The Symbol of Cooperative Individualism--"Alliansen"?

Fredrik Reinfeldt, the prime minister of Sweden, yesterday in his Summer Speech thanked Maud Olofsson, the retiring Party Leader of the Swedish Center Party, because the Swedish right of center Political Alliance would not have come into existence without her. Apart from he skill as a minister she then must have projected a cohesive function and it would be interesting if it is this talent Hilary Clinton, the US State Department Secretary, is tapping now by consulting Olofsson.

If Olofssons largest talent is as a cohesive force for keeping four individualist parties together in an alliance, the current search for a new party leader in the Center Party would have to balance the need for cohesion and a profile that keeps that party above the 4% barrier for membership in the Riksdag, the Center Party just polled 4,3%. The unusually open search for a new party leader in the Center Party is of course highly dependent on the latter and Reinfeldt yesterday was careful with inviting the new leader to the "Alliansen".

It is of great importance that this coalition is maintained for the wellbeing of Sweden and as Reinfeldt pointed out in his speech the left of center coalition that challenged him last year does not exist anymore. All leaders will be exchanged shortly when also the Left Party is electing a new leader and furthermore they don't have a common project. We were lucky that the Swedish people called their empty hand.

A Greek Tragedy?

The Greek Tragedy That Changed Europe - WSJ.com: "Modern-day Greece may be just and wise, but it certainly has not had an ordered life. As a result, the great opportunity and wealth bestowed by European integration has been largely squandered. And lower interest rates over the past decade—brought down to German levels through Greece being allowed, rather generously, into the euro zone—led to little more than further deficits and a dangerous buildup of government debt."

Jan Björklund was interviewed by Tomas Ramberg yesterday in the program "Lördagsintervjun" and the first question he got was about the crisis with Greece in the Eurozone. His wavering answer made me wonder about the position (FP) has about the Swedish prospective membership in the EMU.

The article above is indicating that Greece and some other countries not really would have been candidates for the EMU and that we are looking at a situation where countries even might start to leave the Eurozone with for them dire consequences. The membership, they argue, gave Greece a too god credit score and let them borrow too much. The EMU, in other words, was bad for Greece and perhaps also for some other countries like Portugal, Spain, Ireland, and Italy.

The article seems to paint a very gloom picture for the future of Europe and a potential break-up of the Union in a well off and a less well off region. If I understand this correctly Sweden and Norway would be in the well off area and thus perhaps benefit from membership mostly based on political integrational reasons. Another question to Jan Björklund would then be whether or not such political arguments still exist? Olle Schmidt says that the crisis in these countries is not the failure of individual states but of the monetary union. Schmidt also says that Sweden looses political influence staying outside something Anders Borg also said recently. Per Altenberg is another EMU-positive blogger.

However, Lars Calmfors (DN 15/1) discussed the matter and concluded that the only reason for joining the Euro would be a greater say in the political integration of the EU which is argued against in Tony Johansson's and Jonas Ljungberg's article. They claim the unified interest caused economical differences in the economy that prevents political integration. In my humble opinion then if other countries in the EU would pitch in, the question of political influence attached would arise.

There are, however, break-up tendencies for Europe as such that would argue for staying out of the EMU and that has fuelled a discussion about a Nordic Union. The Visegrad countries, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Poland tend to join forces now and then. We also have Great Britain that is fairly independent and where strong EU sceptical forces loom. Especially so if the Tories will win this years election which is probable. We have France with its recent discussion about its identity and its almost 50% subscription to the idea that capitalism is dead which makes it unique. It has also flirted with the so called Club Med formation around the Mediterranean. Germany is focused rather to the east and wants to develop Russia.

With recent developments it seems prudent to stay outside the EMU with Norway and Great Britain and await the possible recovery of the ailing states? For the non-economically knowledgeable person the political arguments for joining EMU seem to vanish by the day.

Up to a point?

There is a lot written by now about Greece and the other black sheep of Europe Portugal, Spain, Ireland and perhaps Italy. What is interesting is why these countries accumulate so much debt that they risk to fail? Is the reality that they can't live the same as their more affluent countries in the EU but have done this anyhow? This should not be a big problem. Greece only has 2% of the EU GDP.

We then seem to have reached the point where populations of countries are taken care of but countries in the EU are not taken care of by more affluent countries. In my humble opinion this would mean that EU has failed to become united and that states are going to start a process of secession. Most probably without a civil war to follow. There is simply no Abe Lincoln around. That people talk about an expansion of the EU under these circumstances is not understandable other than from individual countries perspective.

As a layman of economics I must ask myself is these potential failures are caused by the monetary union or would have occurred anyhow? Are we living in an impossible world? Neither Union neither Member Countries. A half way house. Charlemagne of The Economist trashed and demoted Lady Ashton to a Low Representative and it is questionable if she ever rises again.

Now, this breaking point occurs as the US is silently distancing itself from Europe. Another thought comes to mind. The European project was possible due to the protection afforded by the US and NATO? It gave the European states an air of supranationality.

Now the French cadets ask questions in French after the speech of Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State! The FAQ page on the web for the EU does not include the US as a factor giving peace to Europe after World War II! I guess the next point in the development is when it would have been the Red Army that liberated Europe--and kept it free.

Carl Bildt made changes in the number of embassies that Sweden has and closed many in the EU. Are we talking about foreign policy between member states or is it internal affairs? More and more people are silent in blogs on international affairs and intra-European news are rare in the newspapers and other media. If it wasn't for the Anglo-American press and internet we would be quite in the dark. Free news and opinions on the internet is apparently slowly closing down as a further step in the world localization process. I hope it will not be a "fatal mistake" to not keep the US as a leader.

I read today about a new book Jämlikhetsanden, or The Spirit of Equality in DN. Someone apparently is trying to provide proof that equality makes us healthier. Magnus Andersson, the CUF leader, wrote on his blog that the Left Party in Göteborg is trying to make it illegal to earn more than four times another person in the commune. I guess we simply are not interested in Microsofts and Googles in Sweden.

So what are we interested in? Hearing the views of Kurds in Uppsala on Studio Ett, a radio program, that were against erecting a statue of Fadime that was shot by her father, an honor killing, it occurred to me that what we fail to do here in Sweden is to make people leave such ideas behind and move into the future. There has then to be a future to speak about. Being known for your welfare system is not to be preferred compared to being known for your Microsofts and Googles and the internet. Not to mention Wikipedia. That would inspire people to become Europeans. A viable society must tolerate exceptional people. It will never work with a stipulated course in Swedish values.

So when the political election debate focus on the part of the population with problems, no job, bad health and not the healthy 90% it is bound to become quite uninspiring.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

It has been a very interesting year indeed. Looking ahead it was good to hear a relaxed and self confident Fredrik Reinfeldt today in his Christmas Speech. There is no doubt in my mind that he today, with his experience and personal popularity, is the best candidate to lead Sweden during the next period.

I'm confident that the tide will turn in the favour of the Alliansen. I earlier thought that a positive outcome of the COP15 deal could boost the Red-Greens but it does not seem to materialize in this fashion. Reinfeldt had a horror story from the COP15 meeting of a Green party member that thought that the world should follow the scientists and that democracy was not important. There is a lack of realism in such proposals and this should translate to caution in our own election.

(FP)'s "landsmöte"

Per Altenberg – ett liberalare Sverige » Blog Archive » Fp tar ett steg till höger: "De flesta besluten på landsmötet som betecknas som höger, t.ex. moderniseringen av LAS, är dock i själva verket ett tecken på att Folkpartiet frigör sig från den socialdemokratiska världsbilden. Det är en bra utveckling."

There was one of Björklund's reforms that seem to be a step in the direction of the Social Democrats namely the job loss protection insurance. In Jan Björklund's speech there was no information as to the level of support that a person would receive. Helle Klein is hitting real hard because of the reforms taken by Alliansen on the loss of "A-kassa" coverage that is happening right now. Klein is bordering rude when she complains on this matter. I guess this is tactics to prevent loss of social liberals to (FP) from the social democrats.

The question is on what level it is economically reasonable to keep people after they lose a job or get sick. It is perhaps more stimulating for the reemployment to have lower compensation levels than that of the A-kassa. People will muster a higher degree of motivation to return to the job market? After all the system seems to be in trouble since we have the highest taxes in the world and still have to lower tax for creating jobs. Is it possible to lower taxes by saving on the job loss reimbursements? In this case it might help in creating more jobs and thus lower the time in orbit.

Lowering job loss reimbursements would also cause a blending of the people in the outsideship. It would not only contain the most desolute. This might have stimulating effects one job creation as well. There might also be less problems with violence in suburbs.

Birger Schlaug writes about our society as driving on the freeway in either the right or the left lane with the green so called "utvecklingssamhälle" in the bushes beside the road. There might be people that prefer using the machete to clear their way in the bush but I prefer my car on the freeway. A new outsideship according to the above might suffice for such a detour and they would not need so much money.

However, such a life will not lead to the goals provided by the life on the freeway. Most people would in all probability not fit into Schlaug's new way but would rather work than having free time, digest culture and spending time with their families which is all fine at a reasonable dose.

The People Representing the Reality?

I'm reading the article by Göran Hägglund on DN Debatt. I'm thinking about how the Alliansen is going to get their required votes to regain command in one year. KD is not an entryport for Red-Greens as Hägglund is pointing out. Nya Moderaterna can pick a few and have recently tried. So can Folkpartiet. Thus KD has to take back votes from M if Alliansen is to succeed.

Well, the people Hägglund talks about are probably voters in M because he talkes about the silent majority like Nixon. And if this crowd exists today it is in the largest party. So why is Hägglund trying to make Social Democrats enter M and FP rather than bringing back M defectants?

I think it might be because they don't want to discuss the issue of modern Swedish family structure. I could not help laughing when I read about Anna Anka on aftonbladet.se. It is of course a caricature of the KD core family. A paradigm that currently is quite alien in Sweden. The right wing parties are rather modeled on the Reinfeldt family. Two professional individuals that are "levnadskamrater". The family values that KD stands for are probably getting rarer by the year and clearly alienates the Red-Green block.

Is it possible then for KD to regain lost M votes? M has supposedly left a vacuum to the right of its position. Or so they say. I'm afraid that it is indeed a vacuum and cannot be filled again even if Roland Poirier Martinson says so. There are very few Swedish American Republicans in this cradle-to-the-grave country.