9
jun
Seneste opdatering: 10/6-09 kl. 0206
12 kommentarer - Tryk for at kommentere!

messerschmidt

Dansk Folkepartis stemmesluger, Morten Messerschmidt, skriver sig ind i historien og slår blandt andre Bertel Haarder og Lone Dybkjær i personlige stemmer.Morten Messerschmidt ånder tidligere statsminister Poul Schlüter i nakken. Dansk Folkepartis store stemmesluger ved EP-valget nærmer sig det konservative koryfæ i personlige stemmer, viser optællingerne.Sidst på eftermiddagen, med 65 byer optalt, har Morten Messerschmidt fået 210.000 personlige stemmer. Til sammenligning fik Poul Schlüter 247.956 personlige stemmer i 1994, hvilket gør ham til den danske politiker, der har opnået næstflest personlige stemmer nogensinde ved et EP-valg. Messerschmidt: Det er helt vildt

En lidt modvillig Svend Auken måtte  på TV medgive, at Messerschmidt er en helt ualmindelig begavelse, ” der dog ikke er det samme  som visdom”, kunne han heldigvis tilføje. Ikke for at formindske Messerschmidt, men nu har det aldrig været sådan, at en generations bedste begavelser først og fremmest søgte ind i politik. Man kan, som vi ser, også politisere fra universiteterne.

Man kan  fodre svin, nå ja, så får, med artikler som de følgende: Framgång som förskräckerBed om gästfritt Europa,Vill ha ett vitt Europa. De er så dårligt og klichefyldt skrevet, at det meget vel kan være en central computer, der har formuleret dem. Tag dem, for hvad de er: journalist-spam i metermål, moralisme på linjebetaling med  fremtiden bag sig og Europas befolkninger imod sig.

Geert Wilders of the Netherlands: Europe’s supposed shift to the right is really just a signal for a return to reality.

By Henryk M. Broder

Was it a swing to the right — or just a return to reality? The result of the EU elections is not some terrible portent of doom. Instead, it is evidence that voters reward populists like Geert Wilders, who are not afraid to address issues that other parties don’t want to touch.

There is always a certain amount of risk associated with any election. It is a truth recognized by dictators around the world — leading them to prefer predetermined results. In the last elections for the North Korean “parliament,” for example, the Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland got 100 percent of the vote and all 687 seats. It was a result that was difficult to misinterpret — and met the expectations of those involved.

The outcome of the European parliamentary elections was different. It was a disaster that became apparent as early as Thursday, when the results from the Netherlands became public. The right-wing populist Geert Wilders and his Freedom Party ended up as the second strongest party in the country behind the Christian Democrats.

Many were horrified. The correspondent for German public radio station ARD even called Wilders a “peroxide blond blowhard,” a “sleazy provocateur” and a “petty patriot.” In his commentary, the ARD correspondent went on to say that “his political program is focused entirely on demonizing Islam” and finished by saying that the Dutch should be ashamed of themselves. Spiegel Online : European Voters Know What They Don’t Want

De socialdemokratiske ledere i Danmark og Sverige synes at benytte det sammereklamebureau. Måske får de rabat: »Endnu en sejr, og jeg er fortabt«,  Mona Sahlin är odelat positiv till resultatet EU valet.

The Self-Hating Parliament

The next generation of EU technocrats will need to be populists as well

The European Parliament is in the throes of an early midlife crisis. This year should be a cause for a double celebration — looking back at its remarkable 30-year history as the first multinational parliament in the world, and looking forward to increased authority under the Lisbon Treaty.

But instead of being flushed with the energy of youth, the new parliament is more likely to enter a period of dramatic self-doubt. Although many newspaper headlines focus on the strong performance of center-right parties in big countries like France, Germany, Italy and Poland, the 2009 vote is more likely to be remembered for strengthening the fringes than the mainstream. This is leading to the creation of a new phenomenon in European politics: the “self-hating parliament.”

A substantial minority of its seats will be filled by members who see their role as reducing rather than expanding the European Union’s power. This is a remarkable change for a body that fought tooth and nail to extend its competencies, budgets and legal authority every time a new EU treaty was negotiated.

The paradox of the European Parliament is that as its power and confidence have grown, the public’s interest in its activities has declined, with each election recording a lower turnout than the one before. However, the verdict of 2009 is even more brutal: Many of the parliament’s new members do not even believe that the body in which they will sit should be allowed to exist at all.

Take the colorful Geert Wilders, whose anti-Islamic-immigrant party shot up to second place in the Netherlands with 17% of the vote, after the Christian Democrats who won 19.9%. He ran on a manifesto that included a pledge to abolish the European Parliament. In the United Kingdom, the two biggest parties were the euroskeptic Conservative Party (committed to abolishing the Lisbon Treaty) and the euro-loathing U.K. Independence Party (committed to getting Britain out of the EU). And the xenophobic British National Party picked up two seats with its pledge to “end the blood-sucking scam” of the EU.

In Austria, the xenophobic Freedom Party got 13% of the vote with a call to remove the EU from Austria’s affairs, compared to the conservative People’s Party that took the lead with 29.7% of the votes. A party set up to protest against the abuses of the European Parliament managed to pick up 17.9% of the vote. Anti-European populists also picked up significant support in Hungary, Denmark, Slovakia and Finland.

The notion of a “self-hating parliament” sounds like a contradiction in terms, but its appearance tells us a lot about the dynamics of the EU as a political system. From the beginning European integration has been defined by two contradictory but mutually reinforcing trends: technocracy and populism.

On the one hand, the EU is the ultimate technocratic project. The so-called “Monnet approach” — named after the key architect of European integration, the French official Jean Monnet — is designed to generate a consensus among European diplomats for limited projects of practical cross-border cooperation. Each of these projects should lead to further integration of policy areas — from Europe’s single market to its foreign policy.

By building the EU in an incremental way, the technocrats have managed to lower political temperatures in national capitals, and find agreement among bureaucrats who are more interested in negotiating deals than grand-standing for the national media. The success of the technocrats was phenomenal. They created first a coal and steel community, then a customs union, then a single market and even a single currency.

But as the EU matured as a political project, it was the very success of the EU as a bureaucratic phenomenon that fuelled a populist backlash. This first started as a localized phenomenon, with Margaret Thatcher famously wielding her handbag in Britain in the 1980s. But as the elections of 2009 demonstrate, it has now become a pan-European force. The populists come from across the spectrum of left and right, but their common complaint is that the EU is an elite conspiracy, a project to build “Europe against the people.” In its place, they plan to mobilize the “people against Europe” — leading, in the words of one senior diplomat in the Netherlands, to the “democratic destruction of the EU.”

Technocracy and populism are mirror images of each other. One is managerial, the other charismatic. One seeks incremental change, the other is attracted by grandiose rhetoric. One is about problem-solving, the other about the politics of identity.

People in Brussels talk about them as opposites; but in fact they are mutually reinforcing, as we have seen in the saga of the Lisbon treaty. On the one hand, the more EU leaders try to remove European integration from national politics, the more brittle the EU’s legitimacy becomes, which in turn means that policy makers want to evade public opinion even more. On the other hand, the more technocratic the EU becomes, the stronger the calls for democracy and referendums, which in turn create a space for parties to emerge with populist policies.

Technocracy has been with the EU since the moment that Jean Monnet turned his mind to uniting Europe. Populism has now been sanctified as part of the EU’s structure through the introduction of referendums and elections to the European Parliament. The election of the new European Parliament will be a major shock to the Brussels system.

Its diplomats, journalists and think-tanks live in the world of technocracy and understand well how it works. But they have a poor grasp of populism or the politics of the EU’s member states. If they are going to avoid total gridlock, national and EU officials will need to deepen their understanding of the domestic politics of the 27 states of the EU, and spend time analyzing and engaging public opinion.

If the EU is going to escape its mid-life crisis and acquire the poise of an authority of mature middle-age, the next generation of EU technocrats will need to be populists as well.

Mr. Leonard is executive director of the European Council on Foreign Relations.  Wall Street Journal

Den Grønne Skole

En imam ble i forrige uke pågrepet og siktet for vold mot barn på en koranskole i drammensdistriktet. Barna skal ha blitt slått med stokker eller kjepper. Barna skal ha blitt slått over fingrene eller ryggen, forteller politioverbetjent Nina Bjørlo i Søndre Buskerud politidistrikt til Drammens Tidende. Ifølge politiet har avstraffelsen blitt brukt om barna kom for sent, om de leste koranteksten feil eller om de var urolige. Voldsovergrepene mot koranskolebarna, som er mellom seks og tolv år gamle, skal ha pågått i mange år.

Helt fra 2002 har vi fått opplysninger om at barn skal ha blitt utsatt for vold, sier Bjørlo, som leder etterforskningen av saken.

Opplysningene har kommet inn til politiet som anonyme tips fra bekymrede foreldre og som bekymringsmeldinger fra skoler. Foreldrene tør ikke stå fram på grunn av frykt for represalier fra miljøet. Ifølge NRK har tre moskeer i Drammen vært i politiets søkelys. Imam skal ha slått skolebarn med kjepp

Annoncer fra Danske Partner-Ads:


Donér engangsbeløb?Kan du forpligte dig til fast betaling?