The red and green flags gets raised for real!

“Assumingly SPP has moved enough right on the political scale to catch you up,”

Not really, to be honest with you. Last year, during the election, when I made the decision to vote for the Unity List, I did so because of clarity in their policies, not because I agreed fully. In the areas that I had the most interest in, such as surveilance and so forth, SPP was a tad bit too vague for my taste, and I just can’t have vagueness when I try to decide something I feel is important.

“though I must remind you that the Unity List (Enhedslisten) is the party proclaiming themselves as ‘the red-greens’ beside the party name, just to avoid confusion.”

Umm, in case you didn’t know, that’s the case with SPP as well, go read their site, it does sound a little bragging, but they clearly make themselves out to be a red-green party. Go look on Wikipedia as well, if find that easier than getting it from the horse’s mouth: http://sf.dk/default.aspx?func=article.view&menuID=10962&topmenuID=238&id=10961.

Also, SPP’s member of the EU parliament sits in the European Green Party. Oh and by the way, I am not against the EU either, in fact I am hoping that Turkey would hurry up and fix their human rights issues, the Cyprus issue etc. so that the EU might accept them as a member (I’d love the see the faces of DPP, when people from a country where the majority are Muslims (Do notice that Turkey has a STRONG tradition of secularism), can easily come work here in Denmark).

“One thing about SPP I’m worried about, is Villy Søvndal’s rhetoric attack on Muslims who are against democracy, that they can just ‘go to hell’. It might turn into a new voters’ favorite like DPP (Danish People’s Party, Dansk Folkeparti) I fear.”

You know, I am of the exact opposite opinion. That’s the kind of clarity I like. When I get upset about something I will curse and swear like a pirate. Now, I don’t think Villy should do that, mind you. But I think saying “go to hell” to an organization whose members have been known to make antisemitic comments in the past, and are openly against democracy and equal rights etc. etc. is 100% legitimate. I can’t stand this whole “posh” language that you hear a lot of politicians use, I like some straight-talk in the form of common, layman words.

I’ll go out on a lim here, and make a statement, just for your amusement.

To Inner Mission (Danish: Indre Mission), GO TO HELL!!!

“One of my other friends was active until recently in SFU (SFs Ungdom, youth of SPP) until the mother party gave up it’s opposition to the 24-year-rule (law said to avoid forced marriages, but I have not seen a proof that it actually works) in order to gain seats in parliament and coorporate more thoroughly with the Social-Democrats.”

This is one of the reasons I have been getting frustrated with the Unity List, I have in several cases now noticed them deliberately distoring, or ignoring what other people say. And that I just can’t stand, that’s pulling a Republican if you ask me.
If you spend like a miniscule 30 seconds listening to what SF actually said, when they announced that partnership with the Social Democrats, they are still very much against the 24-year rule, but if you count the number of people in parliament, who would be in favor of abolishing that law, there is nowhere near a majority! So should SPP stomp on the ground and yell “WE WANT ALL THINGS OUR WAY OR NOTHING!!!” ? That would simply be naive, wishful and zealotry thinking. I am strong believer in idealistic goals, but I am also a strong believer in using a good deal of sensible pragmatism to reach those idealistic goals. Totally uncompromiseable idealistism, just keeps you stuck if you ask me. Pessimistic political realism (Often equated with “pragmstism”) ain’t gonna get you anywhere either, because the goals you decide on aren’t gonna get you more than a nano-meter forward.
If SPP flat-out refused to work with the Social Democrats, because the SDs happen to agree to the 24-year rule (Which a shockingly big part of the population also does), we ain’t gonna get rid of this frustrating government for another three elections! What’s better? A little bit of pragmatism in the short term, and thereby a bigger chance for a new, and hopefully better government, or an arrogant and staunch insisting on only your own world view forever and ever, and keeping our current VK-government with it’s support of Danish People’s Party (A party that both you and I have some passionate disagreements with!) ?

Again, get it from the horse’s mouth: http://sf.podhandle.dk/villy550.mp4.

If you still feel they have given up their opposition to the 24-year rule, well, what can I say? “Boller fra Koberg!” 😛

“(He’s now active in Socialistisk Ungdomsfront, SUF – Socialist Youth Front – the same organization as me, belonging partially to the Unity List.) In my opinion, SPP has moved to be more a social-democratic party today than an actual reformist-socialist party.”

Well, I consider social democracy, the ideology, to be socialism, but through an alternative approach. Unlike some people (They know who they are, and I am not talking about you here, Karmus) I don’t think capitalism is inherently evil or eats babies for lunch and whatever else certain people spew. I look at capitalism like a samurai sword, you can use it to kill somebody, in other words cause harm, or you can use it to chop a bit of wood to make a fire to get warm in the winter.

“Its roots from communism are definitely long gone, according to this article: http://avisen.dk/villy-soevndal-skrotter-sf-s-socialistiske-vaerdier_8187.aspx“

Much of that stuff in the article I agree with, or partially agree with (I do believe we need a bunch of nationalisations in Denmark 😉 ). First of all I don’t believe in absolute equality in terms of wages, I think that just stifles society. Also I think a market economy is way better for pushing technology, let’s face it, technology is everything these days (Yes, even your pants could in some ways be considered technology)! If it wasn’t, how come it was the United States that invented the modern computers you and I use? Why didn’t the Soviet Union or China, with their centrally planned economies of old and total state-ownership, manage something like it? Sure technology isn’t everything, I will agree with that, but it’s A LOT still.

Speaking of China, a while ago I ran accross this quote by Deng Xiaoping:

“Planning and market forces are not the essential difference between socialism and capitalism. A planned economy is not the definition of socialism, because there is planning under capitalism; the market economy happens under socialism, too. Planning and market forces are both ways of controlling economic activity.”

Now, let me say up front, that I seriously never will agree with Deng Xiaoping on much, this guy was a full-on dictator before he died. But I think on this one thing, he has a fairly good point. Think about it. Let’s take Nintendo as an example. At some point some guy in Kyoto sits down and says “This is what the Wii is gonna cost!”, well that’s planning for you, but no “central planning”. You can read more about China’s current economic system here: Socialism with Chinese characteristics. It’s an interesting read, I don’t want to sit here and rehash it all to you, when Wikipedia does a good job at explaining it.

Also, this part of the article:

“- Altså, det er jo mange år siden, vi forsøgte at afskaffe markedsøkonomien. Jeg er selv mere og mere overbevist om, at styrken i vores samfund er samspillet mellem en meget fleksibel privat sektor og en ret duelig offentlig sektor i forhold til mange andre typer af samfund.”

I pretty much completely agree with. I see a need for both a public and a private sector. Why you ask? Because government can’t do everything, and it tends to fail when it tries.

Also, you mentioned SPP’s roots in communism being long gone, well good riddance if you ask me, because I view communism as an utterly broken concept.

“But congratulations or what to say. Hopefully you’ll find working with politics interesting and get schooled in some ‘good old ideology’ – the basis for the beliefs of the current parties. :P”

Trust me, I have already done quite a bit of reading, and carefully considered a lot of things.