For journalistic and paradoxical reasons I did actually forward the below article Democratic Flicker to first and foremost Liberal Alliance (Y) for the response to my two last questions. And secondly to other parties - mentioned or not - to give them a chance to respond to the 'democratic flicker' remarks. Not that I expected responses. Busy schedules and all. But I did it - for the record.
Thursday, 30 October 2008
Tuesday, 28 October 2008
Democratic Flicker - Part One
Margrethe Vestager explains the fundamentals of Social Liberal politics
Ask any member of The Danish Social Liberal Party (B) any question, and chances are that the answer will include the buzz words of democracy or political project. The party's cornerstones are economic responsibility, social responsibility, and cross-parliamentary co-operation. That means negociation as a solution for everything. So the party doesn’t really like the notion of splits.
I had the opportunity to take the time of the party leader and chair person of the parliamentary group, Ms. Margrethe Vestager, in her busy schedule. You see, the party is constantly confronted with not having had any political influence in the past seven years. And these past weeks there have been stories in the Danish media about individual splits within the party, caused by this frustration.
Although traditions demand the party’s participation in any government, they have been kept out of influence from the coalition of The Conservatives (C) and The Liberal Party of Denmark (V) in three consecutive periods of government, since these parties choose to assure their majority in passing most bills from the very Right, The Danish People’s Party (O). The Cliff Notes to Danish Politics below will guide you roughly through the political scene in Denmark:
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/cliff-notes-to-danish-politics.html
Ms. Margrethe Vestager finds this undermining of the Danish democracy, in her own words:
“Danish politics changed in 2001. We got a completely fixed blue block. It is a good, political children’s lesson that center parties influence the forming of government, whether it be The Liberals or The Social Democrats to take the post of prime minister. Most people have decoded that The Liberals and The Conservatives are very fond of the co-operation with The Danish People’s Party. This is democratic flicker. They use this clique to keep out other parties from influence.”
Paradoxical, since major players in Danish politics normally fight each other to seem very ‘center’-like, and you hardly can get any closer to the actual center of Danish politics than with The Danish Social Liberal Party. Therefore the party now points to Ms. Helle Thorning-Schmidt from The Social Democrats (S) for prime minister, planning to work with both sides of the Danish parliament. To change the democratic climate.
In 2007 a new (then) center party saw the light of day. Two members from The Danish Social Liberal Party broke out together with one member from The Conservatives and formed the party of New Alliance (Y). After a confusing transitional period and breaking up again, the remaining two members from The Danish Social Liberal Party reformed the party, now called Liberal Alliance (Y).
I therefore asked Ms. Vestager if this was a symptom of the lacking political influence and the frustration of The Social Liberals mixed with the success of the so-called blue block. If this blue block had actually managed to split up the The Social Liberals?
“No. In the beginning there was confusion about the political project of New Alliance. Later it turned out that they had a different political project on the agenda – now they even call themselves Liberal Alliance. If the political project binds members together, the party won’t split,” was the response of Ms. Vestager.
“But they do point to Mr. Anders Fogh Rasmussen (V) for prime minister?”
“Yes, but they will have to make account for that themselves,” Ms. Vestager declined commenting any further.
So now we have about two handfuls of very diverse parties in Denmark, alongside with the individuals who have broken out of one party or another. Several have not even found other parties to join or formed their own parties as yet in order to get a political platform to speak from to voice their opinions. Truly democratic flicker.
Although traditions demand the party’s participation in any government, they have been kept out of influence from the coalition of The Conservatives (C) and The Liberal Party of Denmark (V) in three consecutive periods of government, since these parties choose to assure their majority in passing most bills from the very Right, The Danish People’s Party (O). The Cliff Notes to Danish Politics below will guide you roughly through the political scene in Denmark:
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/cliff-notes-to-danish-politics.html
Ms. Margrethe Vestager finds this undermining of the Danish democracy, in her own words:
“Danish politics changed in 2001. We got a completely fixed blue block. It is a good, political children’s lesson that center parties influence the forming of government, whether it be The Liberals or The Social Democrats to take the post of prime minister. Most people have decoded that The Liberals and The Conservatives are very fond of the co-operation with The Danish People’s Party. This is democratic flicker. They use this clique to keep out other parties from influence.”
Paradoxical, since major players in Danish politics normally fight each other to seem very ‘center’-like, and you hardly can get any closer to the actual center of Danish politics than with The Danish Social Liberal Party. Therefore the party now points to Ms. Helle Thorning-Schmidt from The Social Democrats (S) for prime minister, planning to work with both sides of the Danish parliament. To change the democratic climate.
In 2007 a new (then) center party saw the light of day. Two members from The Danish Social Liberal Party broke out together with one member from The Conservatives and formed the party of New Alliance (Y). After a confusing transitional period and breaking up again, the remaining two members from The Danish Social Liberal Party reformed the party, now called Liberal Alliance (Y).
I therefore asked Ms. Vestager if this was a symptom of the lacking political influence and the frustration of The Social Liberals mixed with the success of the so-called blue block. If this blue block had actually managed to split up the The Social Liberals?
“No. In the beginning there was confusion about the political project of New Alliance. Later it turned out that they had a different political project on the agenda – now they even call themselves Liberal Alliance. If the political project binds members together, the party won’t split,” was the response of Ms. Vestager.
“But they do point to Mr. Anders Fogh Rasmussen (V) for prime minister?”
“Yes, but they will have to make account for that themselves,” Ms. Vestager declined commenting any further.
So now we have about two handfuls of very diverse parties in Denmark, alongside with the individuals who have broken out of one party or another. Several have not even found other parties to join or formed their own parties as yet in order to get a political platform to speak from to voice their opinions. Truly democratic flicker.
Friday, 24 October 2008
Cliff Notes on Danish Politics
There are approximately two handfuls of political parties in the Danish parliament. And trust me, they are handfuls. The left hand never knows what the right one is doing. No party is ever in complete majority. So coalition is the order of the day. With 179 members of the Danish parliament it would appear to be easy - just count to 90. But they all have to get along to rule the country. No party is too small to participate. Yes, there is a two percent limit to get into the parliament, but individuals can always get around that by simply getting enough votes as persons to enter. In the nineties one comic character actually entered the parliament promising tail wind on bicycle tracks (humoristic one-time event). And if this doesn't work - do like the numerous amounts of tiny left wing parties did when forming the ultimate left side in the parliament: unite. They had to after the fall of The Soviet Union and The Berlin Wall.
Thus seen on a horisontal line, and starting on the left wing, we are fortunate to have a colourful mix of the remains of the very, very socialist parties and the very, very green parties. In unison they usually - just - make it past the two percent limit. They call themselves Enhedslisten (Ø) - The Red-Green Alliance (or Unity List) - its chair person is Ms. Line Barfod. They appeal to a base of intellectuals, researchers, social workers, etc. One of the most noticeable persons in the party is the ever alert watch dog, Mr. Frank Aaen. Almost singlehandedly he works to keep the democracy alive and kicking. We are lucky to have a democratic safety valve in the parliamentary system - the so-called §20 open asking time that goes on record. And through these Q&A sessions Mr. Aaen, for one, keeps the government on its toes with truck loads of critical questions. Any government. Any time. The reason for this is naturally a healthy love of democracy and debate - that goes without saying - but also because The Red-Green Alliance will never be anywhere near influence and direct government, since no other party will include the party in a coalition. So they have the rare role of always being in opposition. No matter what side of the parliament is in government.
Next on the political line we have the very socialist and very green party of Socialistisk Folkeparti (F), The Socialist People's Party. They appeal to teachers, artists, social workers, intellectuals, blue collar workers, etc. Usually around 17 percent of the voters, but within this past year, they at one point persuaded around 21 percent of the voters. Why? Because of the party's chair person - or chair character - Mr. Villy Søvndal. He has no prime minister-like appearance at all, and doesn't need it. With hard welfare punchlines, fiery Socialist rhetoric, and tongue-in-cheek remarks he will persuade anybody - sometimes even right wing voters. This way, and on themes like immigration or terror, he actually manages to steel votes from the ultra Nationalist right wing party, but more about that - once we reach that end of the line. His party actually steals the base of the old left wing party of tradition:
Socialdemokratiet (A) - The Social Democrats - with its chair person, Ms. Helle Thorning-Schmidt. From 2005 on she is fairly new at this game, but with a prime minister-like appearance. She seldom opens her mouth without mentioning welfare, ordinary people's lives, and social security. The party appeals to the great formerly working class population gone middle class, since there are not too many lower class people left in the Danish welfare state. Nevertheless, the backing of the party has gradually fallen from the safe 30-40 percent of the votes in the olden days of the solid Danish welfare state to the current approximately 22-26 percent. The party has tried to move to the center to appeal to more people, but has lost voters in the process. Partly due to Mr. Søvndal's fiery cannibalism on the left wing, partly due to the extreme Right's growing succes.
And now the center. The place any large party in Danish politics tries to occupy, or encroach on as closely as possible. Paradoxically, here we find one of the smallest parties in Danish politics, with approximately 5-6 percent of the cultural elite votes, mainly attracting academics, public officers, intellectuals, artists, doctors, the creative class. In comparison with other parties, this is the party with the highest educated electorate ('the intelligent party' it is sometimes called - derogatorily, since equality is huge in Denmark): Det Radikale Venstre (B), or The Danish Social Liberal Party - with its chair person Ms. Margrethe Vestager. She also appears to be very prime minister-like, but she has no real use for this quality, since the leader of one of the major parties will always be appointed this post. The party members focus very much on both social and economic responsibility, can hardly open their mouths without mentioning democracy, freedom of speech, rule of law, and international co-operation. Don't be alarmed and fooled by the word 'radikale' - they are not in any way, shape or form 'radical'. The term is historic, from the time there was only a 'Right' and a 'Left' in Denmark - much like the USA today: Conservative/Republican or Liberal/Democrat. At that time it was considered very 'radical' to be Social-Liberal. In fact, the two major opposing parties can't get any closer to the center because of this party. They are in the way. Usually this party will be in a coalition government. They incessantly flirt to the Left and to the Right. And usually no major political player dares to ignore them - if they do the math and count to 90. But in the last three government periods they have been left out of coalition and influence, since the government finds it easier to count to 90 through the lucrative electorate of the ultra Right.
Somewhere around the center, we also find The Christian Democrats in Denmark - Kristendemokraterne (K). Or rather, sometimes we find them here. They have been out of the parliament in the last elections, having the support of voters of less than one percent. As the name suggests, they attract mainly dedicated Christians from all walks of life, stealing votes from both The Social Democrats and The Conservatives - that is, when they get votes. Having been reformed, they represented a line more Social than strictly Christian. Among other things they toned down their original 'pro-life' line, and pointed to The Social Democrats for government. That is right up until this weekend: At the party convention a new chair person from a Christian fundamentalist background was elected, Mr. Bjarne Hartung Kirkegaard. A return to the strickter Christian line is likely to follow.
Moving to the right side of the Danish parliament, traditionally covering the voter base of farmers and small business entrepreneurs - the party has become a big-city phenomenon for educated business men and women. Similar to The Social Democrats on the left side, attracting approximately 22-26 percent of the votes: the prime minister is called Mr. Anders Fogh Rasmussen and is from the Danish party of Venstre (V) - the traditional The Liberal Party of Denmark. He appears very prime minister and statesman-like, and used to be an ultra-Liberal, a spokes person for 'the minimalist state', but must have gone soft since the nineties, since today he has moved towards the center. Or rather, he signals having moved to the center. He manages a very rare form of government: Appealing to the mass votes of the center, alongside with including the extreme right in his majority of 90 members for passing bills (without including the party in the coalition itself). It appears to work. The coalition has done so for the past seven years, and rarely glances in the direction of other parties in the center or to the Left for the passing of bills. Many would argue - and do - that it doesn't actually work. Must be like the now redundant theory of the bumble bee.
Since The Liberal Party has gone partly center, partly extreme Right, today, there is room for an actual Liberal Party. Oddly dissidents from the Social-Liberals - and not from the old Liberal party - have formed their own party, Liberal Alliance (Y). The party appeals to both business men, educated elites, and voters who have simply had enough of the Nationalist retorique of the supporting right wing party of the current government. Liberal Alliance's chair person, Mr. Naser Khader, himself a secular Muslim, gained much support during the Danish cartoon crisis in 2005-2006, partly because of hefty speaking up for the freedom of speech, partly because of direct terror threats to his person. Directly after forming the party they gained upto 12 percent of the votes according to the polls. But because of scandals of colourful individuals in the party, they soon fell to right about the limit of two percent at the 2007 election. Now they barely exist at less than one percent of the votes in the polls. Paradoxical, since there ought to be plenty of room for them, having taken over the very Liberal space in the parliament. But nothing is logic in Danish politics.
On the really Right, we find Konservative (C) - The Conservative People's Party or The Conservatives. The only true coalition partner to The Liberal Party. The party covers a base of primarily small town middle class workers and civil servants, but also other people who set family values, fighting crime, and the climate high. The Conservative Party used to be the most powerful in Denmark - in the olden days. Gradually shrinking to a support of approximately 10 percent. Recently the Conservative chair person was changed - from a former prime minister-like policeman to a younger and outspoken woman, Ms. Lene Espersen. One could argue about her prime minister appearance, but she gains a lot of personal votes because of a direct style and fiery rhetoric. After this change the most recent opinion polls mark a rise in support to about 12-14 percent.
And now, finally, we reach the ultimate Right end of the line: Dansk Folkeparti (O) - The Danish People's Party has a tiny but powerful chair person, Ms. Pia Kjærsgaard. She is in no way prime minister-like - and frankly, my dear, doesn't seem give a damn about it, since this is not her mission. She gets her way anyway. To her, and the party, anything Danish is the top measure for anything. To a high extent, the party attracts blue collar workers, social workers, the unemployed, retired people, and anyone who is dissatisfied with European and International co-operation, if it means giving up the Danish welfare goods. Or anyone against immigration. No doubt that the party leaders are brilliant at covering these bases. The party springs from another right wing dissident party, and has gradually over a timespan of less than fifteen years gained remarkable influence, to a degree where the original extreme right party dwindled and dissolved. Being very Nationalist, it used to be a party absolutely no other party would take seriously, or consider in a coalition, because of a very strong and aggressive anti-immigration line. But today, representing 13-15 percent of the voter support (variying in some polls upto almost 17 percent) - nobody dares to ignore the party. Rhetorically, the only one to match Ms. Kjærsgaard is Mr. Villy Søvndal from The Socialist People's Party, mentioned earlier. Very effective, since they represent the dual aspect of the Danish Parliament in extreme form. Both are so-called 'value-based' parties. Both chair persons are fiery speakers to recommend and protect the Danish welfare system.
Apart from the parties we usually have 1-5 people in the parliament who have left their parties, for one reason or another. They fight hard for political influence, since they are not invited to anything and fight hard to get attention from the press. Personally, I enjoy every single one of the above parties and individuals. Representatives from all these parties are on my thank you list. Even though I don't support all - I thoroughly enjoy their participation in our Democracy. No one is redundant. They all cover their bases.
Thus seen on a horisontal line, and starting on the left wing, we are fortunate to have a colourful mix of the remains of the very, very socialist parties and the very, very green parties. In unison they usually - just - make it past the two percent limit. They call themselves Enhedslisten (Ø) - The Red-Green Alliance (or Unity List) - its chair person is Ms. Line Barfod. They appeal to a base of intellectuals, researchers, social workers, etc. One of the most noticeable persons in the party is the ever alert watch dog, Mr. Frank Aaen. Almost singlehandedly he works to keep the democracy alive and kicking. We are lucky to have a democratic safety valve in the parliamentary system - the so-called §20 open asking time that goes on record. And through these Q&A sessions Mr. Aaen, for one, keeps the government on its toes with truck loads of critical questions. Any government. Any time. The reason for this is naturally a healthy love of democracy and debate - that goes without saying - but also because The Red-Green Alliance will never be anywhere near influence and direct government, since no other party will include the party in a coalition. So they have the rare role of always being in opposition. No matter what side of the parliament is in government.
Next on the political line we have the very socialist and very green party of Socialistisk Folkeparti (F), The Socialist People's Party. They appeal to teachers, artists, social workers, intellectuals, blue collar workers, etc. Usually around 17 percent of the voters, but within this past year, they at one point persuaded around 21 percent of the voters. Why? Because of the party's chair person - or chair character - Mr. Villy Søvndal. He has no prime minister-like appearance at all, and doesn't need it. With hard welfare punchlines, fiery Socialist rhetoric, and tongue-in-cheek remarks he will persuade anybody - sometimes even right wing voters. This way, and on themes like immigration or terror, he actually manages to steel votes from the ultra Nationalist right wing party, but more about that - once we reach that end of the line. His party actually steals the base of the old left wing party of tradition:
Socialdemokratiet (A) - The Social Democrats - with its chair person, Ms. Helle Thorning-Schmidt. From 2005 on she is fairly new at this game, but with a prime minister-like appearance. She seldom opens her mouth without mentioning welfare, ordinary people's lives, and social security. The party appeals to the great formerly working class population gone middle class, since there are not too many lower class people left in the Danish welfare state. Nevertheless, the backing of the party has gradually fallen from the safe 30-40 percent of the votes in the olden days of the solid Danish welfare state to the current approximately 22-26 percent. The party has tried to move to the center to appeal to more people, but has lost voters in the process. Partly due to Mr. Søvndal's fiery cannibalism on the left wing, partly due to the extreme Right's growing succes.
And now the center. The place any large party in Danish politics tries to occupy, or encroach on as closely as possible. Paradoxically, here we find one of the smallest parties in Danish politics, with approximately 5-6 percent of the cultural elite votes, mainly attracting academics, public officers, intellectuals, artists, doctors, the creative class. In comparison with other parties, this is the party with the highest educated electorate ('the intelligent party' it is sometimes called - derogatorily, since equality is huge in Denmark): Det Radikale Venstre (B), or The Danish Social Liberal Party - with its chair person Ms. Margrethe Vestager. She also appears to be very prime minister-like, but she has no real use for this quality, since the leader of one of the major parties will always be appointed this post. The party members focus very much on both social and economic responsibility, can hardly open their mouths without mentioning democracy, freedom of speech, rule of law, and international co-operation. Don't be alarmed and fooled by the word 'radikale' - they are not in any way, shape or form 'radical'. The term is historic, from the time there was only a 'Right' and a 'Left' in Denmark - much like the USA today: Conservative/Republican or Liberal/Democrat. At that time it was considered very 'radical' to be Social-Liberal. In fact, the two major opposing parties can't get any closer to the center because of this party. They are in the way. Usually this party will be in a coalition government. They incessantly flirt to the Left and to the Right. And usually no major political player dares to ignore them - if they do the math and count to 90. But in the last three government periods they have been left out of coalition and influence, since the government finds it easier to count to 90 through the lucrative electorate of the ultra Right.
Somewhere around the center, we also find The Christian Democrats in Denmark - Kristendemokraterne (K). Or rather, sometimes we find them here. They have been out of the parliament in the last elections, having the support of voters of less than one percent. As the name suggests, they attract mainly dedicated Christians from all walks of life, stealing votes from both The Social Democrats and The Conservatives - that is, when they get votes. Having been reformed, they represented a line more Social than strictly Christian. Among other things they toned down their original 'pro-life' line, and pointed to The Social Democrats for government. That is right up until this weekend: At the party convention a new chair person from a Christian fundamentalist background was elected, Mr. Bjarne Hartung Kirkegaard. A return to the strickter Christian line is likely to follow.
Moving to the right side of the Danish parliament, traditionally covering the voter base of farmers and small business entrepreneurs - the party has become a big-city phenomenon for educated business men and women. Similar to The Social Democrats on the left side, attracting approximately 22-26 percent of the votes: the prime minister is called Mr. Anders Fogh Rasmussen and is from the Danish party of Venstre (V) - the traditional The Liberal Party of Denmark. He appears very prime minister and statesman-like, and used to be an ultra-Liberal, a spokes person for 'the minimalist state', but must have gone soft since the nineties, since today he has moved towards the center. Or rather, he signals having moved to the center. He manages a very rare form of government: Appealing to the mass votes of the center, alongside with including the extreme right in his majority of 90 members for passing bills (without including the party in the coalition itself). It appears to work. The coalition has done so for the past seven years, and rarely glances in the direction of other parties in the center or to the Left for the passing of bills. Many would argue - and do - that it doesn't actually work. Must be like the now redundant theory of the bumble bee.
Since The Liberal Party has gone partly center, partly extreme Right, today, there is room for an actual Liberal Party. Oddly dissidents from the Social-Liberals - and not from the old Liberal party - have formed their own party, Liberal Alliance (Y). The party appeals to both business men, educated elites, and voters who have simply had enough of the Nationalist retorique of the supporting right wing party of the current government. Liberal Alliance's chair person, Mr. Naser Khader, himself a secular Muslim, gained much support during the Danish cartoon crisis in 2005-2006, partly because of hefty speaking up for the freedom of speech, partly because of direct terror threats to his person. Directly after forming the party they gained upto 12 percent of the votes according to the polls. But because of scandals of colourful individuals in the party, they soon fell to right about the limit of two percent at the 2007 election. Now they barely exist at less than one percent of the votes in the polls. Paradoxical, since there ought to be plenty of room for them, having taken over the very Liberal space in the parliament. But nothing is logic in Danish politics.
On the really Right, we find Konservative (C) - The Conservative People's Party or The Conservatives. The only true coalition partner to The Liberal Party. The party covers a base of primarily small town middle class workers and civil servants, but also other people who set family values, fighting crime, and the climate high. The Conservative Party used to be the most powerful in Denmark - in the olden days. Gradually shrinking to a support of approximately 10 percent. Recently the Conservative chair person was changed - from a former prime minister-like policeman to a younger and outspoken woman, Ms. Lene Espersen. One could argue about her prime minister appearance, but she gains a lot of personal votes because of a direct style and fiery rhetoric. After this change the most recent opinion polls mark a rise in support to about 12-14 percent.
And now, finally, we reach the ultimate Right end of the line: Dansk Folkeparti (O) - The Danish People's Party has a tiny but powerful chair person, Ms. Pia Kjærsgaard. She is in no way prime minister-like - and frankly, my dear, doesn't seem give a damn about it, since this is not her mission. She gets her way anyway. To her, and the party, anything Danish is the top measure for anything. To a high extent, the party attracts blue collar workers, social workers, the unemployed, retired people, and anyone who is dissatisfied with European and International co-operation, if it means giving up the Danish welfare goods. Or anyone against immigration. No doubt that the party leaders are brilliant at covering these bases. The party springs from another right wing dissident party, and has gradually over a timespan of less than fifteen years gained remarkable influence, to a degree where the original extreme right party dwindled and dissolved. Being very Nationalist, it used to be a party absolutely no other party would take seriously, or consider in a coalition, because of a very strong and aggressive anti-immigration line. But today, representing 13-15 percent of the voter support (variying in some polls upto almost 17 percent) - nobody dares to ignore the party. Rhetorically, the only one to match Ms. Kjærsgaard is Mr. Villy Søvndal from The Socialist People's Party, mentioned earlier. Very effective, since they represent the dual aspect of the Danish Parliament in extreme form. Both are so-called 'value-based' parties. Both chair persons are fiery speakers to recommend and protect the Danish welfare system.
Apart from the parties we usually have 1-5 people in the parliament who have left their parties, for one reason or another. They fight hard for political influence, since they are not invited to anything and fight hard to get attention from the press. Personally, I enjoy every single one of the above parties and individuals. Representatives from all these parties are on my thank you list. Even though I don't support all - I thoroughly enjoy their participation in our Democracy. No one is redundant. They all cover their bases.
Danish poll for Ritzau:
http://www.catinet.dk/Catinetfv07/Gallery/index.html
Compare six different polls:
http://politiken.dk/politik/article380531.ece
Tuesday, 21 October 2008
Cover Thy Bases
'I had only one superstition. I made sure to touch all the bases when I hit a home run', the American baseball player Babe Ruth was quoted for saying. Maybe it could be used as a piece of advice for the American Presidential candidates? In the American democracy there are in effect two choices for voters, so touching all the bases to become President of the United States becomes so much more important.The Democrat candidate, Barack Obama, seems to touch all sorts of bases during his campaign. Apart from the 'issues' section on his homepage, he also addresses directly the people he want's to reach: African-American, Latinos, Jewish Americans, rural Americans, Republicans, women, people of faith, seniors, sportsmen, small businesses, students, environmentalists, kids, veterans, etc. Recipient-oriented communication. Up until now it has seemed like there was only one Presidential candidate to speak of. But there is also the Republican candidate. Yes, that one.
John McCain's 'issues' section is more colourful and appealing, but do most of the issues themselves in this sender-oriented communication appeal to ordinary people in their everyday lives? How about 'Joe the Plumber'? However, McCain seems to do well at touching on issues directly targetted at his primary conservative bases - like family values, national defence, natural heritage, immigration, fighting crime, the sanctity of life, space program etc. So the candidates both seem to do well in reaching out to their respective bases of voters.
Then there is just that final base: Do they appear to be Presidential? During their campaigns and the three Presidential debates there have been many negative lashes. But where Obama tries to touch the issues and lash out at McCain's support to different bills, McCain has lashed out at Obama as a person to be trusted or not. Up until these negative lashes he had sympathy on his side. McCain even made the noteworthy remark of 'that one' during a Presidential debate. Shouldn't he leave this to his second, running mate Palin? Can a Presidential candidate really afford to act like that himself? Neither of them are running for the Senate, they are running for the highest office. If you want to be President the first step may be to act like one in public. Cover thy bases.
Meta-Comment No. 1
For those in my following who seriously consider what bases my international niche publication covers: Green-blue. To reach an audience most likely to perceive and enjoy my paradoxical writing.
Sunday, 19 October 2008
Obamania
Now there seems to be no stopping Barack Obama in his quest to become the first African-American president. Paradoxically even Republicans support him. Former Secretary of State in the George W. Bush government, Gen. Colin Powell, has made the decision to support Barack Obama for the Presidential Election in November. Having made his decision after watching the three Presidential debates and stating that he doesn't trust Sen. John McCain's grasp of economy:"In the case of Mr McCain... you got the sense that he didn't have a complete grasp of the economic problems that we had."
In response to the news, speaking on Fox News, Mr McCain said he had "always admired and respected Gen Powell", but that it came as no surprise.
Colin Powell's decision gives support to the notion that American elections are more about trust in the person than in the political line. Obama leads in the national prognosis with app. 50 percent compared to McCain's app. 43 percent. I will be interesting to follow the last part of this Presidential race.
Quotations from BBC News, http://www.bbc.co.uk/:
US Election Polltracker (various poll results):
Danish Polltracker (US map and clickable graphics):
Barack Obama photo provided by www.barackobama.com
Saturday, 18 October 2008
A Crack in Everything
What do you do when you want to go to a Leonard Cohen concert - your friends have no time, your pocket is empty, and there are no tickets to be had. What do you do? You go to the concert. You bust your budget. Someone always turns up with the ticket. There's a crack in everything. Today's 'paradoxical' is inspired by Leonard Cohen's concert in Copenhagen last night. At 74 he still delivers knock out musical punches together with tongue-in-cheek lyrics and statements like 'I love the country but I can't stand the scene', 'I fought the bottle, but I had to do it drunk', 'She's a hundred but she's wearing something tight', and 'There's a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in.' I stopped counting encores after the fourth. Thank you for sharing your famous blue raincoat and your secret life with us.Post postum:
Despite the mobile phone appearance of the photo there's nothing wrong with the quality in it.
Wednesday, 15 October 2008
The Invisible Hand
When it comes to economics there seems to be only two directions to follow, Smith or Keynes. Some are firm believers in the free market of The Invisible Hand - some are apprehensive as to what capitalists can get up to, and therefore lean on the state to regulate more. After all it's all about distribution. I tend to agree that with the market left alone the distribution of goods will most likely be unfair. And yet. It depends on the entrepreneurs and the market people, I guess. Some time ago I came across the argument that Jews marked of the worst kind of capitalists, always just pooling money together. The argument was right up there with the cliché and caricature of the big nose. I was shocked that it still existed. Lately I have seen articles to reflect the same way of thinking. Being secular I have the luxury of embracing people of all kinds of religion - Jews, Muslims, Christians, Catholics, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Bahai - or whichever. People. Often I don't even know if I stand before a Jew or a Christian. So I frankly don't understand how any creed should be boxed like that.
When I disagree that the distribution of goods is fair by way of the market - because it evidently isn't - and thus the market should be regulated, I still keep an open door. To me there are three ways. It comes down to the actions of people. I don't look so much to how many zillions of dollars and euros people pool together. I look at what these individual entrepreneurs do with them, please see http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/10/good-greed.html. Back to the terrible cliché of the 'bignosed, capitalist Jew': Whenever I have known I stood before a Jew, I have only met a helping and giving hand. Not expecting anything. So to me there will always be three ways to go about distribution of goods. Preferably in a good mix. Search behind the wall and under the tree, through honest need or selfhelp the help will be there when and where it is needed. Look behind the nose and find the helping hand. The giving hand.
Sunday, 12 October 2008
WETHEPEOPLE
Here we go again: Two candidates in opposite corners, blue and red, black and white. When the session is over, they will be green and yellow. A boxing match? No, it's the US Presidential Election. I know it's a cliché, but I have always been fascinated with this show - going on for several years each time, it seems. And seems to be more important than the representation in the two chambers. Maybe I'm just an ignorant European, but I have always wondered if the Americans themselves don't sometimes feel a need to mix it up some more? Here's my paradox: In the land of freedom and choice - there are only, in effect, two candidates to choose between. Liberal or Conservative. Watched from Europe - and I am happy to say also as part of 'we the people' - I compare: I have many choices. About ten conservative, liberal, very liberal, social-liberal, socialist, very socialist, centered, religious, and other funky parties and single persons. And this is not to say that things are better in Europe (hardly), but the democracy is built on a wide variety of parties. They simply have to get along to rule the country. After each election there are no ultimate winners. But the people.Saturday, 11 October 2008
Power of The Media
The Danish publication Berlingske Nyhedsmagasin revealed an updated list of the Top 100 most powerful people in Denmark this week. It turns out that media are not such a powerful power of the state after all:
- Tøger Seidenfaden, editor-in-chief at the newspaper Politiken, managed to take the 28th place on the list - as the topranking Danish media person.
- Lisbeth Knudsen, editor-in-chief at the newspaper Berlingske Tidende and CEO of Berlingske Media, was placed as a close second-highest ranking media person at the 30th place.
Congratulations to both! With Kenneth Plummer, CEO of the public Danish Broadcasting Company/DR at a distant number 68 most powerful person in the country. Although it is an improvement from the last listing six years ago, with the top media person at number 35, isn't it a paradox that the so-called fourth power of the state, the media, is not represented in the top 10? Or at least have a representation in the top 20 most powerful people? Well, at least here's a challenge for Danish media persons!
Friday, 10 October 2008
THX - An Alternative Award Speech
I've always admired people who can deliver good award show speeches - sharp, witty, to the point, and yet with room to thank the most important people. Bewildered by the star light and pushed for time, most award speakers seem to forget half of those people they would like to thank. I have no other immediate occasion for a good award speech, but I figured that you can never be too prepared. I have a lot of people to thank in my quest. Some for their example alone. Some for their inspiring savvy and intellect, if not foolproof advice. Some embraced me with whole-heartedness and warmth. Some delivered the jokes and the artistic backdrop along the way. And others again I would like to thank for the tribulations they threw at me - only to make me stronger. In alphabetical listing, but of no particular priority:This THX list has been continuously running for upto 18 months.
If some are missing, who should be on the list, it is simply because
I am unaware.
Reversely, some may be on the list who are possibly listed by mistake or no longer credited.
People actually on the list - right or wrong - have received thank you's in truck loads by now.
Longer than any award show that lasts only one night.
IN 2010, THE THX LIST IS CURRENTLY UNDER REVISION
Reversely, some may be on the list who are possibly listed by mistake or no longer credited.
People actually on the list - right or wrong - have received thank you's in truck loads by now.
Longer than any award show that lasts only one night.
IN 2010, THE THX LIST IS CURRENTLY UNDER REVISION
Wednesday, 8 October 2008
Surrounded by Women
Lotte Mejlhede/TV2 and spokesperson for the K2 network hands the K2 award to Kenneth Plummer/DR
Surrounded by women on a daily basis, from his children and wife to his mother in law. Not to mention the women in the company. This is the main qualification and inspiration for Kenneth Plummer, Director General of the public Danish Broadcasting Corporation/DR, to promote female managers in the company, and ultimately achieving the prestigious award from the Danish network for female managers in the media industry, K2. Here's my paradoxical question: haven't male managers always been surrounded by women? Nevertheless today, with Kenneth Plummer in charge, DR has achieved a level of 30 percent female managers in the top three layers of the company. Unique figures compared to the industry as a whole. The Danish newspaper Politiken received the reprimand of 2008 for only having two female managers out of fiften in all.
Surrounded by women on a daily basis, from his children and wife to his mother in law. Not to mention the women in the company. This is the main qualification and inspiration for Kenneth Plummer, Director General of the public Danish Broadcasting Corporation/DR, to promote female managers in the company, and ultimately achieving the prestigious award from the Danish network for female managers in the media industry, K2. Here's my paradoxical question: haven't male managers always been surrounded by women? Nevertheless today, with Kenneth Plummer in charge, DR has achieved a level of 30 percent female managers in the top three layers of the company. Unique figures compared to the industry as a whole. The Danish newspaper Politiken received the reprimand of 2008 for only having two female managers out of fiften in all.The Danish Minister for Gender Equality, Karen Jespersen, then presented an overview of the national achievements in Danish industries as a whole. The minister referred to the charter for gender equality, designed to promote more women in management. So far the charter has been signed by 43 public and private companies. Apparently not many managers feel surrounded by women. Let's help them!
Saturday, 4 October 2008
Good Greed
'Greed is good', Gordon Gekko claimed more than twenty years ago, blaming managers for their cowardice, hiding behind huge desks, and reversely praising shareholders for their guts, their risks, their greed. He did so through Michael Douglas in the film Wall Street. No doubt about his point of view: market over state. The current financial crisis in USA and elsewhere puts focus back on the inner logic of greed in capitalism with huge corporations being bailed out by the state, i.e. the tax paying citizens. Those American house owners end up paying the full price for their cheap loans - and then some. Lost to the poor judgement of financial managers and greedy shareholders, as in many other businesses. It would appear that modern enterprise has made the shareholder the most important customer. And left the real customers to be secondary. No wonder the cycle doesn't work. Today, one wonders what happens to earnings while flying high, if not partly paid to shareholders - and partly stored for bad times. As any responsible capitalist would do. Whatever happened to the gutsy, risky shareholders? Have they, too, become cowards?
'The Mahatma' made a list of Seven Social Sins in 1925, one of which reads Commerce without Morality. He was also quoted for saying 'The Mother Earth has enough for everyone's need, but not for anybody's greed'. The founders of the Danish brewery Carlsberg, I.C. Jacobsen and his son Carl Jacobsen, pooled together oodles of money - in the end to do good with it through several foundations to support science, research, the arts, etc. Other examples could be globally known people like Bill Gates, Oprah Winfrey - and so many more. Pooling money to give to the poor, for education, etc. Responsible capitalists with morality. Greed can be good.
The Mahatma
The Gandhi memorial, Raj Ghat, Delhi
Although Mahatma Gandhi was killed sixty years ago, he still embraces the city of Delhi. The Mahatma Gandhi marg is the great ring road that encircles the city. Eventhough the man still means a lot to the Indian people, most auto rickshaw drivers will look at you in bewilderment when asking them to drive the Mahatma Gandhi marg. They drive up and down the road many times daily, they all know it by heart. They are just not familiar with the name of it, named a long time after the man himself made his mark. Paradoxically, I also asked many about 'Gandhi' - harvesting the same bewilderment. Gandhi is a widespread name. In India, he is simply known as 'Mahatma' - or even 'The Mahatma'. He is not in buildings or roads. He is in people.Wednesday, 1 October 2008
Beggars Can Be Choosers
What I will remember the most about India is neither the Taj Mahal in Agra nor the Pink City in Jaipur. The strongest impression was made by the huge numbers of beggars. Armed with colour pencils and little booklets, I tried to convince begging children to go to school and become exactly what they wanted to. Selfhelp, I thought. A woman came to me at the Gandhi memorial site in Delhi. She brought her half naked son and asked me wordlessly for money. I tried to buy her off with colour pencils for her son. She looked at me with disdain. Her eyes telling me she didn't need my good intentions for her son, she needed money. I ended up giving her some rupees.Late night at the train station in Agra a group of children came up to me and made the global sign for 'I am hungry, give me food', signed holding their fingers to their mouths. I think they lived on the platform. No parents were around. They got a smiling lecture along with a few school pencils. One boy handed a pencil back to me, frowning. The tip of one pencil was broken, he complained in mime. My immediate response was 'Well, at least it will give you something worthwhile to do sharpening the pencils'. The mime not working and not getting any money, he first looked at the pencils then at me in wonder, as if saying 'don't these at least come with ketchup?'
'Hello, mister!' Two begging girls followed my every move in Jaipur. At first they just put out their hands to ask for money. Not working, they then brought out a barrel drum and banged it about three times, then pushed me for money. As I was going for the colour pencils and booklets in my bag, they helped themselves - probably weary of the wait. One girl swiftly put her entire arm into my bag and pulled out my hair comb. I had a hard time pulling it back from her. They then accepted my little sales pitch to go to school, the colour pencils and booklets and ran off. Now they at least had items for sale in stead.
At the Attari border, countless young boys were pitching CD roms with photos from the Wagha border show. I didn't really want to buy any, so again I tried to buy them off with colour pencils. One boy received one pencil. After a few minutes he returned, 'One more!' he said, blaming me for being unfair to him. I gave him one more. And I ended up buying a CD rom.
In Delhi three children used the Delhi traffic jams to scan the auto rickshaws for tourists. Two of them banging drums, one girl at about five years old dancing hoola, smiling, and flipping backwards saltos. I didn't even go for the pencils but went straight for the rupees.Maybe I should have sharpened the pencil. Maybe I should have let my hair comb go instead of pencils. Maybe the pencil and booklet approach is useless altogether. It seems to me that I was the one ending up going to school in India. I learned that beggars can be choosers. Should be choosers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)