Flirting with Fascism
It really pisses me off big time the way the present Danish government is babbling on about immigration issues when the facts are that we haven’t got nearly as many problems with it as they claim. This is an issue that can be discussed from now on to forever, I know, and I have tried to get down to the facts before. As an example: In 2001, we had 7.4% foreigners living here. Compare that to London with 28% - and London is a city, where people live closer to each other (1.4 times more people live there than in Denmark), but still have a GNP that exceeds Denmark’s.
But almost worst of all is the bad profile it ends up giving our country. Taking a brief look on the BBC News web site, you get the impression that we are turning into fascists here. An excerpt from a radio documentary, entitled ‘Flirting with Fascism’:
“Can you really have a society which is liberal inside barricaded borders; a welfare state which discriminates against some residents; an enlightenment which is exclusive; toleration in which some people are targets?”
-which in fact nails it down pretty much. In all of my years here, Denmark has been looked upon as balanced, liberal and tolerant, and now this image has been shot to pieces by these monkeys in suits within a fortnight. If restrictions even begin to affect tourism, then we might end up becoming the target of reductions in this area, which is one of our strongest incomes, especially when this separatism is paired with the hostile image we tend to get from the rest of Europe because of the headless initiatives from the present government. This is bad. Very bad. Fuck’em. I want them replaced.
On this day...
... in 2008: Super Oors
... in 1999: Slow updates
See all 'On the side' links
Aug 13th 2003
Obviously, the American gov’t has also begun to revise its immigration policies. I understand the need for an extra sense of security, considering recent events. But I can’t help but wonder if they’re really accomplishing anything here, or just putting on a big show for the citizens in order to compensate for their inability to prevent 9/11.
The only people who are going to be affected by these strict new policies are law-abiding people and the folks involved in the tourism industry. If a terrosrist wants to get into a country, he will find a way to do so, policies be damned. That’s why it’s called terrorism. Hello?!? :)
Aug 13th 2003
You’re right. Here, they are restricting entry not because of terrorism but because of a slight touch of fascism spawned by the need of political scapegoats.
But the 9/11 thing surely also have had some impact on you folks. One of my friends live in L.A. (and I was visiting when it happened) and he almost do not dare to travel back home to Denmark just for a visit because he might not be able to get back in again. And in Canada, people are forced to get a signed statement from an official person (doctor, dentist etc.) with whom they have known for over two years, stating that one isn’t a terrorist in order to get their passports renewed. Phew… ( See: http://www.chud.ca/archives/000157.htm )
Aug 13th 2003
the paranoia is unbelievable..
Aug 13th 2003
Yeah. Worst of all is that all this brings forth the worst in people. In that sense, terrorism surely won a huge victory.
Such huge efforts should be spent on prevention in the terrorist communities, eliminating the need to find scapegoats instead.
(This reminds me of the philosophy of the social theorist and religious anthropologist René Girard, who claim that religion and/or human desire stems from the need of iconic ’scapegoats’ (as mimetic rivalry). http://www.cottet.org/girard/desir1.en.htm )