Reykjavík Grapevine - 12.08.2011, Blaðsíða 14

Mountaineers of Iceland • Skútuvogur 12E • 104 Reykjavík • Iceland
Telephone: +354 580 9900 Ice@mountaineers.is • www.mountaineers.is • www. activity.is
SUPER JEEP & SNOWMOBILE TOURS
14
The Reykjavík Grapevine
Issue 12 — 2011
‘The Pots and Pans Revolution’ of
2008 and 2009, which happened
during the aftermath of the total
failure and collapse of the financial
sector, had two distinct demands;
firstly, the resignation of the right-
wing government and a call for
general elections; and secondly,
for a new constitution made by the
general public in a ‘Constitutional
Assembly.’ Both demands were met.
BRIGHT AND SHINY?
As demonstrations rage in Spain,
Greece and other European countries
that are struggling with the financial cri-
sis, many look to Iceland for inspiration.
The Icelandic flag is seen at demonstra-
tions against the protection of banks all
around Europe. And with some good
reasons. Two and a half years after the
greatest financial disaster in the his-
tory of Iceland the economy is suppos-
edly on the up, and the probabilities of
Iceland defaulting are all but gone. The
Constitutional Committee has finished
its draft for a new constitution. And the
general public got to vote, two times,
on whether the Icelandic public should
pay for the enormous losses of private
banks. And said no on both occasions!
For those living in countries where huge
amounts of money have been spent on
bailing out banks that are once again
paying out ridiculous bonuses, and
where governments are cutting down
welfare systems; in countries where the
general public has not been allowed to
participate in the decisions made, cir-
cumstances in Iceland surely look bright
and shiny.
And once again Icelanders hear and
see in the media glowing reports from
abroad about the progress made in
Iceland, both economically and demo-
cratically. But this time, contrary to the
news of the financial masterstrokes of
2007, the response of many Icelanders
is that someone should go and tell these
foreigners the truth: That ‘The Pots and
Pans Revolution’ was a failure and that
things are not as bright and shiny as
they seem to be.
MAKING WAVES
In late 2009 and the beginning of 2010, it
became clear to many that the new left-
wing government was not going to make
effective democratic changes to the po-
litical system nor to the economic sys-
tem. The new government, lead by harsh
opponents of the IMF in the past (most
notably in the months before taking of-
fice), worked closely with the IMF and
other international protectors of global
capitalism. The welfare system was
protected, with some exceptions, but
almost no steps were made to use the
privatised profit of the financial boom to
pay for the nationalised debt of the fi-
nancial crisis. Little seemed to change
as the leaders of the political parties
made decisions without involving others
in serious discussion or debate.
In late 2010, I took part in founding
the Democratic Alliance Alda (www.
alda.is). Our objective is to fight for a
sustainable society with a truly demo-
cratic economy and political system.
Those who formed the alliance saw
that those in power were not taking the
necessary steps to democratise Iceland
and reach sustainability. The Alliance
looks for real examples of successful
and documented instances of democ-
ratisation and incorporates them into its
policy. Amongst those examples are the
participatory budgeting of Porto Alegre,
the Co-operative enterprise of Mon-
dragón—Spain’s seventh largest enter-
prise—and the Randomly Selected Citi-
zen Assembly of British Columbia. Many
more success stories are to be found all
over the world, and the Constitutional
Committee of Iceland might become
one of them, despite its shortcomings.
Alda sets itself apart from other organ-
ised political groups in Iceland in that it
calls for core systemic changes rather
than adjustments to the current repre-
sentative democracy, where the eco-
nomic sector is exempt from the rules
of democracy. Power should be diffused
and decisions made by the general pub-
lic more often and using different pro-
cesses—both in the political arena and
the economic sector.
NEW AND OPEN POLITICS?
Alda sent Iceland’s parliament ideas
for democratisation but has yet to even
receive a reply—a clear example of the
work to be done. Parliament committee
meetings are closed to the public and
they do not hold transcripts, let alone
publish them publicly. So much for the
new and open politics of the left-wing
government. The same is true of the
Constitutional Committee, which also
decided to have its committee meetings,
where the deep discussion took place,
closed to the general public. Although
the Committee welcomed ideas and
feedback from the public, those who
submitted to it could not count on re-
ceiving a formal response, what argu-
ments were laid against it or any other
information. Some have described the
Committee’s work as a crowd-sourcing
process, which is a rather generous way
of describing its process. Only the for-
mal voting sessions were open and the
Committee mostly used a thick report,
written by a committee appointed by
the political parties, with a selection of
constitutional amendments. Alda thinks
that it is a basic democratic right that the
public can observe the dealings and dis-
cussions of its own representatives and
that when changing the constitution the
process should be more open and di-
verse, with sufficient time and resourc-
es made available. It should be more
crowd-sourcing and less of a replica of
the representative system in place.
The general poll on Icesave was
objected to by the political leaders,
those elected in general elections af-
ter a unprecedented public revolution
in Iceland—with a call for a deeper de-
mocracy. And the argument against a
popular vote: The wait for a result and
a result contrary to the one reached by
those in power would be too costly for
the economy. What it showed was that
the left-wing government placed direct
democracy second behind their own
rule and the economy—pressure from
global capitalism.
CAN WE TRUST THE PUBLIC WITH
IMPORTANT MATTERS?
The Constitutional Committee has sug-
gested that a certain percentage of vot-
ers can call for a general poll but not on
financial issues. General polls like the
one on Icesave will become impossible if
the amendment is passed. One gets the
feeling that decisions on financial issues
should only be made by politicians and
most preferably right-wing politicians.
At least, these matters should not be left
to the public, which is not to be trusted
in such important matters! The Consti-
tutional Committee is not supposed to
discuss or come up with amendments
pertaining to the economic system—yet
the reason for making a new constitu-
tion was the failure of the political AND
economic system. The political and eco-
nomic system seems to be reproducing
itself with some changes but few that
diffuse power, redistribute resources or
seriously jeopardise the power relations.
What other nations can learn from
Iceland is to protect their welfare sys-
tem, even if that is expensive; that the
general public should be allowed to
make decisions on financial matters
through general polls; and that a popu-
lar constitutional assembly is more than
capable of making a new constitution.
What others should be aware of is that
power relations are not easily broken
or changed by simply electing new po-
litical parties; that popular assemblies
need to be in deep connection and
discussion with the general public or
face the danger of being isolated and
inadvertently controlled by the political
system; that global capitalism is a force
to be reckoned with which left-wing po-
litical parties do not have the resources
or ideology to fully test—even when the
cracks are obvious to all; and, finally,
that although revolutions can bring
about change the end result might be
the same and therefore it is necessary
to make clear demands, both ideological
and practical, for changing the corrupt
system of power that we call democracy
today.
“What other nations can learn from Iceland is to protect
their welfare system, even if that is expensive”
Pots and pans | Shiny?
A Success Story?
Post-Financial Crisis Iceland
KRISTINN MÁR ÁRSæLSSON
HöRðUR SVEINSSON
Kristinn Már Ársælsson is a philosopher and sociologist, and
co-founder of the Alda Democracy Alliance.
The idea of a United Europe
is not new, but if you brush
up on your history knowl-
edge you will soon remember
that there have been many different
ideas about how to unite the continent.
The newest and the most successful
idea is the European Union.
Europe has a history of violence, in-
stability and bloody wars. After World
War II, people started to think about
how to do things differently, how to
avoid another World War and keep a
peaceful Europe. In order to secure
lasting peace six countries—Belgium,
France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Neth-
erlands and West-Germany—begun to
unite European countries economically
and politically. This was the birth of the
European Union that is celebrated ev-
ery year now on May 9, in 27 countries,
by millions of European citizens.
Ever since the start of the European
integration project, it has been growing
rapidly and changing greatly. Today the
European Union covers a large part of
Europe and is involved in most aspects
of world matters. It has its own single
market, its own currency, the Euro, and
it is the world’s biggest trading power.
It includes a European Central Bank,
European Parliament and the Court of
Justice of the European Union. It has
a wide range of different policies, all
from a common agricultural policy to
a common foreign policy.
But is that all that the European
Union stands for? What does the slogan
“United in diversity” really stand for?
And why am I convinced that Iceland
should become the next member state
of the European Union?
The answer to the first question is a
big no. The European Union is not just
some gigantic institutional entity that
does a lot of business; it stands for so
much more. Example: Through the in-
ner market of the European Union we
have the four freedoms which means
the free movement of people, money,
goods and services, which means for
the normal citizen of the European
Union that he or she can live, work or
study in any other member country
without a problem. Sounds good right?
That same citizen holds a citizenship
of the European Union, which comes
with rights such as that every citizen
of the Union, regardless of nationality,
has the right to vote and to stand as a
candidate in local elections in his or her
country of residence and in elections to
the European Parliament.
The slogan of the European Union
is ‘United in diversity.’ As you can
imagine, the 27 member states are not
all the same, some are bigger than oth-
ers, some have over 80 million citizens
while others have less than 500.000
citizens.
Opinion | Sema Erla Serdar
The New Idea Of Europe:
United In Diversity
Continues on page 40