The Great Nordic Thread

[ingemann]

Beside the obvious thing, they didn't believe in man-made global warming and they wanted to raise the development aid to the third world.

Why? That surely seems unexpected to me.

Yes, I also stopped the car, when they said that. But the logic behind it is reasonale, and it's also a thing the Conservatives support. The logic is that it's better to improve people's life abroad, so they won't come here, and it's also cheaper to help people in the third world than in the first.

[ingemann]

My guess for a floor in worst case single election is around 10-12%, when they did badly in the 70-80ties that was as far as they fell. Of course the Conservative today lies below what I would say their natural floor were, and Venstre have the problem that they can more or less lose votes to all parties except SPP and the Red Greens, if they do badly.

Also I want to make a prediction, if this government last more than 2,5 year, the minister of justice (Søren Pind) won't last as long. I expect he will have a scandal which will force him to leave the post cause by either a leak, "accidental" bad adviced from his subordinate or a mix of these two things. He's looking like his making a lot of enemies in his ministry and he's not known for his long term planning or impulse control (he tend to survive through luck, talent, stubbornness and raw narcissistic charisma, but I think he have made too many enemies too fast this time).

[ingemann]

Here you see what happens when xenophopic right-wing populist party which labels itself as "working class party without socialism" attacks the unions in the cabinet at the same time with refugee crisis.

Being put in an actual role of responsibility tends to be kryptonite to most xenophobic populist parties. Look at the state of Frp at the moment, or what happened to FPÖ after their participation in the Schüssel-government.

It's actually so that I wish we could hand over the reigns of government to the Sweden Democrats for a year and watch them crash and burn and destroy themselves and we could finally move on and have actual political discussions again in this country.

It wouldn't work, at least not yet. The True Finns or the Progress Party are a more diverse party than SD at least in policies. If you vote for SD you do it for one reason and one reason only, while you can vote for TF or PP for many other reason than immigration. As such SD only need to deliver on one point to say they have kept their promises. Of course they will likely lose a few votes, but you won't see a SD collapse. Also where would SD voters go? They want a harder line against immigration and there's no one else in Sweden delivering on that point.

[ingemann]

snip

I could answer you, it's some good point you bring up, but honestly DavidB brought most of the points up. Through there's one thing I will say again SD is not Progress Party or the True Finns, they're quite different from SD, which have more in common with the Danish Progress Party than either.

[ingemann]

snip

I could answer you, it's some good point you bring up, but honestly DavidB brought most of the points up. Through there's one thing I will say again SD is not Progress Party or the True Finns, they're quite different from SD, which have more in common with the Danish Progress Party than either.

I don't entirely disagree with David either. Obviously I don't say that SD would disappear forever. Most parties have an ability to regain support after a bad period in government and a spectacular election loss. Though it would limit the problem for some time.

I also agree as far as the Progress Party goes, they are a different thing compared to SD. But what is PS except stricter immigration, anti-EU, and anti mandatory Swedish in Finnish schools? Besides the mandatory Swedish thing, those are the exact same pillars as SD stands on. I doubt that there is anyone who really votes for Soini except for those issues. And I'm aware that PS casts itself as the defenders of the welfare state and the working man and what not., but so does SD. That's (as you noted) hardly the reason their voters vote for them.

While both are populist parties, there's a quite distinct difference. SD is a national-conservative party focusing on a single issue in a national state, while the True Finns is a nationalist party with a wide policy platform in a multi ethnic (or bi-national) state (which they wish to remake into a national state).

[ingemann]

Does "veil" imply the niqab or just the standard hijab?

It's everything from hijab to burqa. Through the Daniush word for veil indicates hijab.

[ingemann]

I think "economically responsible" should be the second one.

Very interesting that "Christian" is deemed relevant. Didn't expect that.

Also quite interesting that DF is considered Christian, whereas the Dutch PVV has quite similar positions on social (and national) issues and is deemed a very secular party, which is a common criticism from Christian parties - who are, of course, also afraid to lose voters, so it's up for debate how intellectually honest this criticism is, but still, the difference in common perception is remarkable. Has everything to do with the difference between Danish and Dutch history, cleavages, and the parliamentary presence of "real" Christian parties in the Netherlands, of course.

Anyhow, this chart quite adequately shows why I still support DF even if their economic policies are not exactly what I'd wish for (to put it mildly).

Christianity mean a quite different thing in Denmark than in Netherlands. Alone the name difference between the "national" old (in case of Netherlands) churches are telling "Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk" versus "Folkekirken (The People's Church). Netherlands are a place of religious heterogenity, while Denmark is a place of religious homogenity, to the extent that a significant number of Danes who are member of the Church aren't even aware that there's other Protestant churches outside weird sects. It's also why Danes accept Jews so well, because in the eyes of the average Dane there's not really any big difference between Jews and the few ethnic Danes who are member of other Christian Churches like Catholics, Baptist, Mormons and Calvinists, and all of these are seen as less suspect than the Jehovah Witnesses, who the Danish archetype for weird cult ethnic Danes became member off some years ago (but it has been in descline the last twenty years, so it's like the Mormons and Baptists becoming normalised).

But this mean that even for conservative atheists and agnostics, there's a connection between Danish-ness and Christianity (read the Evangelian Lutheran Church), and there's respect for Lutheran theological knowledge far into the left, with priest historical and even today being well represented in Danish debate and politics, from the Black (as in reactionary) priests in DPP to Margrete Auken in SPP.

EDIT sorry Politicus I started on my post before you posted.

[ingemann]

Thanks for elaborating on this, politicus and ingemann Very interesting.

Of course, that's what I meant when I talked about the difference between Danish and Dutch history in terms of religion and cleavages. In the Netherlands, religion (more specifically the divide between Protestants and Catholics) only undermined the formation of a national identity. However, it was harder for me to understand the specific way in which Danish Christianity served to reinforce the country's national identity, which I now understand better.

That's interesting. How much diversity is there within the Danish Lutheran church in terms of progressivism/conservatism? Are many Danes "culturally Christian" yet not practicing?

One of my social liberal "non-member of the Church" atheist, describe himself as Lutheran atheist. There's a general agreement among people who recognise that national identities exist, that Danish identity are shaped by the Lutheran and pre-Reformation Catholic Church, but also that the Folkekirke is shaped by Danish national identity. It's not the connection between the Hebrews and the Jewish faith, but it's close, if Denmark had gone Calvinist around 1600 (which was a possibility) or Sweden had returned to Catholicism, Danish national identity and Danish Church (whether Lutheran or Calvinist) would likely have been the same. 

[ingemann]

Politicus brings up a lot of good points, one thing with the bible belt. according to a article by KJristlig Dagblad (11 August 2011 http://www.kristeligt-dagblad.dk/kirke-tro/indre-mission-v%C3%A6lger-de-kristne-v%C3%A6rdier-i-politik) 35% of the members of Inner Mission planned to vote Kristendemokraterne (24% was in doubt). In Ringkøbing-Skern they got 5% (one of their worst election in the distict) of the vote. I doubt really you find many non-Inner Mission in the area voting for the party. So a good guess is that between 10-15% of the population in Ringkøbing-Skern would identify as Inner Mission. A good guess for the entire country is that 2-2,5% of the population as a whole. Of course that's just the most well known ecclessial group, there's a lot of smaller free Lutheran churches outside the Folkekirke, but they're smaller group than Inner Mission as a whole.

Of course the most interesting is that the traditional conservative Inner Mission is not the part of the  Church which is connected to DPP. Instead it's Tidehverv, which is a anti-Inner Mission group, whose theology is radical opposition to both Grundtvigian and Inner Mission, and lay weight on a more personal and intellectual version of Christianity (they're deeply inspired by Kierkegaard).

[ingemann]

Ingemann brings up a lot of good points

Being a bit self congratulating

Damn I locked in with the wrong account;). It have been corrected.

[ingemann]

His lacking leadership abilities might put into question his role as the heir apparent in the DPP. Not that Thulelsen Dahl is likely to leave anytime soon.

He has no such status.

I agree

Personally I believe that Messerschmidt have been complete sidelined no matter how much they talk about him being part of party's leadership. From my read on him he's incredible intelligent, but he mix this with arrogance, risk taking, dishonesty (much more than the average politicians) and terrible leadership. It work in Danish group in the Europe Parliament, because he's the smartest guy there and no one know or cares enough about EU rules to call him out, but if he behaved the same way in a Danish national election, he would end being crushed by the veterans in the Folketing. Of course the leadership in DPP have had to reward him with a symbolic place in the leadership, because it would be a bigger history if he wasn't rewarded and because he's the only one who have the potential to break out of DPP if he's unhappy with the leadership. I personally think he would end up burning and crashing if he did that, but it would still be a problem for DPP.

[ingemann]

There's also another aspect Thulesen Dahl are only 46 year old, Pia Kjærsgaard were 65 when she stopped as leader of the party. We can very well see Thulesen continue as leader of the party for the next twenty years. Especially if he planned to become PM at some point. Also twenty or even only ten years is a long time to be crown prince, especially if you're placed away from the centre of power. If DPP plan to use him as crown prince, a sign of this will be if he's allowed to return to Danish politics, he have talked about this several times, but he hasn't returned yet, which tell me that it's the leadership who want to keep him in EP.

[ingemann]

To illustrate what kind of a party DPP is here are some points from an article in Danish conservative daily Berlingske in January:

I'm surprised nobody tried to move a law to impose real party democracy, to cripple them.

First of all I'm not sure how you could do it legal, no one is forced to be member of DPP, so it's up to a non-profit member organisation itself how it organise itself. But even if you could do it create a dangerous precedence and the other parties may also be hurt by common rules for how to organised itself.
Also it would also create a rather ugly backlash when the other parties try to use legislation to "cripple" political opposition.

[ingemann]

Though the authoritarian, Soviet-like party structures of DPP in Denmark or SD in Sweden are rather frightening and says a whole lot about those parties, policy and legislation shouldn't be created around a single organisation.

It's not my impression that SD is as top-down as DPP... yet.

But honestly while we may like to see the party structure of DPP as a sign inborn authorianism in the party, I think it's reaching. Instead it exist for both historical and practical reasons. DPP was founded after a chaotic annual congress for the Progress Party worse than anything I remember in my lifetime. Pia Kjærsgaard who was leader of the Progress Party and her fraction of the party decided to leave the party, the other parliamental fraction left the party some years later, but didn't set up a new party. It tell you something how bad the Progress Party were, when the two warring MP fractions both leave the party. DPP leadership never wanted to see the same thing again, so they set up the party structure to avoid the old Progress Party members entering the party and creating the same chaos in DPP.

But there's also another group DPP want to avoid, when you're right wing anti-immigration party, you really want to avoid the Nazis and want to be able to throw them out again, if they enter anyway.

[ingemann]

Scandinavians in general value internal democracy in in private associations, not just parties, but also football clubs, cooperatives, guilds etc.

[ingemann]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.thelocal.dk/20151029/denmark-wants-foreign-fighters-jailed-for-life

[ingemann]

Surprised by SF. I thought they were effectively the liberal clergy party now.

That group is not big enough to have a party that size. But more serious I think it have a lot to do with the large selection of parties on the left. If you're socialist and don't need to have a strong connection to reality, EL exist, if you're smug know-it-all better-than-you social liberal you have RV, which leave SF with people who's better educated and more soft than Social Democratic voters, but still have to deal with reality. Also you have to remember that Denmark do have a model for how a Denmark taking more refugees in would look, we call it Sweden, and while many have loved that model, it doesn't look that hot right now, if Sweden successful deal with the refugee crisis without becoming more like Denmark, that model will likely become more popular again. At last Denmark for all that the discussion about immigration is still the EU country which take the fourth most refugees per capita.

[ingemann]

Not really shocking as you said, he have been in opposition to LLR always, and they removed him as 1st candidate to the European Parliament. I think he will return to Danish politics, but I think it's more likely that he attempts to become mayor of Viborg than returning to Folketinget. Through he may do both, I find it doubtful that try to stay in EP, as I will be surprised if the Social Liberals could get two mandates (right now I also doubt they get one).

I think this is quite intelligent done, he's mostly outside influence in Venstre (and he would be as long as LLR stay in power), and with EP election often being used to punish the government Venstre risk only get one mandate next time. He also represent people who are tired and embarassed of LLR's behaviour and Støjberg's line on ... well Muslims. At the same time he have been in internal opposition so long, that it doesn't really seem like treason that he leave. So there's a chance that he will bring some voters from Venstre to the Social Liberals.

[ingemann]

Are there any possible defectors in the LA?

No

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Non-western immigrants on average are a fiscal deficit for the Danish society. So I an see why a group of people who want lower taxes, don't really fight hard for such people being free access to Denmark. LA do support immigration of western (includes East Europeans) or skilled immigrants, but the government have in general worked for it being easier for those people to come to Denmark.

[ingemann]

Sorry to derail the topic a bit, but the vehicle tax was 180% of the purchase price in Denmark? That seems really really high to an outside observer; is it calculated differently there than in other countries? Also, I would have thought that for a largely populist party like the DPP that a measure to reduce that sort of tax (perhaps seen as a nanny state, environmental tax) would be popular with their voting base.

Diouf have already said the most, but I think a historical context are also necessary, Denmark have never really produced cars, there have been a few Danish car companies, but they was long gone when this vehicle tax was created. Denmark on the other hand suffered from major BOP deficits after WWII and up to the 90ties, it was not really a problem before 1970, because before that Denmark had some of the highest growth rates in western Europe. But as the growth rate fell, Denmark needed to limit the outflow of capital, our membership of EEC limited custom barriersd we could set up. Instead we could set up high prices on products we didn't produce ourselves. We also set high prices on oil, to limit the oil import, of course as we became a oil producers, this served to increasing our export, as we consumed less of our oil, the high taxes on cars also resulted in Danes buying smaller more fuel efficient cars.

That's give us a little context for why we have these taxes. As for why DPP's voters are not fan of lowering the taxes, well I think it can best be explained by them asking, what public services will be cut to pay for these tax cuts? DPP may be populists but that doesn't mean that they can promise everything all the time, they want to keep 3rd world immigrants (primarily Muslims) out, help the elderly and ensure high public service. It's hard to promise the last two thing and support cut the tax. LA do, but no one believe them, and their voters in general support that the poor should get poorer.

[ingemann]

Shouldn't be that surprising. During the 2015 general election, their campaign posters featured slogans like "Stramme asylregler og flere krav til indvandrere". (Strict rules for asylum and more demands for immigrants, too translate it a bit awkwardly.)

I know, I followed that campaign I just didn't think they would ever double down on that "promise", especially since I thought people that are more "soft" on immigration had gained power within the party after HTS's defeat.

Mette Frederiksen have always been more ideological and old fashion than HTS, but that doesn't translate into being soft on anything. The goal of the Social Democratic party in Denmark are to upkeep and potential expand the welfare state, and they have usual been condemned for that by the Whiny Left, who want to talk and talk and  talk and talk, rather than doing something and risk getting their hands dirty. Because they value clean hands and conscience more than helping people.

Of course the SocDem have also been home to some of those, but historical there have been internal discussion since the 80ties in the party in how to deal with immigration, with the soft liners getting power with Svend Auken in 1987. But there was already a strong internal debate before that.

Mette Frederiksen who did have a reputation for being soft, thanks to her focus on social (mostly women issue) early in her career, what people forgot about her was that her district was in the centre of the SocDem hardliner area, the western Copenhagen suburbs.

At the same time there's a general Danish political-cultural aspect which count for almost all parties (to greater or lesser degree), people tend to forget. In Danish politics the most important issue are money. We can discuss why it's so important in Denmark. So the question are always how much do things cost, how do we find the money, who's going cough them up.

Here's the main softliner party the RV/SL solution to emigration have been the last few years, have been to raise the pension age, lower the period you can be unemployment benefits etc. (you people get the idea).

So RV have in fact done SocDem a favour, they have set up a model for how Denmark can handle the large influx of third world immigrants.; simply to destroy the Welfare State.

This mean that suddenly the SocDem opposition to large scale third world immigration have been transformed from being opportunistic in nature (or a necessary evil) to being ideological, and even the softliners like Gjerskov and Yildiz (I don't know with Toft) support most of the bill, they're just in opposition to the 3 year rule.

[ingemann]

The Danish political structure seems like, utterly unworkable at the moment. Neither the red or blue blocs make much cohesive sense - I still think we could see a grand cooperation between two of DPP, SD and Venstre is in the cards after the next election.

I doubt it will happen, through DPP-Venstre coalition are the most likely. SD and Venstre will not enter a grand coalition again short of national emergency, until either everybody who remember the SV goverment are dead or if Venstre complete change into another party. SD and DPP are also unlikely to enter a coalition at this point. DPP need to prove themselves first to be more than populists. But what can happen is a SD one party government, which closely cooperate with DPP.

[ingemann]

It is now no longer only voters which leave the Social Democrats to join the Alternative. In the first defection of this parliament, the Social Democrat MP Pernille Schnoor joins the Alternative. She believes that the Social Democrats are no longer humanistic enough in refugee and immigration questions and denounces the party's former Finance Minister Bjarne Corydon's comments about making Denmark a so-called competition state instead of a welfare state. The 49-year old Schnoor was very much a quiet backbencher; she didn't even have any spokesperson roles. This is her first term in parliament; previously she taught brand ethos and marketing management at Copenhagen Business School.

Maybe she should have come to this conclusion a little earlier, the competition state was not something which came after last election, it was there already before she was elected. 

[ingemann]

http://www.thelocal.dk/20160504/danish-school-rejects-muslim-students-over-niqab

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[ingemann]

http://www.thelocal.dk/20160506/danish-euro-mp-to-be-charged-for-millions-in-misused-funds

You must be logged in to read this quote.