Sounds reasonable on the surface. Might end up as our own Guantanamo or CECOT
“åpne for” means “consider”, not “open for” as in e.g. “open up so as to facilitate”.
Awful. The only point of this idea is to allow Norwegian authorities to treat asylum seekers in a way that would break the Norwegian law in a jurisdiction where the Norwegian law does not apply.
As a Norwegian i think this is a good idea. We cant help everyone
It’s a way to address a fictional problem with an unworkable, inhuman solution.
And people will believe, until the end of time, that it is going to win Frp a majority in Oslo. Unless the other parties adopt it as a position and take the “credit”.
This belief has been pushing this concept in many countries in Europe for years and years now. And it’s what has pushed it into the “discussion” in formal fora. In much the same way as destroying labour laws was “considered” because too good labour laws would make the businesses sad. And how we practically speaking turned our heads against the refugee convention and the UN. Or in the way we have been orienting our entire election around a marginal question about incredibly narrow top rate taxes. Or in the way we have been going with making cutting in healthcare and welfare a requirement, etc.
It’s pushed into a “discussion”, an “opening” is created in the law. And although no one dares to vote in favour of the legal changes openly, or to argue for the changes in the law that it would require to enact the suggestions – because you cannot defend it with a rational argument without laying bare the sheer humanity-hostile ridiculousness of your position that way — one will instead refuse to oppose regulation changes adopted by the government, at least officially in parliament, on the basis that it will lose you an election and usher in a majority Frp government if they do.
In short: political elites genuinely believe that we need to make into law an irrational suggestion from unhinged special interests, on the basis that unless we do it ourselves the opposition is going to win the next election. And they will believe so until the end of time, even as they are crushed in the general elections because they are betraying their own constituents by adopting politics that no one rational can defend. Both of the support parties in the conservative coalition split down the middle over the support of this. Many analysts and commentators who argued at the time that we should domesticate the opposition by inviting them into government – have since reneged their belief, specifically on the basis that pushing in the usual nazi slop into government, and into law, in the name of stopping it — doesn’t work.
Funny how that works out.
But the belief will still persist.
What do I think of this suggestion? It is shameful. The only time I’d “consider” throwing immigrants out of the country with retroactive regulations – would be if they thought this is a good idea, and use their status as immigrants themselves to make it seem less like the anti-humanitarian bullshit it is.
5 comments
Sounds reasonable on the surface. Might end up as our own Guantanamo or CECOT
“åpne for” means “consider”, not “open for” as in e.g. “open up so as to facilitate”.
Awful. The only point of this idea is to allow Norwegian authorities to treat asylum seekers in a way that would break the Norwegian law in a jurisdiction where the Norwegian law does not apply.
As a Norwegian i think this is a good idea. We cant help everyone
It’s a way to address a fictional problem with an unworkable, inhuman solution.
And people will believe, until the end of time, that it is going to win Frp a majority in Oslo. Unless the other parties adopt it as a position and take the “credit”.
This belief has been pushing this concept in many countries in Europe for years and years now. And it’s what has pushed it into the “discussion” in formal fora. In much the same way as destroying labour laws was “considered” because too good labour laws would make the businesses sad. And how we practically speaking turned our heads against the refugee convention and the UN. Or in the way we have been orienting our entire election around a marginal question about incredibly narrow top rate taxes. Or in the way we have been going with making cutting in healthcare and welfare a requirement, etc.
It’s pushed into a “discussion”, an “opening” is created in the law. And although no one dares to vote in favour of the legal changes openly, or to argue for the changes in the law that it would require to enact the suggestions – because you cannot defend it with a rational argument without laying bare the sheer humanity-hostile ridiculousness of your position that way — one will instead refuse to oppose regulation changes adopted by the government, at least officially in parliament, on the basis that it will lose you an election and usher in a majority Frp government if they do.
In short: political elites genuinely believe that we need to make into law an irrational suggestion from unhinged special interests, on the basis that unless we do it ourselves the opposition is going to win the next election. And they will believe so until the end of time, even as they are crushed in the general elections because they are betraying their own constituents by adopting politics that no one rational can defend. Both of the support parties in the conservative coalition split down the middle over the support of this. Many analysts and commentators who argued at the time that we should domesticate the opposition by inviting them into government – have since reneged their belief, specifically on the basis that pushing in the usual nazi slop into government, and into law, in the name of stopping it — doesn’t work.
Funny how that works out.
But the belief will still persist.
What do I think of this suggestion? It is shameful. The only time I’d “consider” throwing immigrants out of the country with retroactive regulations – would be if they thought this is a good idea, and use their status as immigrants themselves to make it seem less like the anti-humanitarian bullshit it is.
Comments are closed.