Danish Elections and Politics

[Diouf]

A Social Democrat MP, spokesperson on judicial affairs, Bjørn Brandenborg, has also come out against legislation to limit freedom of speech.

[Diouf]

This question seems to be causing a lot of internal problems in the parties supporting it. Another Social Democrat MP Frederik Vad has published a picture of Salman Rushdie, and tweeted that his party and MP colleague Per Husted was absurd for wanting to go even further to appease the Islamic world by banning drawings of Muhammed.

In the Alternative, which so far is the only opposition party supporting the idea, one of their six MPs, Theresa Scavenius has tweeted that she will vote against the proposed changes.
There must be several more Liberal MPs incensed about this as well.

[JimJamUK]

This question seems to be causing a lot of internal problems in the parties supporting it. Another Social Democrat MP Frederik Vad has published a picture of Salman Rushdie, and tweeted that his party and MP colleague Per Husted was absurd for wanting to go even further to appease the Islamic world by banning drawings of Muhammed.

In the Alternative, which so far is the only opposition party supporting the idea, one of their six MPs, Theresa Scavenius has tweeted that she will vote against the proposed changes.
There must be several more Liberal MPs incensed about this as well.

Are any of the government MPs saying or at least inferring they would vote against it, or are they just signalling they don’t agree with it in advance of voting for it anyways? If they did vote against what would be the consequences?

[Diouf]

Are any of the government MPs saying or at least inferring they would vote against it, or are they just signalling they don’t agree with it in advance of voting for it anyways? If they did vote against what would be the consequences?

This is still a dynamic issue, and we don't have an idea of how the proposed legislative changes from the government will look. Løkke is saying different things at different times, sometimes it's just the burning of Quarans in front of embassies, sometimes it's the repeated burning of Quarans in front of embassies and at other times it's a general ban of burning Quarans. And some wonder the most feasible legislative instrument for any change would have to look a lot like a re-introduction of the blasphemy paragraph.

Hopefully, there will be so much resistance that the changes are dropped, but perhaps that is being to optimistic. Løkke has put in a lot of his credibility on this, so would be a humilating climbdown for him. If several actually intend to vote against, I guess the government could call it a free vote in the same way as moral questions like abortion have been earlier. But if things turn out normally, it will be a regular party-line vote, and if someone doesn't follow it, they will probably lose their spokesperson roles for some period of time.

All newspaper editorials are against this, except Kristeligt Dagblad (religious) and Børsen (very close to the business community). Even the normally 100% loyalist Social Democrat PioPio is against it.

[Diouf]

Seven opposition parties have made a common statement against the government's ideas. Only Social Liberals and Alternative are not part of this declaration, and even those parties are split. Incredible how Løkke managed to drag the government's position so far to the left on this issue. There must be some polling results on this question soon, and the results will be interesting to see.


https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/syv-partier-i-faelles-udmelding-frihedsrettigheder-skal-vaegte-hoejere-end

[JimJamUK]

Seven opposition parties have made a common statement against the government's ideas. Only Social Liberals and Alternative are not part of this declaration, and even those parties are split. Incredible how Løkke managed to drag the government's position so far to the left on this issue. There must be some polling results on this question soon, and the results will be interesting to see.

I’m not sure EL would consider Løkke to be dragging the government to the left 😁

[DavidB.]

Incredible how Løkke managed to drag the government's position so far to the left on this issue.

This is the essence of the Moderates' existence. Undoing the kingmaker position of working class S/DF and lower middle-class V/S swing voters by destroying the bloc system, and replacing it with a kingmaker position for rich voters who only want "what's good for business".

[DL]

How is burning a book an example of "free speech"? Its not speech, its a physical action.

In any case there are always limits on free speech. You cannot yell "fire" in a packed concert hall. There are laws against hate speech in most democracies etc...

I find the burning of ANY book very unsettling and makes me thing of Nazi bonfires of book burning in 1933. Why single out the Koran when you could just have a law against publicly desecrating any book or religious symbol.

I'm 100% atheist and have no use for any religion. If someone wants to give a lecture on why they think that Christianity or Islam or Judaism are false and based on myths - I applaud that. But burning Bibles and Korans etc... seems to just be gratuitous hatemongering

[Helsinkian]

In any case there are always limits on free speech. You cannot yell "fire" in a packed concert hall.

This example gets repeated ad nauseam, but few people know its background. It comes from a U.S. court case during World War I where SCOTUS decided that distributing flyers opposed to the draft is not covered by free speech -- the Justice who wrote the decision argued that opposing conscription in wartime was akin to shouting "fire" in a theatre (Schenk v. United States, overturned a few decades later). Time to find a new analogy?

[DL]

In any case there are always limits on free speech. You cannot yell "fire" in a packed concert hall.

This example gets repeated ad nauseam, but few people know its background. It comes from a U.S. court case during World War I where SCOTUS decided that distributing flyers opposed to the draft is not covered by free speech -- the Justice who wrote the decision argued that opposing conscription in wartime was akin to shouting "fire" in a theatre (Schenk v. United States, overturned a few decades later). Time to find a new analogy?

It was a bad analogy during WW1 since I see no comparison at all between yelling "fire" in a movie theatre and expressing a political view on the draft. But there are many other limits on so-called free speech. For example it is illegal to libel someone. Its illegal to commit perjury (when is the last time someone tried to defend themselves in a perjury charge by saying "I have the freedom to lie under oath - its my free speech". Also, in many countries Holocaust denial is illegal and hate speech is illegal. Many years ago a neo-Nazi Holocaust denier in Canada was jailed for "spreading false news" when he kept claiming that the Holocaust never happened (though he kept saying he wished it had happened).

In many countries (including the US) it is illegal to burn the national flag.

I don't know what the laws are in Denmark, but if in Canada you spray painted "Death to Jews" on a synagogue or even on a billboard, you would get charged with a hate crime and claiming the defense of "free speech" to spew hate would not get you very far - and that's a good thing.

Do you agree or disagree that it should be illegal to yell "fire" in a crowded concert hall - or does that constitute an example of free speech that must be protected?

[DL]

What exactly is supposed to be the consequence of making it illegal to desecrate religious books and symbols? is there some huge sub-culture of people in Denmark whose idea of fun is setting fire to Bibles, Korans and the Book of Mormon etc. and if they can't do this anymore, their lives are no longer are worth living?

As said above, I am atheist and consider all religions to be a joke, but if the law says I can't set fire to to religious books - what's it to me? I can still enjoy my life despite that "limitation" to my fun.

[Jens]

Seven opposition parties have made a common statement against the government's ideas. Only Social Liberals and Alternative are not part of this declaration, and even those parties are split. Incredible how Løkke managed to drag the government's position so far to the left on this issue. There must be some polling results on this question soon, and the results will be interesting to see.

I’m not sure EL would consider Løkke to be dragging the government to the left 😁

Especially since both SF and Enhedslisten has been quite clear that they dont support a ban

[Diouf]

A Voxmeter poll for Ritzau. Had hoped it would at least have been 50/50, but there seems to be support for the ban. So if other pollsters show similar result, hard to see the government backing down.

Among other things the burning of Qurans should be illegal. 48% for, 30% against.
It would damage Danish security if Quran burnings remain legal. 64% agree, 16% disagree.
It would hurt Denmark's reputation if Quran burning remain legal. 62% agree, 15% disagree.
Making it illegal can be a slippery slope towards further limitations on freedom rights. 47% agree, 30% disagree.

Seven opposition parties have made a common statement against the government's ideas. Only Social Liberals and Alternative are not part of this declaration, and even those parties are split. Incredible how Løkke managed to drag the government's position so far to the left on this issue. There must be some polling results on this question soon, and the results will be interesting to see.

I’m not sure EL would consider Løkke to be dragging the government to the left 😁

On issues like multiculturalism, value relativism etc. I would normally have the Social Liberals and Alternative as the most left-wing parties, or lenient or liberal or which terms one would prefer to use. But yeah, nice to see the principled stances from SPP and Red-Greens here.

[Diouf]

Former SPP leader and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Villy Søvndal, is running in the EP election next year. He is currently a councillor in Kolding. With the highs SPP are currently on in opinion polls, there should be little doubt that the party gets at least two MEPs elected, and he will surely be one of them. He is not running to become the party's lead candidate. That will in all likelyhood be current MEP Kira Marie Peter-Hansen.

[Lord Halifax]

How is burning a book an example of "free speech"? Its not speech, its a physical action.

free speech is a Common Law concept, in Continental Europe they typically use broader terms which makes it either less relevant or irrelevant whether something is speech or another way of expressing an opinion. German has Meinungsfreiheit (freedom of opinion), Spanish and French have libertad de expresión and liberté d'expression (freedom of expression), and the Scandinavian term yttrandefrihet (Swedish) and ytringsfrihed/t (Danish/Norwegian) also means freedom of expression.

[DL]

How is burning a book an example of "free speech"? Its not speech, its a physical action.

free speech is a Common Law concept, in Continental Europe they typically use broader terms which makes it either less relevant or irrelevant whether something is speech or another way of expressing an opinion. German has Meinungsfreiheit (freedom of opinion), Spanish and French have libertad de expresión and liberté d'expression (freedom of expression), and the Scandinavian term yttrandefrihet (Swedish) and ytringsfrihed/t (Danish/Norwegian) also means freedom of expression.

So I guess child pornography is also freedom of expression?

Alao aren’t there all kinds of laws against women wearing hijabs. I guess their “freedom of speech” doesn’t count. In fact these days when people talk about freedom of speech it really boils down freedom of speech for angry, bigoted white men. No cares about free speech for the rest of society

[Conservatopia]

How is burning a book an example of "free speech"? Its not speech, its a physical action.

free speech is a Common Law concept, in Continental Europe they typically use broader terms which makes it either less relevant or irrelevant whether something is speech or another way of expressing an opinion. German has Meinungsfreiheit (freedom of opinion), Spanish and French have libertad de expresión and liberté d'expression (freedom of expression), and the Scandinavian term yttrandefrihet (Swedish) and ytringsfrihed/t (Danish/Norwegian) also means freedom of expression.

So I guess child pornography is also freedom of expression?

Alao aren’t there all kinds of laws against women wearing hijabs. I guess their “freedom of speech” doesn’t count. In fact these days when people talk about freedom of speech it really boils down freedom of speech for angry, bigoted white men. No cares about free speech for the rest of society

All of the examples you've brought up (porn, libel etc) are things that cause real harm to people and are therefore not covered by freedom of expression. Burning a quran is asshole behaviour but doesn't actually harm anybody. Not the same thing at all.

This is your brain on Canada.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

How is burning a book an example of "free speech"? Its not speech, its a physical action.

free speech is a Common Law concept, in Continental Europe they typically use broader terms which makes it either less relevant or irrelevant whether something is speech or another way of expressing an opinion. German has Meinungsfreiheit (freedom of opinion), Spanish and French have libertad de expresión and liberté d'expression (freedom of expression), and the Scandinavian term yttrandefrihet (Swedish) and ytringsfrihed/t (Danish/Norwegian) also means freedom of expression.

So I guess child pornography is also freedom of expression?

Alao aren’t there all kinds of laws against women wearing hijabs. I guess their “freedom of speech” doesn’t count. In fact these days when people talk about freedom of speech it really boils down freedom of speech for angry, bigoted white men. No cares about free speech for the rest of society

Women should be allowed to wear hijabs. They should also be allowed to burn the Quran. Both religious practice and criticism of religion should not be punished. This is perhaps the essence of Western liberal philosophy.

[Horus]

Imagine being such a snowflake that someone burning your holy book of choice causes you to react with rage and violence. Absolutely feral, animalistic mentality. If your faith is genuinely strong you should not care at all, as their action only harms their relationship with the God you know to be true, and you know with 100% certainty that God will eventually have the final word. And no I'm not an atheist by any means.

[Hollywood]

Imagine being such a snowflake that someone burning your holy book of choice causes you to react with rage and violence. Absolutely feral, animalistic mentality. If your faith is genuinely strong you should not care at all, as their action only harms their relationship with the God you know to be true, and you know with 100% certainty that God will eventually have the final word. And no I'm not an atheist by any means.

It's like you've channelled the Ghost of Hitler.  LOL.  I suppose he got the idea from the Marxists that burned Jewish texts in 1901 and between 1914-1917, which was followed by the progroms. 

Imagine being such a snowflake that you got upset when another individual was enraged by someone of another faith, sect, or no faith, discriminated against his religion by destroying your sacred text via arson in order to make a political point. 

However, I do agree with people being allowed to burn a Quran.  That's freedom of speech.  You can also burn the US or Mexican Flag.  However, I suppose you can criminalize an arsonist for setting a fire in a public place, and make intent to keep warm or cook an affirmative defense.

[DL]

Imagine being such a snowflake that you get driven to a mad rage by some women making a wardrobe choice to cover their hair with a hijab?

[Horus]

Imagine being such a snowflake that you get driven to a mad rage by some women making a wardrobe choice to cover their hair with a hijab?

Yes, people who get violent about that just as bad. Did you read the post right above mine? Why are you deflecting?

[DL]

A Voxmeter poll for Ritzau. Had hoped it would at least have been 50/50, but there seems to be support for the ban. So if other pollsters show similar result, hard to see the government backing down.

Among other things the burning of Qurans should be illegal. 48% for, 30% against.
It would damage Danish security if Quran burnings remain legal. 64% agree, 16% disagree.
It would hurt Denmark's reputation if Quran burning remain legal. 62% agree, 15% disagree.
Making it illegal can be a slippery slope towards further limitations on freedom rights. 47% agree, 30% disagree.

Seven opposition parties have made a common statement against the government's ideas. Only Social Liberals and Alternative are not part of this declaration, and even those parties are split. Incredible how Løkke managed to drag the government's position so far to the left on this issue. There must be some polling results on this question soon, and the results will be interesting to see.

I’m not sure EL would consider Løkke to be dragging the government to the left 😁

On issues like multiculturalism, value relativism etc. I would normally have the Social Liberals and Alternative as the most left-wing parties, or lenient or liberal or which terms one would prefer to use. But yeah, nice to see the principled stances from SPP and Red-Greens here.

I wonder why the question is so specifically about banning the burning of the Koran as opposed to banning the burning of religious books in general - not just a ban on burning the Koran but also a ban on burning the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Talmud etc... The law and the polling question should stay away from being so specifically about the Koran and Islam and should be broader and apply to other religions.   

[Diouf]

Minister of Defence Jakob Ellemann-Jensen has apologized to parliament for giving them false information with regards to a rushed purchase of an artillery system from Elbit after the existing system was donated to Ukraine. The false information regard how much the Ministry were in contact with other companies and how short of a deadline there was on the Elbit offer.
Normally, these kind of situations could put that minister under a lot of pressure. However, the permanent secretary of the ministry, Morten Bæk, has said that the instances of parliament receiving false information "unequivocally is due to mistakes made in the department and the responsible agency", so there does not seem to be anything concrete to criticize Ellemann for. Also with this being a rare occasion of a majority government, and the minister being the leader of one of the parties, there is probably little chance of a resignation even if there was something wrong about his conduct.

Lars Barfoed, who led the Conservatives from 2011-2014 and has been Minister of Transportation and Justice Minister, has left the party. However, this mostly seems to be due to issues regarding local politics. Barfoed's wife, ex-MP Helle Sjelle, is a member of the Frederiksberg City Council. Her preferred candidate for leader of the Conservatives in the council, Nikolaj Bøgh, lost a tight leadership election 46-54% to Michael Brautsch. Sjelle has left the party as well, and states that that new Conservative leader has no "Conservative compass" and has moved the party away from the constructive, centrist form of Conservatism which have been a constant in the Frederiksberg chapter of the party. She also says he has given all power in the party to those who supported him, and thereby cut off the almost half of the party, which supported his opponent.
After the local elections in 2021, the Conservatives lost the mayoral position in Frederiksberg for the first time since 1909 as a Red Bloc majority elected Social Democrat Michael Vindfeldt as the new mayor. These internal troubles will not make it easier for the party to regain the throne.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The koran burning discourse made me curious about its most obvious comparison (flug burning laws); amusingly in Denmark it is legal to burn the Danish flag but not non-danish flags. How did that weird situation arise?