Darth-Pia Strikes Again
Future immigration policy according to the Danish Peoples' Party
I honestly thought it was a joke, and after having heard it live on national television, I was waiting for the catch, an intelligent “aberdabei”, the small text. But it wasn’t a joke at the Danish Peoples’ Party (DF) summer summit two weeks ago, and it still isn’t. In fact, Pia Kjærsgaard and the rest of the party leadership has tirelessly promoted their suggesiton ever since, forcing both the prime minister and other parties to relate to what must qualify as the most stupid political suggestion of the decade.
The non-joke I am referring to is of course DF’s suggestion that Denmark should halt all immigration from non-Western countries.
What is genuinely problematic is the way other Danish parties and politicians have responded to the suggestion. Ranging from “not practically possible” to “we can’t afford that”, many reactions testify to the semantic lack in differentiation of terms in Danish vocabulary when it comes to “foreigners”.
On the part of DF, it simply underlines the dangerously paranoid and short-sighted national vision that they have represented since their foundation in 1995. This isn’t a particularly Danish trait – it’s a nationalist mindset that you will find in every nation around the world, whether marginalised and marooned on the outskirts of the political spectrum, or, as in Denmark, supporting current governments. DF also isn’t the first party to propose selective immigration. For example, in the Norwegian general election in 2009, Fremskrittspartiet (ironically called The Progress Party) became the second largest party in Norway (22.9% of national votes) with a similar agenda.
What is genuinely problematic is the way other Danish parties and politicians have responded to the suggestion. Ranging from “not practically possible” to “we can’t afford that”, many reactions testify to the semantic lack in differentiation of terms in Danish vocabulary when it comes to “foreigners”…
In a previous post, Expats in Denmark are true pioneers, I pointed out that “the debate on immigration policy … has, throughout the last 20 years … been focussed on the integration of asylum seekers, refugees, family reunifications into Danish society and culture”. Accordingly, “udlændinge” (foreigners) are, in the minds of many Danes, either people who need our collective help, or people who intend to settle down permanently in Denmark, and therefore need help integrating (or assimilating, depending on who you ask) as fast as possible…
Leaving aside the general debate on what level of integration/assimilation to expect from “new Danes”, Expats generally don’t fall into any of the above mentioned categories. They obviously aren’t tourists, they aren’t fugitives or asylum seekers, and they have no intention of applying for Danish citizenship or settling down permanently. Unfortunately, the term “Expat” remains largely undefined in the Danish vocabulary, and as such, to the general public and political representatives, the diversity and value of the Expat community is far from top-of-mind.
If you are reading this blog, you may yourself be an Expat. If you’re from a non-Western country, rest assured that DF probably didn’t intend to include you in their hopeless generalisations, but not knowing any better, they did. The real problem is that many others, who are in no way affiliated with DF, demonstrate a similar unfamiliarity with your, and your fellow Expats’ contributions to Danish social and economic development.
We cannot ignore this narrow-minded ignorance. When Darth-Pia strikes, we need to strike back. Therefore, Expat in Denmark is launching a one month awareness campaign, starting September 1, which will define and promote the Expat community as something very different from what current terminology and society understands as “foreign”. We will be needing your help in the campaign, so please stay tuned.
In the mean time, if you live/work/study in Denmark, please take a second to answer the below question:
Expat in Denmark
Peter A. Lemmich
Helle Granhøj
The Copenhagen Post
Neal Greenspan
Craig Till
linnkatarina
Well,
For starters: As the DPP itself has pointed out several times, the official aim of the immigration reforms implemented when the new coalition took over in 2001 was to shift immigration (defined broadly as the influx of non-nationals) from asylum seekers and family reunification seekers that end up on welfare to the so-called “super-immigrants” who come here to work and study. That has succeeded, at least to some degree, but it does show that the immigration debate isn’t *entirely* misinformed, even though “foreigner” stilll usually refers to: “poor Muslim”.
But generally, I support the move. We already have differential visa and visa waiver programs in place, that take into consideration everything from the person’s purpose of travel, proposed accommodation in Denmark, criminal record and … gasp! … country of origin, since it’s no secret that we have different experiences with people from different countries. The easy way to implement this program is to retain the quotas and point-based system already in place, but add “Most Favoured Nation”-points to people’s green card applications as a continuation of our visa-waiver programs.
I’d like it to be as a easy as possible to work and study in another country, but uncontrolled mass immigration would be — and has been — a chaotic failure. So I’m for having a very strict entry policy, but with waivers for countries with whom we have good relations and good experiences, i.e. regarding extradition.
Our inability to handle foreign nationals’ legal and residency statuses, the issuance of work and study permits, visas and the Schengen screening processes efficiently is a real problemm so I think it would be a move in the right direction to coordinate our visa progams with our immigration policies more closely.
I think the biggest problem here is trying to stay unbiased and rational. Any or all discussion about immigration almost always brings the word racist to the surface; as though if you don’t agree with ‘open borders’ you are a racist.
I can dictate who I allow into my house and where I live (assuming I have enough money) and who my friends will be etc……., but I have no choice (here or in my ‘home’ country of England; and yes I do distinguish between England and the UK) who I ‘allow’ into my country (adoptive or home). Non of the major political parties, anywhere in the ‘first world’ will address the issues of immigration and the problems that come with it. I’m sure if most Danes (and English) knew then what they know now, most of the immigration into Denmark and the UK would NOT have happened.
That being said, if we could have a mature debate, with all sides allowed to have their ‘say’, whether politically correct or not, maybe we can move the issue forward.
What type of society does Denmark want in 20, 50, 100 years time. It’s great that Denmark wants to help people in need and, of course, take advantage of their skills in a mutually beneficial way, but at what price. I have to be honest. I don’t want to be a minority in my own country, at least culturally or religiously. Both of these are now under pressure from different cultures all across Europe. If that is the ‘will of the people’ , then fine, but I’m really not sure that it is.
Don’t simply dismiss people’s views, because they are not the same as yours:; even Pia Kjærsgaard. Se has a much right to comment as we all do.
I wasn’t surprised by Dansk Folkeparti’s suggestion – it’s nothing new from them. The reaction from other Danes was the shocking part. It’s hard to fathom how so many “moderates” can have such a primitive view of the world. That they can equate economic desirability of a person with country of origin, in 2010, is difficult to understand. Clearly many Danes support the proposal, at least tacitly, as it hasn’t caused any serious political counteraction, and it wouldn’t surprise me to see the idea gain political traction.
The great failure of Denmark, time and again, is its inability to treat people from abroad as individuals, each with their own merits. Danes still rely on stereotypes to define us, and they don’t realize that this offends not just the people they want to keep out, but also those they allow in. The end result is that Denmark largely fails to gain loyalty from any foreigners, desirable or not, as it’s hard to respect a society that is so self-focused. Danes sense only the rejection, not the reason, and this in turn reinforces the isolationist, go-it-alone national sentiment. It’s a downward spiral – the question is, where is it leading them?
It seems there’s another missing category: people who want to become Danish either because they have married a Dane or has a career with a Danish company or simply has fallen in love with the country. We might call these people Repats. They too are lost in the bifurcation between (a) refugees, their descendants, and people who immigrate via family reunification with these on one hand, and (b) expats who study or work in Denmark for a few years.
Most repats probably only need help in the form of part-time Danish classes, and therefore they are not a drain on society, quite the contrary.
Of course, in my opinion we should also do a lot to help refugees who are traumatized by war and torture for humanitarian reasons, within our means, even though these might never contribute to society, in contrast with the repats.
Would use the term “in-pats”–repat is a term used to describe expats who return to their country of origin, and to discuss issues they face (which as a former repat, are nasty and considerable).
Mike
Why is India and the area immediately west of there darker on the map? Will this now mean they are not allowed to adopt Thai babies?
The DF propose this simplistic binary model and we go “oooh! Pia! You’re like Darth Vader you are!” but then the centrist parties come up with all the populist policies that are designed to do exactly the same thing. Then Danes say “I do not agree with the DF! I like Venstre/SF the best!”
As if there were a difference in what they do and say about immigrants.
Meanwhile, you guys are falling over yourselves to prove that *we* are the Good Immigrants (even if we do come from Japan or Kenya!) and buy into the fallacy that there are loads of Bad Immigrants out there spoiling it for everyone. WHERE are they? Are we talking about refugees who are suffering from PTSD? Are we really saying because we came here for work, we should be treated better than someone who came here to flee persecution or war?
@skatesection
Unfortunately, it seems you
deliberatelymisunderstand the purpose of the blog entry, and our advocation for a differentiation in terms, and a consolidated Expat community.1) The map used to be coloured. India was bright maroon, and China/Oceania was purple. I’m not sure what adoption policy has to do with that?
2) What I criticise is the rhetoric (like I wrote, DF’s policy suggestions most likely will not manifest into actual policy this time around), and the semantic lack of differentiation in terms when it comes to foreigners. There is a substantial difference between DF’s immigration policy/rhetoric, and that of the centrist or left-wing parties (have you ever bothered reading their respective political programmes?). The problem is that because the expat community is relatively unknown and non-present in the immigration debate, even the benign actors have a tendency to jump the gun in their reactions to DF’s provocative suggestions, such as the proposed ban on non-Westerners.
3) The treatment that a refugee suffering from PTSD requires is, ceteris paribus, very different from a US family or educated individuals such as yourself. It’s not a question of categorising foreigners in “good” or “bad”, or giving any particular group of foreigners a “better” treatment than others. But it is about acknowledging their different requirements, reasons for living in Denmark, duration of stay, etc., and avoiding generalisation on the whole (which, as Giles Potter mentioned, goes both ways).
I don’t know how you can use a word like “deliberately”, that is pretty provocative. My understanding is my understanding. If I have misunderstood you, you were not clear enough.
If non-Westerners are to be banned then will adoption from non-Western countries also be banned? Thanks for explaining why the colouring was different on the map.
Yes, I have “bothered” reading their policies. And I will say it again. The centrists have remarkably similar rhetoric about immigrants and their policies are very much anti-immigrant. For example, LA mooted “let’s make immigrants pay for health care for seven years” and Venstre were “very interested”. Who is coming up with the anti foreigner legislation? It isn’t DF acting in isolation.
Best case scenario, the Danes decide that THE EXPATS or The International Community or whatever you call us are as good as the Swedish but worse than the Greenlanders, say. We will still be on a hierarchy, it just seems you want to bump us above the refugees.
Using “Anti-foreigner” to depict legislative differentiation, and Danish immigration policy on the whole, is pretty provocative as well
Of course I respect your opinion(s), and your right to have one, and it’s always good to have someone demand clarification, if arguments seem vague. I also think you have some interesting points about differentiation and hierarchy in immigration policy, although I cannot endorse your (self-proclaimed) cynicism.
In any case, and speaking of free speech, why the anonymity? And where in Denmark do you live?
It would be great to continue this discussion in real life – if you ever have the opportunity of attending one of our Expat Thursdays or social events, please let me know
Why is it that when someone is critical it is necessary to know who they are?
Okay. I do not believe that I *have* free speech here as an immigrant-woman. I am often told to shut up, join a sports team, leave the country etc when I give my opinions.
I need to be anonymous because I work for a Danish folkeskole. I teach in English, they get half their lessons in English. Politicians in the Parliament looked into having us *closed down* for being udansk. They found out that it is not illegal to teach children how to be fluent in English and so we continue. I am aware of how precarious a position our school is in and I refuse to stand up, be counted and have my school get into trouble.
My blog attracts hate mail from time to time and I have no interest in those sick people being able to use eniro.dk so they can continue their campaign to shut me up. I am the ONLY person in this whole country with my name. It’s alright for the Lars Larssens and the Anders Andersens to have free speech.
Where I am… I am in the middle of Jutland so it is not practical for me to go to things on Thursday nights out of town. I have subscribed to your emails but nothing is ever local to me.
“The Expat in Denmark network is jointly run by the Danish Ministry of Economics and Business Affairs and a consortium made up of the Danish Chamber of Commerce (Dansk Erhverv), The Copenhagen Post, and the Danish Bankers Association (Finansrådet).”
I would like to understand how an organism jointly run by (among others) the Danish Ministry of Economics and Business Affairs is able to completely ridiculize the head of the party currently supporting the government (DF’s Pia) and call its sugestions “stupid” and “hopeless”. Is it the democracy, the free speech, is it a pamphlet?
@thegoodexpat
Strictly speaking, the blog entry only reflects my own personal opinion. Hence, the entry is by Peter A. Lemmich, not Expat in Denmark as an organisation, consortium, or beneficiary of government funding. Having said that, banning non-Western immigrants is a laughable idea, and it runs counter to any opinion or policy the Danish Chamber of Commerce or Expat in Denmark has ever aired or publicised. Regarding the ridicule, I’m pretty sure Pia has been called worse than “Darth-Pia”. She also knew very well that the suggestion would meet the resistance it did, and that no other party (and very few other politicians) would ever support it in a parliament vote. So yes, I suppose it is democracy and free speech at work.
If you had to choose though, which do you prefer: Free speech or democracy?
Free speech and democracy are two sides of the same coin, if you ask me.
There is no free speech nor democracy. It is but an illusion.
I agree with all of you (or none)
1. According to Peter’s original post, ‘mainstream’ parties responses were ‘Ranging from “not practically possible” to “we can’t afford that”…’ These are technical-bureaucratic responses which do not address the principle of differentiation based on passport. Shall silence be interpreted as assent? If yes, I share skatesection’s fear.
2. I agree with Peter that immigration/expat/asylum policy should be differentiated to an even greater extent than it is. And, to find out what this means in kroner and social capital it is crucial to find out how many of us fit into which category. Look out, everyone, but I think Denmark’s ‘expat policy’ is much too generous for expats–by which I mean people who come here, retain close contact with ‘home,’ and intend to return home ‘sometime.’ Such people are ‘using’ Denmark’s economic and social resources and should pay for the privilege.
3. Concerns expressed by Pia are shared by enough Danes to ‘matter.’ They need to be addressed head-on: (a) foreigners spend too much time with other foreigners; (b) foreigners behave in ways that are offensive to danes (talking loudly, crossing when the light is red); (c) foreigners are not grateful for the gifts given them. Silly though it sounds (to me, at least), these are real concerns. And saying ‘that’s silly’ is not an effective way to convince those who share these concerns to change their own perceptions.
“Concerns expressed by Pia are shared by enough Danes to ‘matter.”
Hi David, just came back from CPH to the USA. While there, I was staying in a big student dorm in Nørrebro, with about 300 folks living there, of all political stripes. Many were medical students, nanotechnologists, engineers, economists – people moving forward with PhDs and even some post-docs. These are the future leaders of Denmark. They do share Pia’s concerns, but for vastly different reasons.
For example, Ø members were concerned at the idea of a parallel society, at why New Danes didn’t/couldn’t integrate and kept social practices like arranged marriages, subordination of women, etc. Altho’ certainly not Islamophobic, they did feel strongly that the cultural issues leading to honor killings, forced marriage, refusing to send female children to school, etc had to be stopped, preferably through intense social work and more incentives to study Danish, but also stronger prosecution of those who harm family members with these anti-feminist practices. They had no problems at all with Brits, Americans, Brazilians as immigrants – if they learned Danish. Their concerns were purely feminist.
In contrast, some folks were Venstre. When I told them I wanted to learn Danish and come to Denmark, to become a citizen, they were openly uncomfortable. They couldn’t understand why an American would live in Denmark. Most of them had already lived in the USA for at least 2 years to get master’s degrees and actually want Denmark to become much more like America – to end the social welfare state, the universal health care. They were mostly economics students and political scientists who believe the “Washington Consensus,” that there should be very few taxes, no regulation.
These folks don’t believe Denmark as we know it is sustainable, and they believe it has to be taken apart so Danes could experience “real freedom.” Until that time, they seemed very unhappy that ANYONE AT ALL should be allowed to come to Denmark unless they started a large company or enterprise, noting that USA law creates special niches for people who come to America with millions of dollars in assets.
They seemed aware of the anti-immigration movement in the USA and the Tea Party both. When I asked them why such an entrepreneur would ever come to Denmark since they could never reap the fruits of capitalism there or even receive retirement, they had no answer.
In the middle were people of other parties, who were gentle in their manner of expressing that they were afraid that they wouldn’t find good jobs if foreigners were allowed to come and take them. It was really that simple; they mostly don’t feel that the country needs highly-skilled foreign workers. They seemed to support some kind of “Turkish guest worker” model, where young males could come for 3 years, wash dishes in a cafe, and then absolutely have to leave.
“Love immigrants” and highly educated workers just weren’t wanted by anyone I spoke to. To them, love immigrants implied uneducated third-world women who met and married vacationing Danes. Most of the young Danes I spoke to reacted negatively to the idea of the “expat.”
If you want to be in Denmark at all, they felt you had to learn Danish and accept certain social norms, altho’ again the hijab wasn’t an issue for them. The idea that you would come to Denmark and call yourself “an expat,” something foreign, something not-Danish, nearly offended them, as if the term was somehow derogatory to Danes, as if by calling yourself an expat you meant you wanted to be separate.
These were all lovely young people, but it’s easy to see how the economic climate has made them anxious, and how they are still naturally searching for a path to their own future and identity.
Have you done a study Peter to learn how Danes feel about the terms used to describe “love immigrants,” “expats,” “foreigners,” “New Danes?” All these terms seemed negative to young Danes across most parties in my brief discussions with them. Maybe we need to change them, to find new ones?
well, if you look from above at all the world, its just a bunch of frogs – it doesn’t matter party, politics etc. it all bullshit. Pia just thinks she is a better frog than others – and how can that be Danish?! U people r all scared, oh those crazy non-western foriegners – we bomb their countries, we suck their resources, who are we then? There is this ‘adorable’ way of living that I call ‘spectators’ – we just watch and eat, but the fact is that we constantly think that we are so much better, well educated – who chooses a pass from birth?! None! The same rules should apply to all Danes living abroad then, western vs non-western. Make tomorrow a poll and ask all the Danish politicians how many of them have really foreign friends – very, very few. Make a poll in the entire contry, I am so sure we will be shocked about the figures.
A very interesting debate. I always find it interesting how right-wing governments go on and on about sustainability in a social context, while at the same time actively encouraging impossible expectations in stock markets of 20% growth per annum. Funny how ones economic viewpoint always fits your ideology, isn’t it? What used to be appealing about the Danish model was common sense socialism, applying democratic socialist ideals where they benefitted society and humanistic capitalism where economic stimulus was required. Over the decades, a balance was achieved, and Denmark prospered better than a country of its size might have been expected to have done. Unfortunately, it was an unstable balance, and what we have seen since 2001 is right-wing politicians cynically pandering to an unpleasant innate xenophobia in some segments of Danish society, exacerbated by 9/11 and changing immigration patterns throughout Europe brought about by EU expansion. As ex-pats in Denmark (disclaimer: I don’t live there now, but did for eight years, and I have family in Denmark, one of whom is himself an American ex-pat) we are perhaps better placed to see the changes with a slightly more jaundiced eye than the indigenous Danes. It does continue to surprise me that Denmark, which for decades punched above its weight due in no small part to those democratic socialist ideals of the 50s and 60s, is now willing to pretty much dismantle a successful model for ideological reasons. As I say, sustainability is pretty much what you want to define it as …
I’m personally not much in favour of national borders. It’s funny how those who define the borders, as with those who write the history books, are inevitably the victors. I guess I just don’t get nationalism …
I’m an American who married a Danish women and I have been here over two years now…
I came across an article today related to this debate entitled “Liberal and wealthy Denmark has xenophobic streak”
http://www.internationalnewsservices.com/articles/1-latest-news/16047-liberal-and-wealthy-denmark-has-xenophobic-streak
Hvor er Peter L? Vi savner hans vittige bemærkninger!
@greensleeves I går var jeg i smilets by og fyre de vittige bemærkninger af, som det fremgår af det nyeste blogindlæg