Denmark Legislative Elections

[Abdülmecid I]

The next legislative elections for Denmark are going to take place next Wednesday, on the 5th of June. According to the polls, the "Red Bloc", a coalition of center-left and social-democratic parties, is projected to win, as they managed to maintain or even slightly increase their percentages. As a result, the "Blue Bloc", a coalition of conservative groups, which currently governs the Scandinavian Kingdom, will probably be evicted from power. Especially the popularity of the Danish People's Party, the most radical and nationalistic member of the alliance, is found in a gradual decline of approximately 10%.



The reasons for its fall is, firstly, the fact that many Danes feel tired with the current government, while its more moderate friends, the center-right Conservative People's Right and even the liberal Venstre, have begun to copy its fiery rhetoric, with very positive results. Namely, they call for very harsh restrictions against immigrants and calling for immediate assimilation of the new-comers who do not belong to the "West-European civilisation". Interestingly enough, even the Social-Democrats, nowadays the most dominant party, have not hesitated to demand stricter policies, despite the fact that Denmark is hardly known for her leniency. Moreover, some of the disappointed voters of the Danish People's Party have flocked to a new formation, called Hard Line. Hard Line, led by a convicted racist and stalker, who is also notorious for publicly expressing his hope of the extinction of Muslims, promises to evict all Danish citizens believing in Islam, so it clearly invests on xenophobia and the attack of principal human rights, like freedom of religion.



From a socio-economic perspective, things are not very bad, as the employment rates have almost reached the 2008 levels, while the vast majority of Danish are satisfied with their quality of life. However, the situation is not ideal, either, as wages have stagnated or declined, while Denmark is one of the champions of part-time jobs, especially in what concerns the youth. Meanwhile, the famous Nordic model is on the retreat, due to budget issues and because corporation taxes have decreased, while both center-right and center-left governments promote a policy of privatisation in the welfare sector. This image probably explains why verbal attacks against immigrants are so profitable for ambitious politicians, although the pension system and healthcare partly survives thanks to the contributions of lowly-paid immigrants.

[Cookiegod]

I am actually a Danish voter, and I'm going to throw in a blank paper. I am not satisfied at all with any of the choices presented.

Denmark has until recently been able to avoid the extreme right problem, as those on the right were able to vent their frustrations by voting DF (Danish people's party). It is kinda hilarious that this party, which hasn't been part of a government ever and has been as not politically correct for anyone to form a coalition with (they do support the minority coalition though), has as a campaign slogan this: "Now is not the time for experiments".

And there's a great deal to dislike about the biggest parties especially, which are essentially sellouts, and seen as such by many. I personally can't forgive the Socialdemocrats for having gifted public enterprises critical for the nations success away to American banks. DONG was "sold" at half price and with extra privileges to Goldman Sachs, even though a Danish insurance company had offered a better, and trustworthy deal and had been willing to pay more for the same shares.
The company "NETS" that stores a lot of critical personal information about every citizen has also been sold to American banks, even though it is public knowledge that American enterprises are obliged by law to hand over any information to the US government, even when it's about foreigners and obtained in other countries.

Many of the smaller parties can't be seen as serious alternatives anymore either, as they do typically support the big ones. So even though Denmark is blessed with a multitude of parties in parliament, the result is nevertheless very binary.

A lot of Danes dislike this binary mindset, and thus, those 2-3 parties that don't want to follow that line do advertise this stance and get a boost in public opinion from that.
However, the "Radikale Venstre" (which you call the social liberal party) is only outside that binarity in so far as it fits in both blocks very well, and is a perfect blend of socialdemocrats & venstre, and "Alternativet" is a clown club in many ways.


I want to finish off with the remark, that "Enhedslisten", known in English as the "Red Green Alliance" isn't so much "green left" as you state, but a very ridiculous communist party. It still calls for a complete abandonment of capitalism and calls for a "revolution" (albeit not in a violent way, but more as a lipservice to marx). They aren't much focused on green issues at all. I voted for them when I'd freshly moved to Denmark 2 weeks before the 2011 election. I had hoped they'd vote against Libya and boy was I wrong. 179 out of 179 members of the folketing voted to destroy another country and hand it over to islamists *cough* I mean voted to humanitarian bombing to ensure prosperity, peace and democracy in the region. I slightly suspect that public support in Denmark for another war (we've participated in every adventure uncle sam allows us to) would've been a bit less than 100%, but what do I know. That's democracy for you, and given those choices I've voted "no" or not at all on everything ever since.

[Basil II the B.S]

Tl;dr:

For once in Europe, the Social Democrats finally give up on the idea that freedom of movement of people is good for national working classes, something that noone in the center-left believed before 1990 and return to their roots. They win. They also give up on the ideology of multiculturalism, because it destroys social cohesion, fosters tribalism, division while lowering trust and willingness to redistribute resources.
https://www.socialeurope.eu/immigrat...emocratic-case
Now, while Abdulmecid has already started painting everyone as bad people, this policy shift was advocated by Mattias Tesfaye, Etiopian Father, Danish mother, member of the party.

Unsurprisingly, this ''New Deal'' offered to the working class will deliver a victory.

So the possibilities are two: Tesfaye is a bad mixed race hombre and a traitor to fellow people with foreign background.
Or
He's simply promoting common sense, which obviously has eroded single-issue parties like the People's one.

Cookiegod brings up an interesting point, since I had followed the DONG case years ago. The so-called centrists selling out country assets to globalists in exchange for future positions. That happens to be a rather common case in most of Europe and there's a reason if I call them traitors.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

The Socialist Party, because Denmark has more serious issues than a burka ban and because of strategic issues (vote of Danish government for Timmermans on european level).

[Karnil Vark Khaitan]

Yeah I might go Enhedslisten or Radikale venstre, Not sure if I am going to vote SF.

[Prodromos]

Mette Frederiksen: the anti-immigration left leader set to win power in Denmark | The Guardian

A victory for Frederiksen would be a boon for Europe’s social democrats as they gaze across the continent at a dispiriting political landscape. But it would not be without controversy, for under Frederiksen the party has been ruthlessly reshaped: dragged to the left economically – and sharply to the right on immigration.

“For me, it is becoming increasingly clear that the price of unregulated globalisation, mass immigration and the free movement of labour is paid for by the lower classes,” she said in a recent biography.

Denmark’s current right-wing coalition government last year enacted the most anti-immigration legislation in Danish history and, rather than position her party in stark opposition, Frederikson has embraced much of it.

Under her leadership, the SD have called for a cap on “non-western immigrants”, for asylum seekers to be expelled to a reception centre in North Africa, and for all immigrants to be forced to work 37 hours a week in exchange for benefits.

She has reached out to the populist Danish People’s party (DPP), doing a series of joint interviews with its leader, Kristian Thulesen Dahl, and discussing cooperating with them in government.

But it is the government policies her party has supported or failed to oppose which have been most alarming for her allies in the left-of-centre red bloc. The Social Democrats voted in favour of a law allowing jewellery to be stripped from refugees, and a burqa and niqab ban, and abstained rather than voted against a law on mandatory handshakes irrespective of religious sentiment at citizenship ceremonies, and a plan to house criminal asylum seekers on an island used for researching contagious animal diseases. In February, she backed what the DPP has branded a “paradigm shift” – a push to make repatriation, rather than integration, the goal of asylum policy.

Many believe her party’s new populist profile is a pure power play. The Danish People’s party has slipped from 21% in the 2015 elections to below 13%, according to a poll of polls by the Berlingske newspaper.

An internal Social Democrat survey of the party’s core voters carried out last autumn found that 37% of loyal Social Democrat voters thought immigration policy was too lax. And this was after three years of the most anti-immigration government in Danish history.

Frederiksen has dealt harshly with any internal dissent. When her party colleague Mette Gjerskov, a former minister, vociferously opposed the burqa ban, a rival candidate for her seat came forward at the same time as the local Social Democrat mayor suggested it might be time to change MP. Gjerskov fended off the challenge, but was then fired as the party’s international development spokesman.

“I was aware that shifting the position in the party would take a lot, but I knew that I had to win that fight,” Frederiksen said in the biography. “Normally, I would seek to compromise, but not on immigration policy.”

Frederiksen has been promoting her approach as a prescription for ailing Social Democratic parties across the world, berating sister parties at a meeting in Lisbon last December for losing their core voters’ trust by failing to prevent globalisation chipping away at labour rights, increasing inequality, and exposing them to uncontrolled immigration.

“For years, we have underestimated the challenges of mass immigration,” she told them. “Economic policy and foreign policy in Europe have been too liberal. We have failed when it comes to maintaining the social contract, which is the very foundation of the social-democratic social model.”

Out on the Copenhagen streets, MP Peter Hummelgaard argued that the tough line on immigration was a return to the party’s roots. “We have become more aligned with many of the voters who we are made to represent, and who we became alienated from over the past 25 years,” he said.

In Tårnby, the working-class area he represents near Copenhagen airport, voters who deserted the party for the Danish People’s party are flooding back, he claimed. “The reactions that I’m meeting on the street are overwhelming. It is one of the areas where you have seen the consequences of mismanaged immigration, and you have also seen working-class people leaving the Social Democrat party. But they are now returning.”

Seems like a smart way of keeping the "far right" at bay.

[Aexodus]

Economic leftism and a smidge of social rightism is indeed a sure way to win the working class and de-claw the right wing. I put Liberal Alliance but the SD sound good too.

[Cookiegod]

Just went to throw my blank vote. Why am I not surprised that the candidate from the "Stram kurs" has the most ridiculous name? Who calls himself or his child "Lemmy"? Seriously? Could it be any less Danish?

The biggest joke is that they'll probably get into our folketing, barely. And we only have a 2% hurdle for people to get in. It's the classic Trump effect. They generate outrage, and the mass media oblige. So they get more coverage than they're worth and oh what a surprise, that gets some people to vote for them.

Also I just need to point out that Danish politics & mentality really isn't like that in most of Europe. It's fundamentally different because of jantelov and such.

We Danes have always been more wary about who we let into our country, since we're so small and more tight-knit. We've also been wary about the EU from the start. On the other hand, the welfare system in our country is perhaps the most extensive one in the world, and very few in our country are interested in a DANXIT.

So it's simply incorrect to link our election to Trump, Brexit and so on. It's really got nothing to do with any of that.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

One nation, one empire, one lemmy!

RIP Lemmy Killmister!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Perhaps danish people are a nation of motörheads?

More serious:

I guess, danish "Lemmy" want to show, that he is one of the common people, the buddy from next door.

The same reason, why Salvini like to make Screenshots, while he is eating Nutella bread or eating Pasta Napoli.

[Cookiegod]

I grew up in Germany originally, and to me that's a lot like those "Mandy's" and "Sandy's" one can expect to vote for AfD in east Germany.

I pride myself for having done the "right" thing by ignoring "stram kurs" as much as possible. I still don't know what Paludan sounds like. I only know his face from newspaper articles or those few times I take the S-train instead of bicycling. Apparently he likes to do the V-sign, but I only know that because some school apparently had the brilliant idea to prohibit that sign because of him (which again: So stupid).

[Karnil Vark Khaitan]

Just look at his face and you know how he sounds like xD

[Cookiegod]

HAH! I like being wrong! Seems stram kurs is going to miss the 2% rule. Probably because enough people went to vote because of them. (Votes aren't all counted yet, so take it with some salt).
Also: The established right wing party (DF - Danish people's party) is hemorraghing mandates. Most of them going to the ruling party, which has a massive increase in mandates and yet will still lose their campaign. Which again goes to showcase the one principle I find applies almost everywhere in the world:

Give the people alternatives, don't shame them for their views, but listen to them. And they'll stop voting for the right-wingers.

[Aexodus]

Are mandates like seats?

[Basil II the B.S]

HAH! I like being wrong! Seems stram kurs is going to miss the 2% rule. Probably because enough people went to vote because of them. (Votes aren't all counted yet, so take it with some salt).
Also: The established right wing party (DF - Danish people's party) is hemorraghing mandates. Most of them going to the ruling party, which has a massive increase in mandates and yet will still lose their campaign. Which again goes to showcase the one principle I find applies almost everywhere in the world:

Give the people alternatives, don't shame them for their views, but listen to them. And they'll stop voting for the right-wingers.

Everything most people ever asked was:
-celebrate national identity
-limited migration that gives enough time to newcomers to integrate

Was it so hard? We'll see if the center-left can deliver anyway.

[Muizer]

I think they're as likely to deliver as a right wing party. Migrants aren't going to stop coming to Europe. If one country closes its borders, just means they end up somewhere else. And if all EU nations do this, it's going to get even more crowded in the northern Mediterranean. What have the Danish Social Democrats promised to do about that? Or are they following the same path as so many other countries: 'not our problem'.

[Aexodus]

If Europe opts not to take in migrants, then they will stop coming. It’s quite simple.

I’m actually delighted to hear that the Danish Left has some common sense, I would definitely consider casting a ballot for them were I a Dane.

[Basil II the B.S]

I think they're as likely to deliver as a right wing party. Migrants aren't going to stop coming to Europe. If one country closes its borders, just means they end up somewhere else. And if all EU nations do this, it's going to get even more crowded in the northern Mediterranean. What have the Danish Social Democrats promised to do about that? Or are they following the same path as so many other countries: 'not our problem'.

That's the usual argument used by no borders extremists who want to destroy Western societies because ''inherently white supremacist'' and ethnically cleanse white people because ''only white people are racist''. Just state what you want, clearly: a ''post-racial society'' where there are only ''brown people'' instead of Danish people so that ''racism will be finally defeated''. In short, mass ethnic cleansing of anyone guilty of whiteness.

Fact: countries that don't want mass migration, see Hungary, Poland, but also South Korea, Japan.... don't' get mass migration.

So we can stop with this absolute lie promoted by liberals that ''mass migration can't be stopped''. No. YOU DON'T WANT IT TO STOP.

So it's not migrants nor Danish people the problem, but the ones that are weaponizing mass migration to destroy our civilization. This is a declaration of war against people of European heritage, waged by traitors inside our institutions. They must be stopped.

The solution? A Migration Responsibility Act: anyone who promotes migration or multiculturalism, covers up crimes should be held legally responsible every single time a migrant commits a crime. Very simple. Skin in the game. Put your money where your mouth is.

[95thrifleman]

That's the usual argument copy pasted by no borders extremists who want to destroy Western societies because ''inherently white supremacist'' and ethnically cleanse white people because ''only white people are racist''. Just state what you want, clearly: a ''post-racial society'' where there are only ''brown people'' instead of Danish people so that ''racism will be finally defeated''. In short, mass ethnic cleansing of anyone guilty of whiteness.

Fact: countries that don't want mass migration, see Hungary, Poland, but also South Korea, Japan.... don't' get mass migration.

So we can stop with this absolute lie promoted by liberals that ''mass migration can't be stopped''. No. YOU DON'T WANT IT TO STOP.

So WHO IS THE PROBLEM HERE? The ones that are weaponizing mass migration to destroy our civilization. This is a declaration of war against people of European heritage, waged by traitors inside our institutions. They must be stopped.

The solution? A Migration Responsibility Act: anyone who promotes migration or multiculturalism, covers up crimes should be held legally responsible every single time a migrant commits a crime. Very simple. Skin in the game? Put your money where your mouth is.

Do you genuinely believe this crap?

[Basil II the B.S]

I genuinely believe in this: the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People.

https://www.un.org/development/desa/...DRIP_E_web.pdf

''Article 8 1.Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.2. States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:(a)Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;(c) Any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;(d) Any form of forced assimilation or integra-tion;(e) Any form of propaganda designed to pro-mote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.''



Everything Muizer suggested is a violation of this article.
-by denying the right to close borders and reject mass migration, he forces the destruction and forced assimilation of their culture
-it deprives Danish people of the right to preserve their identity as distinct people with an ethnic and cultural identity
-it disposses them as their homeland as mass migration would ultimately make Danes minority within their home country
-it results in a population transfer, which is forced, because Muizer insists Danes can't prevent this

The wording is clear: any action or any form which results in this is a violation of the rights of indigenous Danes.

[Abdülmecid I]

Thankfully, neither of this stuff happens in Europe. It's really absurd to watch one of the wealthiest and least authoritarian societies on Earth complaining of forced assimilation and of being dispossed from its territories or resources, while Denmark has a lower percentage of immigrants than Saudi Arabia, for example, not to mention the cases of Bahrain, Qatar or United Arab Emirates, where the indigenous people have become a minority. And yet, no Arabangladesh theory has been created yet nor has anybody accused the "cosmopolitan emirs" of conspiring with international socialists to eradicate the locals, for the sake of diversity. Back in the good old days, before edgy reactionarism became trendy and right-wing political correctness dominated the political discourse, we could reject Frederiksen's opportunism as the epitome of cynicism, because it violates her party's supposed ideological platform.

Nowadays, parroting your opponent's shallow rhetoric, in order to pander to an increasingly spoiled, immature and functionally illiterate audience, is praised as a remarkably intelligent move. No doubt it is intelligent, as cheap xenophobic attacks always bring more votes, especially in a kingdom accustomed to empty symbolisms, like the institutionalisation of ghettos or the confiscation of jewellery, but, from a moral perspective, I would describe it as rather controversial. Let's see what Frederiksen will achieve from the position of Prime-Minister, when the voters would expect more than verbal diatribes about the endangered Danish civilisation. Her result in the next elections will be more determined by her administrative skills and social policies, than her professional populism and the attrition the ruling, conservative coalition suffered from.

Do you genuinely believe this crap?

Well, collective guilt is one of the most essential principles of fascism and far-right dogmas, in general. It's interesting to note that the hatred for free-speech is not limited strictly to ideologies that openly advocate for violence, like Nazism, but to every group (or ally of the group), whose interests conflict with the agenda of the chauvinist camp. Such extremist views have been gradually normalised, evolving from being unacceptable taboos to friendly jokes and now, with the help of our ambitious leader of Danish Social-democracy, legitimate opinions. Although the growing inequality is the most significant factor to the rise of this worrying phenomenon, mass media also share some responsibility with their abnormal obsession with the issue of immigration or, sometimes, with their sheer ultra-conservatism. Just yesterday, I was reading an article of the Economist, where a racist cartoon, published by a clerical fascist and future collaborator with the Germans, was casually praised as "uncannily accurate". Imagine something like that being written in the '60s or the '70s.