An embarrassing display of disgust

Norway’s prime minister Erna Solberg’s conduct during the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony yesterday agitated quite a few, clearly demonstrating her contempt, not only by abstaining from applauding a number of statements, but by clapping – and smiling – in a demonstratively condescending way. Yours truly not exempt:

Needless to say there’s been a lot of debate in the wake of the whole thing. The PM herself, and those sharing her view on nuclear weapons, keep trying to explain that applauding attitudes she does not share would be dishonest, and who am I to contradict that? Hell, I even agree.

Nevertheless the incident turned out to be a blatant show of the official Norway’s distaste for Nobel laureate ICAN, which surely cannot possibly have been the Nobel committee’s intention.

Better then to stay away, leaving the Norwegian parliament’s opposition, sharing ICAN’s views, to represent the official Norway.

That could have brought some dignity to the mockery we were forced to witness.

With all that said, I’m not at all sure that a unilateral disarmament is the way to go (in Norwegian), but this performance was nothing less than a blatant display of disgust. For which I’m deeply embarrassed.

Photo: Norway’s Prime Minister Erna Solberg (Conservatives). Photographer: Tomas Moss – http://www.icu.no.

In a tweet yesterday (please forgive its – Norwegian – language) I put it to my fellow tweeters that the longer an occupying force (Spain) is able to hold an occupied possession (Catalonia, since 1714), the bigger the chance of the occupation’s international approval:

Most of those protesting the statement objected that the occupation has lasted too long for the assertion to hold true.

Also see: Let Catalonia remain occupied, if they so desire

Let Catalonia remain occupied, if they so desire

I like Spain. Not only because I’ve visited several times and quite like it there, but also because I favour unity over separatism, which goes for Spain as for any other country, as well as my beloved homeland, Europe.

However, we should remember that the late generalissimo Francisco Franco remains in high esteem among many a Spaniard. Also his Guardia Civil‘s conduct during the Catalan referendum weeks ago, immediately woke my sympathy for the Catalan separatists – and their demand for independence.

With that said, I find separatism a bad idea, just as I find unity a good one, which includes Catalonia and Spain. Nevertheless, there are a couple of factors that we need to take into account.

What ever the outcome, the international community needs to ensure that democracy prevails. Today we hear claims that the Catalan referendum was illegal, rendering, therefore, the declaration of independence equally illegal, but is that actually the case?

  1. We need to remember that the declaration was made, not by the referendum, illegal or not, but by the legally elected Catalan parliament. Whether or not that decision was based on the referendum, it was indeed made by the Catalan people’s legally elected representatives. As the case always is, when ever democracy is at work.
  2. We’ve heard claims that a new referendum would have to be held throughout Spain, in order to secure the referendum’s legitimacy. To which I should perhaps remark that:
    1. The minute you assign an overwhelming majority the task of deciding a minority’s future, how could you possibly expect an outcome favouring anyone but the majority?
    2. Said majority is an occupant, insofar that Spain invaded, occupied and annexed Catalonia in 1714, rendering Spain a de facto occupying force. Since when did international law condone an occupying country’s right to decide the fate of the occupied?

These are all facts that we need to keep in mind, whether we favour Catalan separatism or not. Personally I do not, but if we are to discuss these matters, I think it’s only fair that we do so on the basis of facts.

Illustration: The Estelada blava. The Catalan flag. Blogger’s own drawing.

As self-declared inventor of the word “fake” (true story!), perhaps the current U.S. president should be wary of how he himself is seen, because while no supporter of the Mexican wall – or the Obamacare repeal and replacement, I cannot help wondering how the Donald’s two urgent-most measures seem less feasible than any other.

Photo: U.S. President Donald Trump. Detail from official White house portrait.

Stopp statsstøtten til alle tvilsomme organisasjoner, Erna!

At Erna Solberg nå fjerner statsstøtten til Mehtab Afsars Islamsk Råd Norge, er ærlig talt helt på sin plass – og på høy tid. At hun samtidig nekter å diskutere bortfall av det samme for Hege Storhaugs Human Rights Service, er tilsynelatende tilsvarende ubegripelig.

Når jeg skriver “tilsynelatende”, er det ikke fordi jeg ville drømme om å tillegge statsministeren sympatier for HRS og deres rasistiske tankegods, men fordi det for Erna Solberg handler om såkalt realpolitikk – om det enkle faktum at hele hennes tilværelse som statsminister, avhenger av støtten fra regjeringspartner Frp, hvis HRS-sympati ingen må finne på å betvile.

Som sjef for en de facto rasistisk regjering, har ikke-rasistiske Erna Solberg få andre valg.

Der har du én av grunnene til at jeg avstår fra å involvere meg i partipolitikken. Jeg vil ha mine meninger i fred – og dertil kunne stå for dem.

Det er en luksus statsministeren (eller lojale partimedlemmer som sådan) ikke kan unne seg – med mindre hun hadde hatt sine meningers mot, selvfølgelig, og tok sin hatt og gikk.

When extremism changes our view of normalcy

Most people weren’t surprised by yesterday’s Alternative für Deutschland landslide election, perhaps because we long since allowed extreme views in our own governing bodies, to such an extent that their views increasingly become our own, seen as the standard to which we’re all held.

Seen in light of this, Americans supporting a proto-fascist’s U.S. presidency, or Norwegians, securing another four years of xenophobic rule, should of course not be surprised by a German 12.6 percent AfD support. We should, however, be surprised that extreme views no longer surprise us. Maybe because “they” are now “us”.

The German election received significant news coverage yesterday, as it should, regardless the outcome – granted with some attention to the extremist advance, although few bothered to raise an eyebrow (which is my real concern here).

The term “white shirts” is about to establish itself as descriptive of the white-shirt-clad neo-Nazi Nordic Resistance Movement, whose marching no longer affects or concerns us, lulled into the impression that it’s all as it should be, rendering even authorities on extremism fairly indifferent to their success.

Why?

Perhaps because said Nazis do not define themselves Nazi, and after all, we have to take their word for it, no?

No.

In any event yesterday’s extremism is seen as today’s state of normalcy, and it should scare the living daylight out of us. Unfortunately, brought to a state of indifference, it does not. Furthermore and off the top of my head, I can think of only two groups rejecting the Nazi term used on modern-day Nazis: The moderate voices advocating dialogue over condemnation – and the Nazis themselves.

As mentioned in this blog on many an occasion, we often ask ourselves how the interwar Germans could possibly allow Adolf Hitler’s rise to power.

Really? I mean, really?

Photo: White shirts marching in Sweden (and increasingly, hardly noticeable, in our very own streets).

Muslimske terrorister som kaller seg muslimer – og mennesker som anser seg kristne, men mener det er ok å angi medmennesker på flukt fra krig, har mer til felles enn noen av dem liker å tro.

Én slik ting skiller seg imidlertid spesielt ut:

Ingen av dem handler i tråd med sine respektive skrifter.

Fra kraftnazi til kjellerleilighet-rebell

Vi husker 1970- og 80-tallets Norsk Front og Nasjonalt Folkeparti med vemmelse. En gjeng som leflet med nasjonalsosialismen, slik Adolf Hitler ville ha den, og som anså Norge en ideell arena for slikt, bare den ikke kom i form av invasjon og okkupasjon.

En gjeng som, ikke uten grunn, vakte allmenn vemmelse, forakt og oppstandelse, ulikt Erik Blüchers arvinger av i dag, oftest omtalt som religions- eller islamkritikere, som om noen av delene egentlig har noe med saken å bestille.

Ikke så rart, kanskje, med tanke på at landet er så restriktivt overfor alt som ikke ligner oss, og fører en politikk selv Blücher kunne ha signert.

Så vi nøyer oss med å kalle dem rampegutter og -piker. Rebeller i sine respektive kjellerleiligheter, enten vi tillegger opprørertrangen positive eller negative konnotasjoner.

Men det er klart, det sier jo sitt at det er omtrent så langt kritikerne deres våger å strekke seg (og likevel må tåle pepper for det):

Reciprocation is terrorism, too

Last night’s attack on a Finsbury Park Mosque would appear to be an act of retaliation, but make no mistake about it: Any action carried out as an act of revenge is every bit as terroristic as the act it was intended to retaliate, although I notice how easily I’m provoked by muslims using the incident as proof that Christians/European/white people are every bit as bad as Isil.

Having said that, retaliation is not the way to go about this. Au contraire it is exactly what the terrorists want: An all out clash of civilisations (as pointed out on numerous occasions).

The situation calls for calm composure, even if chances are we’ll have just the opposite.

France beware

A huge fan of France’s newly elected and instated president Emmanuel Macron I remain a staunch supporter of his policy and – up until now – suggested measures, saluting his landslide win in the two stages of the recent presidential election.

A victory in today’s legislative election wouldn’t go amiss either, but there’s every reason to sound the alarm should that victory, too, turn out to be overwhelming.

While I lean more in the direction of Macron’s beliefs than in that of any other candidate, I have always been wary of excessive concentration of power.

Before long my French favourite could emerge an absolute and despotic leader (remember, we do seem particularly susceptible to “strong men” these days).

Certainly I salute the French for taking a firm stand against the nationalists, but feel an urge to remind them that dictators come in many shapes and colours – even in the gentlest of appearances.

There’s something very, very scary about democracies with no real opposition.

Photo: France’s president and En Marche! party leader Emmanuel Macron. Photograph from Business France/Flickr