudi money.

The Saudi offer is a bit of a surprise since Saudi-Arabia hitherto has supported the rival Menningarsetur múslima á Íslandi, which were expelled from Félag múslima á Íslandi a couple of years ago for extremism and fanaticism.



vs.

[politicus]

The Saudi offer is a bit of a surprise since Saudi-Arabia hitherto has supported the rival Menningarsetur múslima á Íslandi, which were expelled from Félag múslima á Íslandi a couple of years ago for extremism and fanaticism.

Why is it a surprise?  A classic way of controlling people is to get them dependent upon your money and then threaten to cut it off unless you do what they want.

The Icelandic press thinks it is a surprise, probably because they don't have your devious Southern mind.

I would add that Saudi-Arabia trying to buy influence in something as marginal as Iceland is in itself surprising.

[politicus]

The Saudi offer is a bit of a surprise since Saudi-Arabia hitherto has supported the rival Menningarsetur múslima á Íslandi, which were expelled from Félag múslima á Íslandi a couple of years ago for extremism and fanaticism.

Why is it a surprise?  A classic way of controlling people is to get them dependent upon your money and then threaten to cut it off unless you do what they want.

The Icelandic press thinks it is a surprise, probably because they don't have your devious Southern mind.

I would add that Saudi-Arabia trying to buy influence in something as marginal as Iceland is in itself surprising.

They don't care about Iceland, but about Iceland's Muslims.  Wahhabism seeks to convert all heretic Muslims to the true faith.

All five of the icelandic muslims? :0

That would be true around 1970. There are 800 organized Muslims now: Arabs, Albanians, Africans and Icelandic converts. There might be around a 100 more who have decided to stay out of the two congregations.

[politicus]

All five of the icelandic muslims? :0

Is this sarcasm, or an actual claim Iceland has only five muslims?  It's hard to tell.

Not really I just decided to give a serious answer anyway.

[politicus]

Has the Progress Party been able to push for any significant changes in the laws related to immigration?

Not much it seems. The government needs to compromise with the Liberals and CPP.

- No getting a spouse to Norway if you are below 24 and a higher income requirement.

- Chosing UN quota refugees based on "integration ability" (dunno if that includes the ability to weed out Muslims or just socio-economic stuff)

- The rules for letting refugees who are converts to Christianity or gay stay in Norway has been harmonized to EU/UNHCR standards (=being tightened)

- Easier expulsion of criminal asylum seekers

- More asylum seekers placed in closed facilities

Hardliners in FrP have been very critical of the immigration policy and said the government follows the Liberals line. Among them are former chairman Carl I. Hagen.

[politicus]

The Pirate Party is the largest opposition party at 21,9 in a new Visir poll in Fréttablaðið, which means that Pirate Queen Birgitta Jonsdottir is starting to look like a serious contender to become the next PM of Iceland given that the centre-left retains its solid lead over the government. Their seat distribution is 3 in Reykjavik North, 3 in Reykjavik South, 3 in the SW, 3 in Southern Iceland and 1 in each of the two Northern constituencies (NE and NW). They have gained strongly in provincial Southern Iceland and if they get a similar breakthrough in the rural north, they are starting to look like a serious threat to the SDA as leaders of the opposition. It is especially Bright Future supporters that are switching to the Pirates and BF may be facing a Bleak Future.

IP 28,0 (19)
Pirates 21,9 (14) (up from 5,1 and 3 in the 2013 election)
SDA 16,1 (11)
Left Greens 10,4 (7)
PP 10,1 (6)
Bright Future 9,2  (6)

Others 4,3 (0)

The poll was conducted before the government decided to ask the EU-Commission remove Iceland from the list of candidate countries (a soft and wussy way to withdraw their membership application)

[politicus]

Yesterday 8.000 demonstrated at Austurvollur square in central Reykjavik against the governments decision to "cancel" the EU application without asking the Althing (which means that it isn't legally cancelled).

Massive critique from not only the opposition, but also IP MPs and former leaders of IP and PP for sidelining the Althing, which approved the original Icelandic membership application six years ago.

Also calls for a vote of no confidence to Minister of Foreign Affairs Gunnar Bragi Sveinsson. If Sveinsson is voted out of office with the help of IP rebels it is difficult to see how the government can survive, so potentially serious.

The reason why the government did not ask the Althing is that a substantial number of IP parliamentarians are either Europhiles or support a referendum (which the government promised during the 2013 campaign) on principle, which means it is far from certain they would have won it.

Will be interesting to see if Benedikt Jóhannesson's small Europhile IP breakaway Viðreisn (Awakening) will benefit from this.

IP chairman Bjarni Benediktsson is running a serious risk of splitting his party by approving this move. So this is a testament to just how much he is financially and politically dependent on the Big Fishing families (one of the leading members of that group owns Iceland's dominant conservative daily Morgunbladid).

Polls have shown a stable 50% no/35% yes to EU for more than a year now, so on paper it would not seem to be risky to finish the negotiations and held a referendum, but Big Fishing (IP base) and the powerful cooperative movement (PP base) do not want to take any chances. There is a consistent majority behind the demand for a referendum on the matter. So the basic fact is still that Icelanders don't want to join the EU, but they do want to vote about it.

[politicus]

PP is the most unpopular party in Iceland. Almost 39% of voters are against having them as part of the government. Up from 10% in 2013.

"What party would you most like to keep out of government?"

PP 38,9%
IP 16,6%
SDA 15,1%
Left Greens 13,6%
Pirates 12,3%
Bright Future 3,6%

Women aged 18-29 and people from Reykjavik hate PP the most.

Share of voters with PP as worst possible coalition partner for their party:

IP 6%

SDA 77%
Bright Future 68%
Left Greens 62%
Pirates 59%

So the entire opposition has PP as worst option with the Europphile parties disliking them more than the Eurosceptics. IP being the most right wing on economics likely also influence Left Greens and Pirate voters, but they dislike PP more than IP.