Crush the Christian Democratic Party

Here you have it folks on black and white: people in general don’t want the Christian Democratic Party to exist and most Swedes feel an awkwardness towards their discriminating policies. 7 out of 10 Swedes support a change in the law so it will be possible for gay people to get married. The spokesman for the party, Annelie Enochsson, states in SvD that it wrong because that it is also wrong for people to marry more than 1 person. Duh, that is the next step. Marriages ought to be non-binding when it comes to gender and number. Hopefully, CDP (sw) will fall out of the Diet next election 2010.

Even a 7-year old understands that it is wrong and immoral for grown-up person to tell another grown-up what he/she can and can’t do. We should try to go as far as possible with that principle …


About tegis

This blog belongs to Carl-Mikael A. Teglund - tegis. Swedish emigrant with a heart for languages, philosophy, history, and politics (classical liberalism in the European tradition). Go ahead and look, read, or listen. I'm sure you will find it interesting.
This entry was posted in Scandinavia. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Crush the Christian Democratic Party

  1. Giulia Guidi says:

    “Here you have it folks on black and white: people in general don’t want the Christian Democratic Party to exist”

    Nowhere does the article in question state such a thing, neither in black and white, nor in any other colour!

  2. tegis says:

    The CDP has compromised way to much with their party’s soul as it is (the gasoline tax, abortion etc.). This is their last stand. If they have to let go on this, the more traditional voters will revolt and the party will split. If they don’t, then the Alliance will split and the Socialists are able to form a new Government. The outcome will in either way be that the CDP party will face such severe problems that will evidentially lead to that the party will get less than 4 % on the polls 2010 and fall out of the Diet (and probably be replaced by the Swedish Democrats).

  3. Giulia Guidi says:

    What an interesting analysis: Thank you! 🙂

    “If they don’t, then the Alliance will split”

    It is very hard for me, as a foreigner, to picture the actual extent of this issue, its deep “strategic” significance, and its real impact on Swedish politics.

    Personally I have always had a tendency to consider “objective” issues such as broad (macro)economic policies, budgetary decisions, welfare reform, perhaps nowadays immigration laws, and so forth as “core” issues on which a disagreeing government coalition might, in extreme cases, split.

    Conversely, I tend to consider “subjective,” ethically charged and highly controversial topics such as, for example, abortion and gay rights, civil unions (in Italy), gay adoptions, genetic engineering and stem-cell research, to be somewhat of a tangle, or (rightfully or wrongly) lesser “side issues” on which each single party and each individual politician and voter is normally allowed a somewhat wider margin of discretion.

    For example, within Forza Italia, the liberal-conservative political party to which I belong, it is possible to find high-profile politicians from a very broad spectrum of ethical positions and persuasions, from libertarian “Radicali” sympathizers to very traditionalistic former Christian democrats. And this only within one party: The “House of Freedoms” coalition is in turn even more strikingly diverse!

    The same goes for the GOP.

    But maybe the Alliance for Sweden (a brilliant political experiment of which I am a huge supporter and admirer) is a much more homogeneous coalition; one not as willing to tolerate a plurality of ethical and moral positions within its ranks.

    What puzzles me is, on the one hand, the quest for ideological purity that seems to have taken over the Moderate Party and, on the other hand, the masochistically (suicidally?) great lengths at which some Christian democrats seem to be willing to go in order to affirm their morally conservative agenda, to the point of questioning, openly denigrating, harshly criticizing and ultimtely, damaging and weakening, the very same Alliance (with, at its core, the Moderate Party and Prime Minister Reinfeldt) that has enabled the center-right, to which they still belong, to win the elections.

    So, what ultimately amazes me is the depth and the virulence of the conflict between moral conservatives and libertarians in Sweden, a conflict that most people seem to be able to somehow overlook elsewhere (including here in the U.S., where, when everything is said and done, what really matters are always the “core issues” I listed above.)

    But, then again, I am well aware of your negative, or at least highly skeptical, stance regarding a possible liberal-conservative compromise (with the conservative component labeled as “evil”! 😉 hehe, just kidding), so maybe I can at least partly understand the roots of the New Moderate “liberal purism.” 🙂

    This was, however, merely a foreigner’s humble, ignorant and superficial first impression! That said, if I were Swedish I would probably vote for the Moderate Party, but with a humble wish for more elasticity of views.

  4. Giulia Guidi says:

    PS: Sorry about that split infinitive! 😉

  5. tegis says:

    I hope you are right on your analysis about the “core” questions. I wish it could be like that but sadly I don’t think that is the case. The socialist opposition has traditionally been put into 4 different groups (of which have been dealing with 4 different main subjects). 1 group = Moderaterna, has been dealing with tax cuts and the economy, 2 group Folkpartiet, has been dealing with school policies and foreign policy, 3 group Centerpartiet has been dealing with the farmers, the rural areas and our nature, and 4th and last, Kristdemokraterna who have been devoted to “soft” questions such as family values, elderly care and Christian values.
    So they each have their individual “core” and I think this is very much the foundation onto each non-Socialist party in Sweden is standing. And they are very hard to move or change. This is more or less the only solution the non-Socialist parties have because otherwise they will steal voters from each other and vice versa and the Socialists will win. This has been the case before and has been called the “non-Socialist’ misfortune” (den borgerliga olyckan). Each party controls their share of the voters.
    The traditional voters for the Party that dares to oppose this order will react (and probably riot).

    What puzzles ME is that you’re Italian and that you at least read and write Swedish on a very high level plus seem to be fluent in English. 🙂 What an eyeopener for me that you shouldn’t doom a whole collective of people.
    It gives me hope for a future European consensus to see that not everyone from the Mediterranean are incapable of making themselves understandable in other languages than their own. 😉

  6. Giulia Guidi says:

    Thank you: Your reply was actually very interesting and instructive!

    “Each party controls their share of the voters.”

    Has anyone suggested the foundation of a unified liberal-conservative party in Sweden? Maybe the Alliance is a first step in that direction! Do you think it could be a good idea?

    “It gives me hope for a future European consensus to see that not everyone from the Mediterranean are incapable of making themselves understandable in other languages than their own.”

    Traditionally, the second language taught in most Italian schools was French, not English. I, too, did not learn any English before reaching the “tender” age of 15. Now, luckily, things have changed and, between the introduction of English as a second language and the spread of satellite television, the Internet, and low-cost airlines such as Ryanair, more and more Italians are learning to speak English at a decent level.

    It should also be noted, however, than many foreigners’ perception (stereotype?) of “the average Italian” is based on the wave of largely indigent and mostly illiterate (southern) Italian immigrants that flooded Europe during the 60’s and 70’s.

    Some of our politicians, however, are not exactly helping our national linguistic reputation! 🙂

    This funny video is actually a “serious,” government-funded infomercial meant to promote Italy as a tourist destination. The speaker, Francesco Rutelli, was at the time (no less than) the Minister of Culture and Tourism in the cabinet of Prime Minister Romano Prodi! 😉

  7. matthew pilmoor says:

    i think that gay people should be aloud to get married because at the3 end of the day we are all the same arnt we!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! #

    also i wont to get married and im 15 and im also gay what is wrong with the fact of 2 men and 2 lasses gettin it married #!!!!!!!!

  8. tegis says:

    hehe, yea of course? why shouldn’t they? But we ought to consider if 15 year olds are mature enough to handle their own freedom and decide life changing decisions, e.g. to get married.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s