The Copenhagen Report

Episode # 79 - MyDenmarkTV.com from MyDenmarkTV on Vimeo.


In Episode 79 of MyDenmarkTV.com, with snow on the way (it started the day after filming this episode) and Christmas coming, we decided to turn our camera's on Copenhagen's Christmas markets (Christiania Julemarked) to separate the crap from the cool.

• Crap - a large portion of Nyhavn's Christmas market

• Cool - Christiania Julemarked. 

Then we really turn up the heat when we answer a viewer's question about family reunification laws in Denmark (familie sammenføring), which appears to be a hot topic. In spite of our best efforts to keep the discussion non-political, it proves to be simply impossible not to label a portion of the rules connected to this visa as highly discriminatory - if not racist. 

We also suggest Copenhagen Theater Circle as a good option for some English theater in Copenhagen, and cover some of the best fitness places in Copenhagen - including perhaps the cheapest - freshfitness.dk (a great deal and great equipment too), and tell you exactly what is what - and why.

An interview with the CEO of Vopium, an international company based out of Copengahen offering a VOIP service for customers around the world helps round out the episode.

Enjoy!

Websites from the episode:

markedskalenderen.dk (Find Christmas markets in Denmark - wherever you are!)
aok.dk/shopping (Julemarked in Christiania)
aok.dk/shopping (Christmas in NyHavn)
ctcircle.dk (Copenhagen Theater Circle)
fitnessworld.dk (FitnessWorld)
fitness.dk (Fitness)
sats.com (SATS)
politiken.dk (A Politiken article about how you get your partner to Denmark on a basis of family reunification status)
dr.dk (A DR article about point system for family reunification)
freshfitness.dk (Fresh Fitness)

Other Useful Resources:
CopenhagenClicks.com (An ever-growing collection of web resources to make your stay more fun and enjoyable)
Consult with MyDenmarkTV team (Via telephone, to help you make your stay in Denmark more enjoyable)
MyDenmarkTV.com Copenhagen Tours (Book a guided tour by water or by bicycle and explore the best of the sights and sounds of Copenhagen)

Each week, The Copenhagen Post passes across my desk at work. For those with a limited knowledge of Danish with an interest in Copenhagen, it's a often the starting point for picking up a bit of Danish news (though a better one is probably the handful of English article published at www.politiken.dk). As I can pretty much follow along with the normal Danish press, my need for the Copenhagen Post is limited - a good thing as it is hardly a comprehensive news source. But they do gamely (and oftentimes lamely) try.

The Copenhagen Post has been making effort to resemble a more traditional newspaper over the years, for example, by adding an editorial section, where newspaper takes a stand on one issue of the other. Which is what motivated me to sit down a write this little piece.

Now, trying to gracefully convey my feelings after reading the pile of smelly tripe they attempted to pass off for the reasoned opinion of the editor in the Feb. 20-26, 2009 edition will not be easy. But I shall attempt to. Fortunately, they did not pollute the cyberworld with this editorial - it can only be found in the print edition. What a shame. I shall therefore allow myself to quote at length from the article, so the nature of it's content can be understood well enough.

The subject was dual citizenship. That is, the ability for citizens to hold 2 passports. In Denmark, this is not permitted (there are a few exceptions, for example, children with parents of 2 nationalities). This in itself has always annoyed me, as it represents a very small-minded way of thinking.

However, reading this editorial left me seeing red by the end of the first paragraph. It only got worse from there.

"It is a fundamental principle of democracy that members of a community should have a say in making decisions about their community. But just as it is impossible to serve two masters, so too is it impossible to live in two countries - by belonging to both, one never fully becomes a member of either," intoned The Copenhagen Post to kick-off the editorial.

Oh, my. Are you fu*king kidding me?!? Um, what is this sh*t about not being able to serve two masters? Are we living in the times of slavery? And then to artificially equate this to serving two countries?

Elequent it may be, but nonetheless idiotic rubbish.

Personally, I don't think I could count how many entities I 'serve'. Is 'the country' really such an important one, amongst the many? And is it the 'ultimate' one (we'll return to this term shortly)?

Let's see.

I'm Canadian and my parents, sister and extended family live in Canada (and some in the U.S.A). They are pretty important to me. I live in Denmark and have for quite some time (which incidently is also a member of the European Union, which is a pretty important entity in itself). I like Denmark, in general. My girlfriend is Danish, as is her family. Would I chose country over her...hmmm, let me think about that for a while... And I have close friends all over the world, obviously some closer than others. They are also important. My employer is a Danish company, situated here in Denmark, but is actually owned jointly by a German company and a Norwegian company (oh no, two masters again!), but on a daily basis I'm working with people situated in 8 different countries (all working for this same company). Impossible to serve 2 masters?!? Impossible to serve 2 countries?!? What century was this editorial written in?

But let's allow ourselves to plow on further, even if we must hold our noses.

"Citizenship is bestowed upon us at birth, and giving it up is the ultimate sign of commitment to one's new country. But before one can make that commitment, one must be permitted to do so: to become a new citizen, one must not only be permitted to enter a country, one must be allowed to live there, and then one must demonstrate a knowledge of the country's history, language and culture by passing immigration tests," continues The Copenhagen Post.

The 'ultimate' commitment to one's new country? Well, I suppose for some it could be, but since when should making the 'ultimate' commitment, whatever it is, be the grounds for gaining something so practical as a passport? Is there not a much lower and more practical threshold that is somewhat more meaningful, or at least 'sufficient'. Does one really have to give up their first passport to make this commitment? Is there not simply, say, any number of actions that would do, such as living and working in a given country for some time (and thereby paying significant taxes), maybe raising a family there, with no additional conditions really necessary? And certainly no arbitrary judgment about which is the 'ultimate' among them.

Although The Copenhagen Post, and sadly the Danish government, supports this antiquated law, the 'ultimate' problem, if I dare suggest it, seems to be an insistence upon viewing the passport as something that is rather romantic in its nature.

Newsflash: it is not.

A passport is a practical and unfortunately necessary document. Something that enables people to move around from place to place. To cross borders. To live their lives as they see fit to. To be together with the ones they love. To make a living as they choose to, and to utilise the abilities they have chosen to develop in themselves. While there may be plenty of romance within these ideas, a passport is merely a facilitator and a cold bureaucratic reality - and those have always had the unfortunate trait of never ever being in any way romantic in nature.

Being able to acquire an additional passport simply makes it easier for those living in a given country to become productive members of society there. Being a productive and deserving member of society can happen in many, many ways. It also so happens that it can be done without the demonstration of knowledge of a given countries language, history, and so-called culture. Or to put it another way, one can 'integrate' into society in countless ways. There is no single correct way to integrate - for example, by giving up one's former passport or passing some sort of 'immigration test'. Of course, especially with regards to language, everything should be done to encourage those who make a country their home to learn it's language.

As for reading history books?!? Give me a break! Will they tell you everything you need to know to be a good little citizen of your new country? Give you a balanced picture of society? Yeah, sure.

Which brings us to 'immigration tests'. Oh, geez. There are certainly some worthwhile practical questions potential citizens could be asked: about laws specific to Danish society, maybe some basics about government that are of practical importance. But it's pretty limited, quite frankly.

That may be tough for those who believe everything can be measured and then converted into some numerical value to understand, a group which apparently includes the editors of The Copenhagen Post. But here's the truth: sorry boys (there are no female editors of the newspaper listed), the real world ain't quite so.

Okay, let's push further into the editorial, into the Disneyland-like make-believe world of The Copenhagen Post editors. There is more still.

"Citizenship carries with it certain rights, but those rights are paid for by living up to the obligation of national service, national pride and national unity. Dual citizenship is divided citzenship, and will always prevent a 'citizen' from fully living up to those obligations."

Yes, at this point we have moved fully into fantasy land that I would never want to be a part of. In fact, it's somewhat scary. What kind of deluded nonsense is this about being 'paid for by living up to the obligation of...national pride'?

Is the implication that if someone does not demonstrate enough, ahem, 'live up to the obligation' of national pride, then they are unworthy of citizenship? What exactly is 'enough national pride'? Maybe singing the national anthem in a loud voice whenever it is demanded? Perhaps when stopped by the police? Or perhaps simply cheering wildly whenever the Danish national handball team scores a point would be enough? Whatever. What a complete joke.

This is the point when the writers have completely lost the plot. And where I have lost my respect for The Copenhagen Post's ability to write a meaningful editorial opinion.

So boys, do enjoy your freedom to express your opinion - but please, show the 'ultimate' respect for this freedom by not forgetting to engage in a bit of critical thinking while doing so. It serves us all so well.

There has been much talk in the Danish media in recent years, and by Danish politicians, about how important it is to attract foreign talent into Denmark since there is a growing labour shortage. Particularly, but not exclusively, in the area of maths and sciences and especially those with PhD's.

Of course, it's one thing to toss around lofty rhetoric about how welcome foreigners are in Denmark and so forth (at least, the well educated fully westernised ones), it's another thing to bring your army of bureaucrats in line with this thinking. Which brings me to this story I am about to share - which I will do by sharing the email exchange that took place around it.

It's a series of email a good (non-Danish) friend was involved in, which he forwarded to me, between himself and a hopeless bureaucrat at the Danish tax office, while trying to deal with some tax (skat, in Danish) problems that resulted from him going abroad to work. Apparently the memo that foreigners were now welcome in Denmark didn't quite reach this particular bureaucrat.

Incidentally (as he writes in his email) this work abroad, which my friend is doing, is actually funded by the Danish Research Council (who at least seem to understand the value a foreigner can be to the country)!

I should also add (not that it matters) that this friend of mine, who has been living in Denmark nearly as long as I have (he completed a PhD here, before becoming an Assistant Professor), genuinely loves the country - especially Copenhagen. He regularly refers to the city (in all seriousness) as 'his paradise'. In fact, I once wrote a post entitled 'Why Copenhagen is a happening place these days' that was somewhat inspired by his views, which I tend to share. Unfortunately, his Danish has not advanced terribly far during this time here (as often happens when you're working full-time...).

Well, even in paradise there is bureaucracy. And where there is bureaucracy, there are bureaucrats. And sometimes this means dealing with a live person...and here the problems so often begin.

Read the exchange for yourself below, it's rather breathtaking. In fact, it could be straight out of a manual written by the highly xenophobic Dansk Folkparti entitled 'how to deal with pesky foreigners in Denmark asking questions'.

"Sometimes they can really piss me off in my paradise.....", wrote my friend in forwarding this set of emails. Indeed, indeed - as you read through this exchange, you can almost feel the emotional explosion as my dear friend loses it...

______________________________

Fra: GP
Sendt: 18. februar 2008 14:30
Til: skat@skat.dk
Emne: VS: Problem Salary Abroad

Dear SKAT
My name is GP (CPR-nr. xxxxxx-xxxx), I am working at the Denmark Technical University for the past several years.
I am currently an assistant professor with a contract until November of 2009 and I have attached my contract. I am spending 12 months to Tokyo University (Japan) with a starting date 1/1/2008.
I visited the SKAT office before I leave for Tokyo because I was informed that I will be in a beneficial tax status since I will spend a period of more than 6 months abroad. I submitted the necessary documents and everything seemed to be fine. However when I received the salary of January this was very low. As you see in the email below the administration office of DTU reported to me that my allowance for 2008 is significant lower.
Allowance 2007 = 7.841 pr. month
Allowance 2008 = 3.685 pr. month
I don't see anything beneficial until now and my salary has decreased instead of increased, so could you please help me, what is wrong and how could we fix it? As you understand living in Tokyo makes difficult every other type of communication than email. Thank you in advance for your help.
Best wishes
GP
____________________________

By: Tim Anderson (timothyanderson2005@gmail.com)

With the threat of a possible election hanging over the country, and not-quite-but-essentially-election style posters appearing on billboards around the city, I decided it was time to come clean and acknowledge that here in Denmark, there is a problem of integration that must be politically dealt with.

In countless Danish political and non-political circles, it has been pointed out over and over again in recent years that there is a small problem of integration in Denmark. At this point that one could be forgiven for believing that what they were hearing was in fact an old vinyl record skipping skipping skipping.

But here’s the reality: there is a certain much-discussed minority group that has begun to establish themselves in this country, yet try as society does this minority group continues to have grievous problems adapting to the culture that surrounds them here – on the streets, in the schools, in the bars and cafes - and even behind closed doors in the privacy of home.

And this it is often said - and frankly I must agree - is a real problem. Because it causes, how shall we say it, a certain disease that is very uncomfortable. It’s very disturbing to have to co-exist with. It’s a bit like desperately yet futilely trying to get oil and vinegar to mix – try as you do, shake shake shake, inevitably after a short period of time it’s right back to the same situation – the oil incapable of integrating itself in any meaningful way with the vinegar. The two remain visibly apart. And that sucks.

So I’ll come out and say it openly: how exactly can we get this small minority, the Dansk Folkeparti and its supporters, to integrate into Danish society? How exactly does one to get this minority group that so stubbornly refuses to see the obvious, to understand that the way they insist on leading their lives and how they insist others should lead theirs, the things they believe in, and the viewpoints they espouse have little, if anything, to do with the values of Danish society?

In fact, I must admit that I sometimes fear that one day this minority may even insist upon covering their faces on the streets in order to shield themselves from the obvious reality that surrounds them, that they nonetheless so fundamentally disagree with. And if they ever did do that, it would surely make an already sticky situation even stickier.

So this is a call to action: I say we need to force these Dansk Folkeparti people to integrate into Danish society!

I suggest to begin with, we move them to the housing centers that already exist for this purpose - for integrating those refugees who are new to Denmark and have never previously been exposed to Danish culture.

Why not start with the center located, rather uselessly, about 15 kilometers outside of Roskilde quite in the countryside, just on the other side of a forest? Maybe being apart from Danish society in this manner will finally allow these stubborn individuals to see the error of their ways and at last adopt the values that will allow them to gracefully fit into this great country.

Of course, I acknowledge that it may not work. I mean, consider the flexibility and ingenuity these refugees have shown in getting themselves from these distant lands where they were born to the far shores of Denmark. It’s a degree of strength and character that the Dansk Folkeparti and its supporters have never demonstrated they possess. Still, it’s worth a shot, no?

If nobody will stand up and say it loudly and proudly, the perpetual problem of integrating these outsiders into Denmark will remain unsolved. Because if nobody will deal with it, a real risk exists that the consequences may slowly tear this wonderful Danish society apart. Which is precisely why we must now be ceaselessly vigilant in our efforts.

*A special thanks to very deceased Jonathon Swift for inspiring this part of the title. My proposal is, of course, far more modest than his more famous one.

by: Tim Anderson (timothyanderson200@gmail.com)


basketball playing boys and girls at lunchtime - near a private muslim school in Nørrebro in Copenhagen...

Muslim headscarves have become a rather hot subject of late around Denmark.

Recently, there was the case of Enhedslisten parliamentary candidate who suggested she would wear her headscarf in parliament if she was elected an MP.

It's not only Denmark. Headscarves have become quite a political issue around Europe. In France, they're banned in public schools.

Yet the idea of passing such laws, in Denmark and elsewhere, just don't quite seem right. It smacks of intolerance and ignorance, and issues like censorship come to mind as not exactly unrelated ones.

A few points.

First, a bit about the comment, contributed helpfully by the leader of the Danish Racist Party Dansk Folkeparti, that Muslim headscarves should be banned in Denmark.

Um, why?

Yes, we all understand that in many Muslim countries the rights of women have been thoroughly and appallingly trampled on. However in Denmark, this is quite simply not the case.

It's like banning pink button shirts because somewhere in the world pink button shirts are worn by oppressed people. In short, it's a pretty unprogressive viewpoint to take.

There has also been much talk in the Danish media about the childcare worker who wanted to wear a burqa to work.

This is a far more sensitive issue then the previous one, and I'm going to take a qualified position on this one that many will probably disagree with. Though I intensely dislike the idea of a woman feeling there is a need for them to cover her face for any religious or cultural reasons, I haven't seen the evidence to demonstrate that such a covered woman couldn't nonetheless be a successful and competent childcare worker. I'm doubtful that it exists.

Still, this has been the conclusion of Danish prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who has clearly stated that children should be able to see the faces of those who take care of them, and thus childcare workers in Denmark should not wear burqas.

As I said, I'm not entirely sure about the merits of that one, though there may well be something to it.

Because I can't help but think that having young children in contact with such a person is a clear acknowledgment that every person in the world is different, and in countless ways. It might just help them as they grow older and are truly confronted by just what this really means.

This seems more progressive then simply trying to create an environment as neutral, though entirely unrepresentative, as possible. And given that a fair number of burqa-wearing women can be seen walking the streets of Denmark everyday, for example around Nørrebro in Copenhagen, well, it really is a reality that is pretty close to home.

Still, I acknowledge that I may have to revisit my views on this one in the future.

And in the meantime, I'd just love to see someone like Kate Moss popularise some sort of muslim-inspired headscarf or burqa for all occasions that suddenly became the rage for young western women everywhere to wear anytime they felt like it. She could be just the one to do it, judging by the current success of her TopShop line of fashion.

by: Tim Anderson (timothyanderson2005@gmail.com)

If there is a couple of words politicians can be counted on to trade upon time and time again, it's hope and change. The formation of the Ny Alliance Party ('New Alliance') yesterday, Denmark's first new political party in the past 10 years (at least the first to actually hold a seat in parliament, that is), is the latest political development offering up the prospect of a bit of hope and dose of change.

There has been a clear and gaping hole in Danish politics since the last election - which the Ny Alliance are cleverly taking the opportunity to attempt to exploit.

In recent years, there has been a lack of parties in Denmark positioned in the very center. The existing political parties essentially form two dominant clusters - one distinctly right of center (the government of Venstre and Konservative, supported by the Dansk Folkeparti) and one distinctly left of center (Social Demoncrats, Socialistisk Folkeparti, and Radicale Venstre). And plenty of Danish voters have become skeptical of the recipe espoused by the left-of-center parties (they were in government for most of the 90's).

The Ny Alliance are positioning themselves as a just slightly right-of-center, very immigration friendly party dead against the racist politics of the Dansk Folkeparti. Given that their new leader, Nasar Khadar, moved to Denmark with his parents when he was 11, you can probably take them at face value on this particular issue.

For Danish voters opposed to basically everything that the overtly racist Dansk Folkeparti stands for (which isn't that difficult...), but uncomfortable supporting the markedly left-of-center parties on the other side, it has been a frustrating situation.

A quick look at Danish politics (and the composition of Denmark's current parliament) will give you an idea of all that is good and bad with multi-party, coalition governments and a system of proportional representation.

There is a scattering of parties in Denmark with elected parliamentary members, meaning a fair amount of choice for the average voter - and a decent opportunity to find a party that snuggly fits around your personal views and beliefs (and actually has a few elected members of parliament to boot).

On the other hand, the downside of the proportional representation system has been put on vivid display in Denmark over the past several years.

Because it has been the racist Dansk Folkeparti that has held the balance of power and propped up the right-of-center Venstre and Konservative coalition government for a number of years, a predictable and frustrating tilt of policy featuring nationalistic and all-to-often zenophobic legislation being passed has occurred, as a means of appeasing this third party.

This is legislation that the majority of the population in Denmark is not terribly keen on - indeed many are outright embarrassed by it.

Nonetheless, not wanting another left of center government for the time being, Danish voters have sucked it up and allowed the existing coalition to continue - even knowing that this essentially amounted to handing the racist Dansk Folkparti the spare set of keys to the car.

But the political events of the past week in Denmark have been an excellent indicator of the potential strength of proportional systems of government.

In countries with first past the post systems (i.e. majority plus one), there is normally only two or three strong parties holding virtually all the seats in parliament, with possibly a very weak fringe party grasping onto one or two remaining seats. Meaning voters in such systems are often uncomfortably forced into a straight jacket when it comes to choosing who to vote for. And the main political parties can often get away with ignoring the demands of various segments of the population for extended periods of time.

However in a proportional system, if the opposition parties are not collectively deft enough to position themselves in accordance with a significant enough percentage of the population, another political party can (and will) emerge to fill in the hole. And in a proportional system, often characterised by minority/coalition governments, even a new political party can potentially gain significant influence quite quickly.

What is required of a new party isn't enough votes to form the government, only that they can mop up a sizable enough pool of disenchanted voters in order to be allocated a few seats in parliament - which can oftentimes prove enough to hold the balance of power. The party holding the 'balance of power' in a proportional system typically has fewer elected members, when compared to a party holding the balance of power in a 'majority plus one' system (which are generally characterised by majority governments, most of the time).

In Denmark, it's exactly what happened when the Dansk Folkparti formed in 1995 and quickly gained strength.

Next election, the magic number for the Ny Alliance to make a real impact in parliament will likely be somewhere around 13% support (the percentage of votes the Dansk Folkparti obtained last time around). It could be much less.

Hence the burst of excitement surrounding the Ny Alliance (and the surge of 14,759 members and counting, who have joined the party in the last 2 days). It may amount to nothing, but with the scent of hope and change now wafting through the air, it certainly has had some affect upon the Danish political climate.

For more on this story, here's a small article from The Copenhagen Post.

by: Tim Anderson (timothyanderson2005@gmail.com)



If there is one thing that can be said about the current government in Denmark, it's that they are becoming rather predictable.

Needing the proudly xenophobic/racist Dansk Folkeparti to prop up their minority government, the government has developed a nasty little habit of throwing their support behind various proposals propogating the idea of 'Danishness' (thereby helping to ward off perceived threats to whatever it is that this so-called 'Danishness' is...). The Dansk Folkeparti loves squeezing out these sorts of legislative turds from the bowels of their parliamentary caucus, as they are the self-proclaimed protectors of the Danish society and cultural identity in parliament. And the government knows how to apease the Dansk Folkeparti.

Their latest is the Danish 'cultural knowledge' Test, a test that prospective Danish citizens will now have to take as the final step to being granted Danish citizenship. Apparently the Danish government has granted itself monopoly rights to decree exactly what it is to be 'Danish'. Amusingly, it has been noted that many Danes are unable to answer many of the proposed questions.

The funny thing is that those taking the Danish cultural knowledge test will have already lived in Denmark for many years. So such people are already a part Danish culture and society - even if political parties like the Dansk Folkeparti have a hard time accepting this reality.

As a Canadian, I should note that a similar sort of test exists in Canada - and it is equally irrelevant and full of nonsense. (For example, I challenge any Canadian in the crowd to name the Lieutenant Governor of their province, a real question from the Canadian version.)

Prospective Danes can take the 'Danish Cultural Test' as many times as necessary in order to pass, and the questions will be published beforehand, making the test essentially an act of memorization. Which doesn't change the fact that it is laughable and unnecessary. Ironically, Danish education basically eschews memorization as a means of learning, but never mind that...

Admittedly, I have no idea whether or not I possess enough of whatever the government's version of 'Danish cultural knowledge' is to pass the 'Danish cultural knowledge' test. However, after 6 years here, I know that I possess certain pockets of specific and highly relevant Danish cultural knowledge.

So, I thought to myself, why not help out the test writers by proposing a few Danish cultural knowledge questions of my own, from my own experience living here? The test writers are probably overworked already, just trying to pin down just what it is to be Danish, after all (and are apparently doing a lousy job of it given all the wrong answers 'real' Danes have been giving).

So here are my suggestions:

1. Name five sunny, holiday destinations abroad served by discount airlines flying out of Kastrup Lufthavn (Copenhagen airport)?
2. Name 3 Danish websites where you can book last minutes package holidays to these sunny southern vacation spots?
3. Describe how to make a proper 'Danish smørrebrod' of your own with any three or four ingredients.
4. Is the number '13' an unlucky number in Denmark, or does it mean something else to many people - for example, students?
5. Name three Danish beers that can be bought at the supermarket for under 3 kroner per bottle?
6. Name two different supermarket chains that sell these cheap beers?
7. If you are having a loud and late party in your apartment and the police show up at your door at 4 AM, what can they do about it?
8. It's 3AM in the morning. Where can you buy a pølser (hot dog)?
9. It's 5AM in the morning. Where can you buy a pølser (hot dog)?
10. It's 8AM in the morning. Where can you buy a pølser (hot dog)?
11. Can you ever NOT buy a pølser (hot dog) in Denmark? (Yes/No)
12. If it wasn't for the fruit and veg shop around the corner, it would be impossible to get fruit and vegetables after ___PM on weekdays, and ___PM on Saturday.
13. The guy who runs the fruit and vegetable shop around the corner is not from Denmark, he is from __________.
14. If you are white and/or from a 'western' country and you already meet the other criteria for being awarded Danish citizenship, will anybody actually bother to grade your Danish Cultural Test? (Yes/No)

Wondering about the answers? Well, you can cue the answers, right here.

And if you want a sample of some of the 'real' proposed test questions already considered by the real test writers, click here (questions in Danish, of course).

And finally, a little shout out to Benno Hansen for his Newsvine link to this article and Benji at YIE for the mention and link! Thanks, it's appreciated!

A friend of mine recently asked me to edit an article she's is hoping to have published that details the sad state of affairs resulting from Denmark's current immigration policies. This inspired me to comment on the situation, as I have a few times in the past on this blog. I try not to get too political here, or at least not too often, but once in a while it is necessary for my own sanity. I should also add that I do believe that these policies I'm complaining about will change before too long. It can't happen soon enough.

To be perfectly clear about my views on Denmark's Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, I'm not all that fond of him, to put it mildly.


please Danish voters, no more of
this guy after the next election

Yes, he's done some good things during his time in office such as supporting EU expansion, keeping the Danish economy generally purring and supporting green energy policies (to be explored further in an upcoming article). However, when it comes to the fundamentals - like implementing policies that ensure as many humans as possible are treated with the respect and dignity every one of us deserves - he's a complete and utter failure.

I'm singling out a couple of policies of his government, above all others: his support of the U.S. in Iraq from the start (and his continuing gutless lack of criticism of the situation there at present, discussed previously in this article), along with the highly xenophobic immigration policies (as noted by the Economist Intelligence Unit, among others) that have become a sad reality in Denmark over the past years.

The reasons for his actions in the area of immigration are quite simple: he needs the support of the highly xenophobic Dansk Folkeparti (who garnered 13% of the popular vote last election) to stay in power, otherwise his government likely falls. The consequence is a rash of policies designed to appease these xenophobes (and the Dansk Folkeparti, understanding that this is as close to office as they are ever likely to come, shrewdly continue to cooperate by taking whatever they can get).

For the simple cost of a large chunk of his soul, Rasmussen has maintained his grip on power. Sadly, too many Danish voters have went along with him.

Yes, Danish voters actually voted him in again for a second term, opting to cover their eyes, ears and nose to the unsightly stench that are the highly undesirable effects that these policies have been having on people - real people. Human beings.

When you live in a largely insulated little bubble, as Denmark is, with it's highly developed (and tuition-free) education system, high salaries and cradle-to-grave social support system, it's easy to pretend that on a grander level it's irrelevant whether the policies of the government of your country just might be having perverse effects on real people just outside of your own limited line of vision.

It is also easy to not think about whether they reflect how you would want to be treated, if they were policies that directly affected your life. I believe that's called following the 'Golden Rule'.

And nobody in their right mind would want to be treated the way Denmark treats it's potential immigrants and asylum seekers.

Denmark, as a small country with a small population, certainly can't solve the problems of the world simply by taking in every potential refugee there is. Fortunately, relatively few of these potential immigrants ever get the idea to come to Denmark, and even fewer actually try. And the ones that do are generally quite energetic, determined and more than willing to do whatever is necessary to make a life for themselves here and contribute meaningfully to society.

So it isn't that big of an issue. Or it shouldn't be.

What's more, the fact the Danish language skills of the average immigrant are limited tends to prevent them from immediately 'stealing' those really desirable jobs away from Danes - as one of the typical arguments made by those against allowing in more immigrants goes. Rather, they tend to end up doing the jobs most Danes don't really want anyway.

What are some of the effects of these policies?

Apparently since 2001, the number of as refugees accepted into Denmark has dropped 95%. About 1% of claimants from Iraq are accepted these days. You can thank the influence of the xenophobic Dansk Folkeparti for that, and it's an accomplishment they are quite proud of, thank you very much.

There are a serious problems with the immigration process as it stands currently.

Potential immigrants and asylum seekers are not allowed to work while their application is pending - a process that often takes years. This is ridiculous and unnecessary, forcing these immigrants to rely on the meagre handouts they receive from the state, while their minds and bodies languish. If countries like Sweden and the Netherlands can let applicants work (and they do), there is no reason Denmark can't as well. Such treatment falls well below the threshold of the 'Golden Rule' - a more meaningful threshold then any law can ever prescribe or explicate.

It is a sad state of affairs to hear about the holding tank at Sandholm, where many of Denmark refugee claimants are housed, stuck in a state of inhuman limbo while their application and various appeals are pending.

Danish citizens seem to understand, a recent survey suggested that almost 97% of Danes believe that Iraqi waiting for there claims to be precesses should be allowed to work while they wait, and almost 88% believed they should be able to pursue an education. Unfortunately, only 25% believed they should be offered a full residence permit. So what is the government, lead by Anders Fogh Rasmussen, waiting for?

There are other areas of policy that hit closer to home for a lot of people and their families.

Thanks to recent changes to immigration policy, any Dane under the age of 24 who marries a foreigner is not considered to be mature enough to enter into such a decision - and so they kindly asked not to apply to bring their spouse back to Denmark on this basis. I would be unable to look myself in the mirror every morning if I was responsible for such tripe and the effects it has on real people and real families with real lives and real emotions.

No person in Denmark can claim to have done more to keep families and loved-ones apart in the past few years than Anders Fogh Rasmussen can.

Priority for voters should be clear: if there is one thing that stands above all else in life, it is the necessity to ensure people are treated with dignity and respect, and to respect and help those who desire to be together with loved ones and families. When government creates policy that does the opposite, it is bad policy and the citizen's in such countries should vote them out of office immediately - regardless of whatever else they may have been doing as a government. It's that simple.

Too many Danish voters have sadly abdicated this particular set of responsibilities.

The necessity of taking this responsibility is best highlighted by planing a simple mental exercise: how would the world look if every government around the world moved in precisely the same radical and xenophobic direction as Denmark over the last years? It would not be pretty.

Of course, a simple look into Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s eyes tells you he knows full well that the remaining shreds of moral consciousness he may have possessed were sold off long ago for a few extra years in office, human dignity be damned.