One of my big concerns in the last election has been who I could vote for without being disgusted by my choice. As regular readers know, my choice has been to vote blank. On Tuesday, my choice is quite different, as my somewhat better half is running. But if she hadn’t done that, I would have been in the same situation again.
The problem, as I see it, is that Danish politics has become increasingly characterized by politicians who, despite their belief in their own abilities, are really devoid of actual insights, of relevant experience from the private sector, and who often also have quite a flexible morality. Unfortunately, this does not only apply to one wing, but is widespread across the Parliament. Some of the clear examples are, for example: 1) The conservatives’ Niels Flemming Hansen, who has shone with platitudes and slogans when journalists have asked him questions, while he has sought to undermine other people’s campaigns. 2) SF’s Karsten Hønge, who, in addition to being an ardent socialist, lacks almost any insight into how the private sector really works, and who can behave like a pig towards people he doesn’t agree with. 3) The Social Democrats’ minister for social affairs and the elderly, Astrid Krag, who is not only known for her abuse of colleagues (see, for example, the last few weeks’ description of her treatment of Thyra Frank), but has also failed to complete a BA degree .
An indication of how morally flexible many politicians are came a week ago. The freedom letter had set the previously convicted fraudster Mads Dinesen to ring various parliamentary candidates with the offer of 50,000 kroner in support (read for example here ). The detail was that it had to be anonymous, even though the rules for party support prohibit anonymous donations over DKK 22,200. Only four parties refused, while a number of candidates decidedly advised Dinesen on how to circumvent the rules. Many of the same parties have been behind efforts against social fraud, where the monitoring and rules have become so strict that it emerged the other day that several people from southern Jutland had gotten into trouble because they had shopped for groceries in Flensburg. If it concerns the citizens, you are willing to shoot with big guns, while on a personal and political level you are more than willing to cheat for your own gain.
While the Danes’ trust in each other is intact, and among the absolute highest in the world, our trust in politicians is far lower. Danish politicians today typically go through youth politics, where they live their lives and learn their norms. It is therefore not surprising – although it is extremely problematic – that many of them have no concept of how to behave towards their fellow citizens. They are brought up to believe that all tricks apply in politics, and as Friedrich Hayek described as early as 1944 , we have ended up with a system where it is often the worst who come out on top. Thus we have a Prime Minister who is known for behaving psychopathically towards employees, and a former Minister of Education from LA who allegedly had to leave her new job because she did not know how to behave towards others. In this way, Danish politicians today are more distant from Danish society than ever in living memory.
If you, dear reader, have to find someone to vote for, there are therefore a number of questions I would ask myself before choosing. The questions must be: Does your candidate have a real political project, or only a personal career project? Does your candidate have experience outside of politics? Is your candidate humble towards power, or is he/she attracted to power and feels a right to rule over other people? And last but not least, would you personally lend your candidate 100 kroner? Happy Election Day on Tuesday!
Christian Bjørnskov
Originally published here.
