Jacob Christensen

A Health Update

Jacob Christensen — Wed, 16 May 2012 10:38:36 +0000

Just a brief update to say that a I 1) am still alive, 2) doing better compared to February and March, but 3) still a far way from my normal level of energy. Recovering from stress is a long, slow process. Consequently, I do not expect to do any blogging on politics or political science or the like until after the summer.

In the meantime you may catch me on Twitter or Facebook which are still relatively undemanding formats.

PS: Comments are closed so that I don’t have to check and clean spam comments.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

A Temporary Hiatus and a Personal Note

Jacob Christensen — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:25:57 +0000

Regular readers will have noticed that postings have become more and more infrequent during the last months and that there have been no updates since February 18.

The reason is not that the blog is dead or abandoned but starting some time in the late autumn I have suffered from bouts of fatigue, a condition which worsened dramatically in February. The fatigue was due to stress and unfortunately I had to take sick leave at the beginning of March.

Obviously, my main priority right now is to get back to a situation where I can begin working again, sort out the reasons behind my condition in order to avoid repeats and consider my future.

Following Danish politics on a systematic basis and blogging about it is definitively at the bottom of my list of priorities at the moment and so the blog is on hiatus until further notice. I am still around on some less demanding formats (Twitter, Facebook) even if I prefer to avoid all too Political or PolSci discussions.

If you need to get in touch with me, you are welcome (see details on the relevant page) but please respect that I may take my time in answering and that I don’t take any requests for comments, etc. for the time being.

A Note on Posting Policy Since my guest post on Ideas on Europe has led...
Conservatives Ah, yes: The Conservative Party. Does anybody remember them these...
The Personal Vote The Danish electoral system can be vary fascinating but essentially...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

What’s Eating the Danish Government?

Jacob Christensen — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 16:48:01 +0000

The development since the September 2011 election must surely go down in history as one of the strangest periods in Danish politics. It may not be on the same level as the 1973-74II session in the Folketing which followed the 1973 earthquake election and which was one of the most tumultuous times in Danish political history but the miserable start to the three-party government’s life has been extraordinary, especially given that the present government and its supporting party, the Red-Greens, had enjoyed a lead in opinion polls during a long period leading up to the election.

So, how can we explain the malaise? Maybe we need a combination of factors to get to the core of the problem.

The Economy
The 2008 fiscal crisis hit Denmark – and in particular the financial sector – hard even if Denmark continues to enjoy AAA (or comparable) ratings by international agencies. Unemployment may not be on the levels of the early 1990s but there is a real fear among many both in the private and public sectors that they could be hit by unemployment. Similarly, the bursting of the housing bubble has seen a lot of savings vanishing into thin air – not least among those who bought houses or apartments during 2004-2008.

The question is if Danish voters have a real sense of crisis. The latest rounds of wage negotiations suggest that the private sector trade unions fearing a continued haemorrhage of manufacturing jobs but the among voters the expectation could still be that the changing governments ought to do something effective against the continuing low growth following the downturn in 2008-2009.

So maybe first the Liberal-Conservative and now the Social Democratic-Social Liberal-SF governments are hit by the same curse: Lack or crisis-consciousness and short-sightedness among voters.

The Positions
For most of the 1990s and 2000s Danish politics has been described as a battle for the centrist voters, a battle the Social Democrats curiously lost as the became ever more “centrist” and “responsible” in economic policy. Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s big accomplishment was to move the Liberals to the centre (or median voter) on both economic and social (i.e. immigration, law-and-order) issues.

Here, I have heard pollsters argue that voters saw the Liberals as more (though by no means extreme) right-wing in 2011 compared to 2007. This was something which opened the field for the centre-left. The problem was that the Social Democrats continued to be seen as left-wing and thus less attractive to centrist voters – some of which would never vote for the Social Liberals.

Maybe the resolution of the debate surrounding the Early Retirement Benefit helped making some of the Liberals’ perceived move to the right less important and in that way, the Liberals have been able to pull back lost voters – even if we should be aware of the fact that the Liberal strategy during much of the time since the election has been taking a passive stance. In many ways, the Liberals are what different voters imagine them to be – a bit like the Swedish Social Democrats in the period following the 2006 election when the party was without a leader.

So the question is what happens if the Liberals take a more active role and have to decide if they should become more centrist or more liberal/right-wing.

The Issues
The government has become known (especially in Berlingske Tidende) as the government which broke all of its pre-election promises except the one about introducing a congestion charge for Central Copenhagen – and that one has had local Social Democratic politicians in the metropolitan area up in arms. Mobilising voters behind such a policy is not easy but the government is also facing the problem that it was forced to pass and implement the cuts in the early retirement benefit, a move which was deeply unpopular among Social Democratic and SF voters. In many other areas, the government doesn’t really stand out – at least yet.

So the government has been successful in passing the wrong reform while struggling to get its own issues on the political agenda.

The Competences
Much has been said about the leaders of the Social Democrats and SF and some of the criticism points to interesting – and to some degree unexpected – weaknesses.

In my opinion, Helle Thorning-Schmidt is in many ways strategically defensive: She is good at defusing potential conflicts but this may come at the price of weakening the Social Democratic agenda. She did manage to put a working three-party coalition together but at the cost of a clearly communicated profile. (Editor’s note: How does this go together with the perceived left-wing position of the party?)

Similarly, the weakness of the SF leadership is puzzling. Between 2006 and 2010, Villy Søvndal and his entourage could hardly put a foot wrong but the party appears to have been left drifting since the summer of 2011. I find this strange given the process of political and organisational modernisation, Søvndal led. Here, more research is definitively needed.

So: It is Pining for the Fjords?
Four years is a long time in politics – much can happen to the economy (even if the Nyrup Rasmussen government lost the 2001 election despite the economy being in good shape) and we could see a ketchup bottle-effect with the government setting unmistakable prints on the political agenda. Will the Liberals’ laid-back strategy work all the way to 2015 (or 2014. Or whatever)? Will SF buckle under the pressure or will the junior partner in the government be able to reorganise itself? As the experience from Sweden 2006-2010 shows, it is dangerous calling the game to early, but the Danish government is facing problems on different levels.

Unattractive Alternatives? There is one thing which is slightly odd about this...
After the Election: First Thoughts 1. Turn-out was up from 86.6 to 86.987.7%. A competitive...
Impending Doom of 2012 I: SF Going Down in Flames Given my general mood, I thought it would be appropriate...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Building 40

Jacob Christensen — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:03:12 +0000

Moving offices is drawing ever closer.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Artist Walk and Talk

Jacob Christensen — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 21:58:17 +0000

Courtesy of fellow tweep Søren Sommerglæde (a suitable name in the dead of winter), I joined an “Artist Walk and Talk” at the local exhibition building Filosoffen – it is located at Filosofgangen, hence the name – where Søren discussed the some of the works with Carsten Rudolfsen and Poul Weile, two members of the association Grünhorse whose works are on display until next weekend. It was a refreshing approach with an interested member of the public rather than an art expert – hope you are not bothered by the description, Søren – as discussant.

The photograph shows the exhibition of no less than 120 small paintings by German artist Runhild Wirth who followed the demolition of the Palast der Republik on site between 2006 and 2008. Just for fun, here are two photographs I took at the same site in November 2004 and November 2011:

First 2004

And then 2011

PS: Look closely, and you will find me on one of the photos from the event here.

Calling the Election As we all are making jokes about the election which...
…and Counting So, everybody expected Lars Løkke Rasmussen to call the election...
A Note on Posting Policy Since my guest post on Ideas on Europe has led...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Play-School or Parliament?

Jacob Christensen — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:51:35 +0000

Today’s Politiken has an article where a number of new MPs complain about the dominant culture in the Danish parliament. Their basic line of argument is that political debate has degenerated into endless repetitions of obvious questions and arguments and that much political behaviour now verges on (if it hasn’t already crossed) the border of victimising.

It is difficult to gauge the argument without extensive studies of parliamentary debates but the observation merits discussion.

First, one of the MPs (Mette Bock) makes the obvious mistake of confusing a parliament with a business. A business corporation has a limited number of goals (produce goods or services, create a profit) while a parliament as a representative organ is one of the major arena for social conflicts. Of course power struggles are part of most, if not all, organisations, but observers of parliamentary business are well-advised to remember that behind most of the work done in any parliament there are more or less manifest conflicts of interests or values.

Second, this means that politicians in general and parliamentarians in particular face two tasks: Solve problems and mobilise voters and social interests. These tasks are not always easy to handle in isolation. Combine them and things get very complicated. We should also note, that if problem-solving gets the upper hand there is a risk that citizens will feel less engagement and perhaps even feel alienated from the policy elite. If mobilisation gets the upper hand, we end in pointless polemics – and voters may end being disgusted by destructive politics.

On the other hand, voters appreciate constructive politics and – as everyone who has checked the Facebook-pages of politicians and political commentators – polemical and condescending attacks on political opponents will invariably draw hordes of cheering supporters. If this sounds confusing, you are on the trail of something important: Voters’ preferences are contradictory.

If you – like me – have read a large number of political debates, you will be depressingly familiar with the polemical style. This is not limited to one particular wing of the political spectrum, but usually the opposition of the day is the most obnoxious part. To me, the problem is that polemics and “gotcha” questions and statements more often than not fail to bring something new to the process. Most Danish politicians are fascinatingly inept at this.

And personally, I tune out when the familiar type of polemics begin.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Some facts about the Danish Social Democrats

Jacob Christensen — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:32:24 +0000

I was looking for some data about the Danish Social Democrats for an article. Unfortunately, the internet (and in particular the material posted by the Danish Royal Library) can be a frustrating tool but here are some facts which interested me – not least because a comparison with Sweden could be worth an effort:

1. The Danish party has reformed its central organisation during the 00s: The old party board and executive committee were merged into a new board.

2. The statutes have rules for a direct election of the party chairman

3. Membership has continued its downward trend, despite an increase in 2005-06 following the leadership election. In 2003 the party had 54700 members, in 2010 it was down to 46050. The Social Democrats can take some solace in the fact that the party once again is the largest in terms of members after losing the position to the Liberals some time during the 1990s. In 2003 the Liberals had 69800 members, in 2010 they were down to 44400.

4. LO (the Danish TUC) no longer supports the Social Democrats but the party continues to receive some support from individual unions. Still, public subsidies are the largest sources of income by far.

The Christian Democrats and Their Chances at the 2011 Election “Politiko” in today’s Berlingske (not on the web as far...
The 2012 Budget The news that the party board of the Red-Green Alliance...
After the Election: First Thoughts 1. Turn-out was up from 86.6 to 86.987.7%. A competitive...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Hoisted from the Comments: Aylott on Juholt, Löfvén, etc

Jacob Christensen — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 17:18:17 +0000

Just in case you didn’t read the comment, here is Nick’s post which focuses on the organisational level.

Exit Juholt, Enter (?) And what a ride that was: The Swedish Social Democrats...
Suggested Readings “There’s an age when boys read one of two books....
The Publication Model I just wanted to point you to a perceptive comment...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Exit Juholt, Enter (?)

Jacob Christensen — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 01:05:12 +0000

And what a ride that was: The Swedish Social Democrats – a party which traditionally embodied the image of rational social engineering – spent the better part of 2011 on a veritable political roller-coaster under the luckless Håkan Juholt. Crises and internal conflicts are nothing new to the Nordic Social Democracies but a train-wreck of these dimensions is something unprecedented. One would probably have to look at the German Social Democrats where the position as party chairman turned into a veritable catapult sometime during the 1990s with the rapid succession of chairmen in 2005-2006 at the high (or low) point. Still, Germany with its federal structure is different and the party chairman is not necessarily the party’s candidate for the position as federal chancellor.

But at this point it is fair to ask what went wrong and how big the risks that the Social Democrats will repeat their mistakes. To do so, it will be an idea to look at the challenges, routines and solutions facing or available to the Social Democrats at four different levels and how the party responded and used the available alternatives.

The Social Level
There can be no doubt that the Social Democrats are structurally challenged. The party’s historical base was the numerous smaller and mid-sized communities which again formed the basis of industrial development during the 20th century but the Swedish society has changed as the major cities have become the main economic centres and the population is migrating to the Stockholm, Gothenburg, Malmö/Lund and Linköping/Norrköping regions. Crucially, the Social Democrats lost the fight against the Conservatives in Stockholm and Skåne in 2006 and again in 2010. Magnus Hagevi discussed this in a recent blog post but I would like to elaborate a bit on his argument by adding the shares of the vote won by the Left Party and the Green Party (I also begin my graph in 1970 rather than 1968)

It is obvious that the Social Democrats are facing a long-term decline in their share of the vote: While the party could operate with a target of 45 percent until the mid-1980s, its target share has been around 40 percent until 2006 and these days 35 percent looks like a more reasonable target. This means I am assuming that the party was performing below its potential in 2010 – and this assumption may not necessarily be correct. But another point is that “the left” is not necessarily weaker because of the Social Democratic crisis – the Left Party and the Green Party could attract voters, even if the Sweden Democrats continue to pull working-class voters to the right; a development Andreas Johansson Heinö has hightlighted (and which has parallels in Denmark)

The Institutional Level
Some years ago, the political scientist Ellen Immergut pointed to an overlooked factor which helped the Social Democrats to maintain their political hegemony from the 1930s until the 1970: The Swedish constitutions. Curiously, the democratisation of the constitution in the form of the abolition of the indirectly elected First Chamber and changes to the electoral system. Immergut’s conclusion is that – depending on your point of view – the Social Democrats punched above their weight until 1970 or that the party would have been stronger on the parliamentary arena, had the two-chamber system been retained.

We should note that the Danish Social Democracy faced similar challenges on the electoral and parliamentary level in the 1970s, so a different institutional development wouldn’t have stopped the Social Democrats from sliding into a crisis but we could have seen a different trajectory.

The Organisational Level
The Swedish Social Democrats have always taken pride in having a strong organisational culture. Outsiders might question the conflict between the image of a grass-roots movement on the one hand and the reality of a top-down controlled machine on the other but the party for a long time succeeded in creating the impression of an organisation without visible conflicts.

The problem is that a strong organisational culture which punish deviating opinions and open conflicts is bound to run into trouble when the environment changes or when conflicts emerge. In reality, there are only two ways to deal with this situation: Either let a dominant leadership decide the course and accept that dissidents are either excluded or leave or find some way of making conflict and conflict-resolution legitimate. The Social Democrats did neither following the Göran Persson’s resignation and this effectively meant that the party was drifting, despite the good intentions of Mona Sahlin. The closed nature of the process behind the selection of first Mona Sahlin and later Håkan Juholt only served to disguise the cracks in the walls of the building.

The Individual Level
At some point during the autumn of 2011 it was obvious that Håkan Juholt wasn’t the man to lead the Social Democrats out of their misery, but what was wrong? As the Swedish magazine Fokus has pointed out, Juholt’s first problem was that he represented the countryside and small towns, rather than the Stockholm centre. He was an outsider – not just because he hadn’t been a minister – and to succeed, he would need to create a stable power base in the party’s central organs. It was not necessarily wrong to pick an outsider, but the Social Democrats managed to pick a leader who looked more like a throwback to the Sweden of the 1970s than somebody who could finally bring the party into the 21st century.

Juholt’s second problem was that he lacked the basic skills needed in a party leader and especially one whose task would be to bring about major political and organisational change. Commentators have noted his carelessness with facts and controversial private life but to me, Juholt is fascinatingly like a Danish party leader who enjoyed great success in his first five years in office despite a certain erratic element. Yes, I am talking about Villy Søvndal – the traditionalist who transformed SF into a lean and mean electoral and parliamentary machine and who between 2005 and 2010 couldn’t make serious mistakes (What has happened from 2010 onward is a different story). Søvndal’s advantage was in seizing the moment when SF was ripe for organisational reform and creating a team (Ole Sohn in the Folketing and Thor Möger Petersen and – until his early death – Jakob Nørhøj in the party organisation) which could support him in a competent way. Juholt essentially was an agitator – and by all accounts a good one – but lacked the strategic and organisational skills. His team turned out to be just as erratic as the chairman, something which put the final nails in the coffin of Juholt’s leadership.

Postscript: For a number of bad reasons it has taken me ages to finish this post. in the meantime, the Social Democrats’ Executive Committee (which is no longer deferentially referred to as “the powerful Executive Committee”) has installed the leader of the Metal Workers’ Union Stefan Löfven as new/interim/whatever party leader. Lövfen is not an MP, something which highlights the party’s problems with attracting talent at the top levels.

A Thought Experiment: Choosing a Challenger to Fredrik Reinfeldt As regular readers will know then I’m not a friend...
The Toll of Tolls By now it is a received wisdom that the proposal...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Political Advertising, Finnish Style

Jacob Christensen — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:13:44 +0000

This, I am told, is not a parody but the real thing. Why on Earth support for Paavo Lipponen is languishing at below 10 percent in opinion polls beats me.

Well, not really.

Election Trends Just for the fun of it, I decided to try...
Opinion Polls As always, the first and best advice with regard to...
The Christian Democrats and Their Chances at the 2011 Election “Politiko” in today’s Berlingske (not on the web as far...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.