Any basis for cooperation on the right + Democracy vs opportunism..

The debate about the possibility of a cooperation on the Right of Norwegian politics is going on. FrP (The Progress Party), of course wants to be let into the warmth with the other parties on the Right, having long been seen as the pariah party. The Right party, as the only one, seems to have moved a long way towards accepting a cooperation with FrP. The other Right parties, such as KrF (the Christian People`s Party) and Venstre, are declining any form of at least formal cooperation, even if that means giving up being in government after the next election. Without FrP a Right government will a hard born child.

While I`ve been, and still am, extremely sceptical to FrP getting into government, I am at the same time not sure it is good to rule out anything in principle. FrP is in my opinion, and in the opinion of many people, a very opportunistic one, and one that do not seem to be very responsible in its policies. Thus, I would definitely prefer the current government to one where FrP is a main part - and if it were a part of the government coalition it would be, because it is one of Norway`s two largest parties, and definitely the largest one on the Right side.

Still, one might argue that there is a slight possibility that FrP will start waking up, and become more aware that all it`s many promises will have consequences, if it gets a chance to govern.

One thing I read recently made me think. FrP argued that it is neutral to the question about Norwegian membership to the EU because the Norwegian public is divided on the question. This argument is representative of a lot of FrP policies. It might be argued that political parties should take into account the public opinion. But it seems to me that this argument of FrP is turned upside down. If the party policies on a given area is not clear, how are people supposed to be able to make up their minds if this is the party to vote for? Should a political party adjust it`s policies as soon as the wind of public opinion turns? Should not people vote based on how political parties make their stand on different issues - not parties changing their stand according to public opinion? It seems to me that FrP did not really catch the difference between democracy and opportunism.

The future of the Norwegian school..

After the resignation of the former Minister of Knowledge, Øystein Djupedal, his fellow party member, Bård Vegard Solhjell, has become the new wise man of education and knowledge in Norway. New minister, new policies - one of mr. Solhjell`s policies is to make the Norwegian primary and secondary school less theoretical.

The criticism from the Right is that SV (the Socialist Left Pary) and the rest of the Left is hysterically afraid of differences in the school. They want to make everything the same for everybody, not offering the more theory-hungry pupils what they want.

I agree in the criticism of the Right Party, but at the same time I realise that it is immensely hard for a lot of schools to offer adapted programs for all students. From my own experience as a teacher, I know that students are very different. And I know that it is really hard, to make the classes suit everybody`s learning style. And it is certainly true, as SV claims (and it is something that a lot of pupils, teachers, parents, politicians, and other realise, too), that a lot of students find a lot of theory boring.

At the same time, there are some students that find theory interesting and stimulating. These pupils should have the possibility of delving into theoretic subjects. In my opinion, these students should be viewed and appreciated as an asset for Norway. Of course we need the children that will go on to become construction workers, truck drivers, hairdressers, bakers, and plumbers. But we also need the more theoretically gifted pupils, and should nurture their talents. To do otherwise would be a grave mistake.

Out of touch with reality: ..but my heart still tells me that it's true..

Visiting Norway last weekend, I happened to read something in Dagens Næringsliv, which kind of made me laugh.

The piece I read was in reference to some statement the Norwegian princess Märtha Louise made in an interview with a Swedish newspaper. In her opinion, men and women in Norway are completely equal when it comes to salary and career opportunities. She could as well have paraphrased Ronald Reagan's famous quote, "My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not", because the facts and the evidence clearly show that what she said is not true. According to the facts, women have on average 30% lower salaries than men, even in leading positions.

The opinion piece in Dagens Næringsliv went roughly like this:

"Bad connotations

Princess Märtha Louise tells the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet that she is not a feminist. She says that 'the word feminist is a word with such bad connotations'.
Soon the word royalist is, too."

Voelkerwanderung

A post on a more personal note this time..

Through the ages, people have moved from country to country, or land to land. And always, they have had some good reason for it. It might have been famine, it might have been wars, or it might have been political or religious persecution. In most cases it had to do with the hope of creating a better life for themselves somewhere else. One good Norwegian friend sometimes points out that I`m prone to stating the obvious, and I guess he would have done that with what I just wrote.

But in my case, it`s not really that obvious. For the last three months, I have been living in the Czech Republic, and I am not alone being an expat here. Prague has got loads of expats, having moved here for different reasons. Some moved here because they had a hard time getting a job at all back home, and some people because they simply could get a better job here. I had a good job back home. It was well paid, and comfortable enough. I had good colleagues, with whom I had a great time. And of course, I was safe, living in one of the safest areas in the world. Still I wasn`t happy with my life there.

One of my former colleagues was sometimes talking about Abraham Maslow`s hierarchy of needs. As long as your basic needs (food, sleep, safety etc.) are not met, you will be occupied meeting those. If you`re constantly hungry, most of your time and energy will be spent trying to get food. But when your basic needs are met, you will try to get your less basic needs met as well, like self-esteem, fulfilling your potential or filling your life with interesting experiences. Maybe when you live in a place like Norway, your basic needs will be met, and some people tend to get a little bored. Being safe and well fed, and having a "comfortable" life, can sometimes be boring.

Maybe that is the reason a lot of people decide to go and live abroad, where the standard of living is lower, and where you earn less money. Compared with my salary in Norway, what I earn here is a joke. And getting simple things done can be a hassle sometimes, especially since I haven`t put as much time as I planned into learning Czech, and communcating with people can be hard. But at least it feels more interesting and more stimulating than living back where I used to in Norway. I have a feeling that I experience different things, that I learn more about the world, at least in a different way than I would back home.

As an historian, I sometimes notice that as the world move forward in time, some things stay the same. People behave in the same way as they did 2000 years ago. Sometimes they do it for the same reasons, sometimes for differing reasons. People will always be people. As people during the ages migrated to create a better life for themselves, so did I. Not because my life was bad, but because it felt like I was in the wrong place at the wrong time in my life. A luxury problem, perhaps, feeling that my life was too comfortable (or boring), with all my basic needs met, but with some of the ones at the top of Maslow`s pyramid met unfulfilled.

Kebabs for votes

It seems Norwegian politics is not avoid of episodes you would normally expect to find in less politically developed countries. In the recent local elections, homeless people and drug addicts have been offered 50 Norwegian crowns (6.50 Euros) or one Kebab to vote for Yosouf Gilani and the Labour Party in Drammen.

It is not clear yet, whether this incident was an attempt by the Labour Party to buy votes or an attempt by other parties to hurt the Labour by causing a scandal.

Either way, this episode is something that damages Norwegian politics, and drags in down into the dirt. Neither the Labour nor its political opponents are gaining anything by such behavior. Not only it is simply tasteless to buy off homeless people and drug addicts for small change, it is also making Norwegian politics resemble something you would find in some banana republic where the respect for democracy is next to nothing.

Some of the people who were attempted bought off found this tasteless too, and simply took the money or the kebab and voted for some other party. It seems a free will can not be bought after all..

A Mullah deprived of his rights?!?

The Iraqi/Kurdish Mullah Krekar has just managed to top a long list of ridiculous statements. This time he is claiming that he has lost all his rights, that he has been labeled a threat to the Norwegian state, and that he has been deprived of social security and any possibility to work in Norway, where he has been staying the last 16 years. Mullah Krekar came to Norway as a refugee from Iraq in 1991. I`ll leave the last couple of statements alone and concentrate on the first one, that he`s been deprived of his "rights".

After having been the leader of Ansar al-Islam, having threatened Norway with revenge in form of terrorist acts in case he will be expelled, and having publicly declared his support for Osama bin Laden and his war against western civilization, it is amusing that Mullah Krekar got the nerve to claim any rights at all. And in response to his victimizing of himself in this respect; of course it is reasonable to label him as a threat to the state.

In any state, its members (which by I mean the people living in it, including refugees, e.g. Mullah Krekar) has got certain rights and certain obligations. One of the most basic obligations, of course, is not to harm or destroy the society in which you live. If you cannot even fulfill this obligation, how can you even think of claiming to have any rights in this society? Can you really expect the state to do anything for you then? Personally, I don`t think so.

So in Mullah Krekar`s case the Norwegian state has more than given him his rights. The main reason for not expelling Mullah Krekar is that Iraq will not give any promise that Krekar will not be tortured or killed if he returns to Iraq. Thus, the Norwegian state cannot expell him.

This threat of being tortured or killed if he returns, is something that Mullah Krekar seems to have an on-and-off fear of. It is not, it seems, his main concern when he goes on holiday to Iraq. When he is in Norway, though, it seems to be a very overhanging danger that he will be tortured and killed if he returns..

Zoon politicon and new revolutionary inventions

This blog of mine seems to have turned out to become a lot more politically oriented than I envisioned when I first created it. That is fine, though. Maybe I am more of a zoon politicon, or political human being, than I thought.

This time, though, I am going to write about something completely non-political. Today, I read about a "new" "invention" in one Norwegian newspaper, Dagsavisen. This new thing is a toilet whose users will not even have to wipe themselves. Instead you will be getting an automatic wash down there when you`re done. I really didn`t think that this was such a new invention, but maybe it is. And maybe it`s good for the trees as well - we don`t have to cut down as many to wipe our asses. Nevertheless, supposedly it is much better and much more sanitary than what we have now.

This article really reminded me of a banner I saw in Indonesia when I was studying there in 2000. This banner was a commercial for a brand new invention down there, and this invention was even, obviously, seen to be even more revolutionary than the recent one here. It was nothing less than the "toilet for the new millenium", and I even think there was a couple of exclamation marks after that. Still, I had to laugh a little at the time, because this toilet for the new millenium was just a regular WC. A white ceramic toilet which flushes when you push the button on top.

I guess things can always be put in some kind of perspective..

Some random thoughts on the upcoming election..

The local elections in Norway are four days away. On monday the Norwegians are going to the polls.

In one recent opinion poll, the Right party gained five percentages, while the Forwards-party lost five percent. Also the right wing of Norwegian politics got a total of 52 %. This is, to me, uplifting news, especially for a country I always saw as too far left. Also, in the recent elections in high schools, the Right party gained significantly in comparison with the latest elections in 2005, while the Forwards-party lost, also significantly. The elections in high schools are viewed as a fairly good pointer as to how the real elections will turn out. Let`s hope they will this time as well.

This is uplifting also because the "serious" right is gaining at the expense of the more populistic parts of it. I am very sceptical to the Forwards-party, and I do think they are in effect bad for the Norwegian right-of-center. Let`s hope this turn will make it less necessary for Erna Solberg, the Right Party chairman, to make any arrangements for a potential coalition with the Forwards Party.

I`ve noticed that the Norwegian Labour Party are focusing on something unusual in their campaign ads this election. In one of the ads, Rune Gerhardsen, the Labour candidate for city council chairman in Oslo, is pointing out to one of the young up-and coming politicians that it should be easier to succeed for young people in Oslo. That is probably true. In reference to one of my earlier blogs-postings, let`s hope it will be accepted as well.. Anyway, I applaud this focus on success.

In another of the ads, mr. Gerhardsen is asking the same girl if she could promise him that he will be taken care of when he is getting old. Her answer is that they will need to win the election before she can promise him that. This is interesting. In a recent report on the work conditions in the health care in Oslo, the conclusions are that there are way to few nurses, not enough time available for each patient, etc. Maybe the Labour has got some kind of plan to correct everything thats wrong with public health care, who knows..

Personally I think the state should give such a promise. That`s what living in a welfare state is all about. You should be taken care of when you`re not able to do it yourself. It is the state`s task to make sure of this. This is not to say that the state needs to actually perform care-taking tasks itself. Maybe a better solution will be delegating tasks the state is unable to perform properly itself to others, for instance by allowing private companies to offer services like this to a larger extent.

As an example, the Ørland county in Trøndelag is offering public care for old people for 75% of the base pensions + 85% of earnings on any kind, including interest on savings. 75% of the base pension comes to exactly 4.176 Norwegian crowns a month. Why not let private companies offer such services? It`s already something that is paid for, so why not let there be some competition about it, and maybe some companies are able to provide better services for less money? Probably private companies will make an effort to offer better services to attract customers, and they will potentially be able to cover more of the demand than the state is currently able to do..

I am pretty sure the right wing of Norwegian politics would be more willing to open up for this than the left side.

On torpedoes, right of center views, and the wealth of nations..

The mayor of Oslo, Per Ditlev-Simonsen, is the main figure of a political controversy going on in Norway the last couple of weeks. It has been disclosed that he had a hidden swiss bank account up until 1985-86 (he is not sure himself of when he got rid of this bank account). On this bank account he had an, according to himself, modest amount of money. Nevertheless, it is being perceived as an attempt to evade taxes. One of the representatives on the Norwegian parliament (storting), Martin Engeset, feels this affair as a torpedo having hit the Right Party (Høyre), in which Ditlev-Simonsen is a member.

This affair makes me think about Norwegian attitudes toward wealth and economic success. I have a Norwegian friend, with whom I discuss this every time we meet, and we never seem to get anywhere in our discussions. She may be a little extreme in her left-wing opinions, and I think her political views are quite moronic, and I never miss an opportunity to point out that to her. Nevertheless, she is a great friend, whose company I love, and I also love discussing those things with her, even though (or perhaps because) we never will agree.

Anyway, the Norwegian attitude toward economical success may not differ too much from the attitude of France or Germany, or other European countries, but there is definitely a lot of jealousy toward rich people or people experiencing economic success in Norway. Don´t get me wrong, I am not trying to defend cheating and evading taxes, and of course people should contribute their fair share to the community they live in. But this affair with Ditlev-Simonsen seemingly trying to hide away money, is something that is very, very easy for other political parties in Norway to cash in on.

It seems to me that, besides in sport, success is not really something that is applauded in Norway. If you are experiencing economic success, then you are to be de facto punished for that. If you earn more, you should pay more, not only in terms of the amount, but more proportionally. That means that if you work a lot of overtime, you are to be taxed more heavily on your overtime hours. Why is it so that we should punish people who are hard working? In my opinion, this is something that should be applauded and rewarded. I don`t see the rationale behind taxing overtime heavier than regular hours, especially when there is a manpower shortage in Norway. If anybody wants to work more, it is something that will gain Norway as a nation, and that should not be punished by taxing it far more than normal hours.

Also, if people are wealthy, it seems that they should not be allowed to use that wealth to pay for better schools for their children, pay for better health care, pay for better care in their old age, etc. I understand the argument that people should have the same opportunities, and I understand that it might not seem fair that some should have better health care than those less well off. Still I can`t accept it. If you work really hard, and if you are successful at what you do, why should you not be allowed to use that wealth to make your life or your life situation better? Why should you have to be content with something less than you could have? Are you not entitled to make yourself more comfortable if you worked really hard for it?

The Norwegian attitude toward the egalitarian ideal make me think of something I heard while studying in Germany a few years ago. It was said about the east Germans, but could as well be said about Norwegians. Well, what was said, was that if the east Germans had the choice between a) the west Germans having toast with ham and cocoa and the east Germans having bread with jam and milk, and b) everybody eating dry bread with water, they would choose alternative b. This is in fact an attitude which is widespread in Norway, although in to lesser or greater extent. If public health care could get a little better because of a little competition from private clinics, or if public schools could improve (which they sorely need) because of competing private ones, why not? Competition is not inherently bad, it is something that brings improvement. It adds to the wealth of nations.

I honestly think that Norway is a great country, and it is a great place to live. But some things could be improved, and I think Norway as a nation and state could profit from applauding success and rewarding hard work more than what is currently done, and let people enjoy the fruits of their hard work.

Well, I`ll let that be the end of my ravings for now...

Democratic problems?

The local elections in Norway are getting closer. And one potential democratic problem has been identified.

Norway has got three official written languages - bokmål (derived from Danish), nynorsk (constructed from Norwegian dialects), and Sami (the original language of the Sami people, spoken by almost all Samis). The thing is that the leaflets or booklets explaining how to vote in Norway are not written in Sami. That is a problem, according to, among others, language consultant Ellen Ragnhild Sara. I do agree, partially. Information about elections and election procedures should be written in all of the official languages, and in the languages of the largest immigrant minorities (Pakistani, Somali, Arabic, Russian, etc.)

This problem is, to me, of a principal nature. But, if you look at it another way, there could be another principal problem. If some people, e.g. the Samis, cannot understand and communicate in normal Norwegian (i.e. bokmål or nynorsk), that could pose a far larger democratic problem than election leaflets not printed in Sami.

If the national discurse about society, politics, and about Norway in general, is to function properly, it seems to me self evident that there needs be one lingua franca, in which the discurse is to take place. If there are several languages, as there is now, especially concerning the Sami society, that means that there is a dichotomy in the national discurse. It is taking place in different languages, which in effect is mutually excluding. Non-Samis cannot understand and participate in the Sami discurse, and at least not all of the Samis are able to participate in the national discussion in Norwegian.

If we get into a situation where it is accepted that Samis cannot communicate in Norwegian, that is not good at all. It might not be a problem, other than a principal one, and I do not hope that it is. But if it is not, than neither is the problem with election leaflets not written in Sami.

As a closing to this entry, let me state my respect to the Sami people. The history of the Samis in Norway is a troubled one, and I respect the Sami people`s need for expressing their own identity, of which their language is a big part. Still, they are part of the Norwegian nation, and should be able to communicate in standard Norwegian language.

Speed king (cutting corners)

It is not a great time for the Norwegian Royal Family nowadays.

Every Norwegian knows that our King is a mean sailor. He`s really fast out there, on the waves. But he might have cut one corner too many now, or gone a little too fast, because he`s actually been disqualified from the ocean sailing World Championship. Not good..

One of my friends asked me just recently if I`m anti-royalist. I don`t think that I am, but after that ridiculous angel-school-affair, I think I am starting to be. But not quite yet. Instinctively, I`m holding on to Norway being a monarchy. It must be my conservative nature..

Boredom, or the lifeblood of a blog?

When I think about it, I think boredom was the thing that brought this blog into life. We had a really slow day at work, because our computer system was down, and we couldn`t really get that much work done. So out of boredom, I decided to create this blog. I`ve been thinking about it, though, for a while, but boredom was the spark that made it come to life.

I hope not, though, that boredom will be the only thing that keeps it going. I don`t make a habit of being bored, so if boredom is to be the sole life blood of this blog, it does not bode well for it. In that case, it will be a short lived one.

Angels and Norwegian princesses

As I am currently not living in Norway, I don`t really follow the Norwegian news as closely as I normally would. Right now, that makes me really, really happy.

Before, I kind of thought that Norway being a monarchy is a good thing. Even though it is an antiquated form of government, it is something that unites us Norwegians. And up until now, I always thought the Royal Family were pretty good ambassadors for Norway. Now, I`m starting to have some serious doubts about just that.

One of the top stories in the Norwegian news right now is the Norwegian Princess` "angel-school". Students of this school, which by the way had its opening day today, are being promised that they are guaranteed to get in touch with angels only after a few weeks. Her Royal highness Märtha Louise herself, of course, claims to be some kind of psychic, and has for a long time been able to even communicate with her horses on "a deeper level", whatever that means. With this new school of angels, the Norwegian royal stupidity reaches new heights, even topping the Princess` and her husband`s book publishings.

To put the words into the mouth of the silent majority...

In one of their songs, the Norwegian (mock-political) metal band Black Debbath declared itself the voice of those who don`t really have anything to say ("Et talerør for de som intet har å si"). That is also essentially the way that I feel about blogs - they are pretty much a device for people to express themselves without really having anything much to say. And with me writing this blog it is going to be the same way, just a string of random, meaningless thoughts, mostly about Norway. Having moved abroad, maybe it`s a nice way to keep involved.. Or something...