Inclusive vs Exclusive
I have been bemused by this right-wing left-wing model all summer. Reading the news, following the Canadian miserable political system, following the US election debate, travelling to war-torned countries in the Baltics and the Balkans, and reading various crazy books . I have been trying to make some sense of the big 'why'. I devote quite a bit of time to this, I feel it is hard to go ahead without understanding the underlying issues. By lifting the rocks I often uncovered more questions than answers. I also faced my own limits: lack of education in history, philosophy, psychology, and lack of time. I tried different paths, and almost even convinced myself along the way that right-wing people must simply be dummer. Though Bush' looks and remarks tend to reinforce that case, I cannot run a worldwide IQ test and match it to political aspirations and it probably won't help anyway.

In Denmark, this oh-so-well organised and socialist country, it is easy to take pity for the poor and the hopeless. Chances are, you will meet the same ones often; the Chinese guy who picks up the empty bottles at Nyhavn, the guy without an arm who asks for change in the train, the old man with his big dog and his caddy covered with Danish flags, or the black guy playing piano (yes a real piano). I meet them once a week. In Rome, I felt there were so many I stopped caring and voluntarily turned a blind eye.

Fundamentally, I think this is what makes the difference. Do you prefer to live in an inclusive society or do you agree to live in an exclusive one? Is it okay to turn a blind eye? Is it ok to defend a system simply because we benefit from it? Is it ok to become much richer than others at their own expense? Should we give anything to the poor and the "hopeless"? Or should we
1) let them die in the streets (India?)
2) give them the chance to risk their life for their country in exchange for food and education (US)
3) pay some charities to distribute free food - but still let them die outside in the winter (Canada)
4) give them money and support to make them feel part of society and allow them some human dignity (Denmark)?

Unfortunately, the rich are always sold to the institution that makes them rich. Morality and humanity often disappears with wealth.

After Moore's law, here is Moore's effect. What else is there to say, since even conservatives go out see the movie. Americans seem to be taking it like a "needed cold shower". That can only be good. Even in Denmark Farenheit 9/11 is watched and praised: the critics commented it as "what the mass media has been denying for the last 4 years".

Only two comments for those agreeing with the cause but disagreeing with the means: the first is from Moore. "Every single fact I state in "Fahrenheit 9/11" is the absolute and irrefutable truth. This movie is perhaps the most thoroughly researched and vetted documentary of our time. No fewer than a dozen people, including three teams of lawyers and the venerable one-time fact-checkers from The New Yorker went through this movie with a fine-tooth comb so that we can make this guarantee to you. Do not let anyone say this or that isn't true. If they say that, they are lying. Let them know that the OPINIONS in the film are mine, and anyone certainly has a right to disagree with them. And the questions I pose in the movie, based on these irrefutable facts, are also mine. And I have a right to ask them. And I will continue to ask them until they are answered." (Jul 4 "My first wild week with F9/11")

The second: of course, some would have preferred a more balanced documentary. But who are the real targets of this movie? Not us! Yes it ties up all those doubts we have had from the start, and it even surprises us in its breath and depth. But the real targets are the conservative republicans who have been bombarded by one-sidedness for the last years. Yes, Moore goes right in, drills a hole in their brain and pours the doubt so deep that they won't remain unshaken. That is the objective. It is working in the cities: "In California, effigies of the president are sold in tourist shops, apparently to be burnt on the beach. Bush punchbags are doing brisk trade: "Anyone but Bush" stickers are on cars. Bush-hating has become a national sport." It remains to be seen if "church-going, gun-owning populations of Arkansas and Arizona" will change their "God bless America" sticker. This is why "Mr Kerry knows he must be as conservative as possible to win". (FT Aug 18 - "Bush-hating becomes a way of American life")

Moore, by the way, won the Palme D'Or for his movie at Cannes this year with a 15-min standing ovation. Even Fox News give the movie a good critic: "But, really, in the end, not seeing "F9/11" would be like allowing your First Amendment rights to be abrogated, no matter whether you're a Republican or a Democrat."

So by the way, why is it again that Denmark joined the US in the war? Is the leap to that question so huge?

Why save Christiania? Simply because it is an alternative. A viable and truly free alternative to the other neighbourhoods of Copenhagen where more often than ever it is money that dictates the lives of the people. Christiania is an example - the most successful example to date - of a free society based on tolerance, cultural initiatives, collective ownership and self-management. What does it mean in practice? From a consumerist point of view, it means that people are happy to serve you because they chose to be there for the pleasure, not for the money. They close when they feel like closing, not because it is time to close. This is a subtle, but very beautiful difference.

Copenhagen and Christiania actually complement each other: on one side, the slick, clean, organised, chic design of a bustling european capital and on the other the humble, environmentally-friendly, visionary and artistic Christiania. But to me there is no doubt about which is the most sustainable in the long term..

Last weekend was yet-another high moment in Christiania with the HalfMachine interactive art installations: the "Grey Hall has transformed into a weather machine - objects and dancers are suspended in a giant mobile - robots, video art and live concerts in water and light - a crazy and surreal eco system in the midst of an electronic playground."

It is sad that people who devote their time and energy to arts should be harassed. Let not freedom be about greed, but about creativity.

(do read http://www.forsvarchristiania.dk/index.php?id=38)

In response to "Kjærsgaard urges more foreigners to leave"
It is the role of our public servants and representatives to show direction and leadership for the long term viability of our society. I expect them to be wise and courageous, to show respect for all their citizens and to encourage mutual understanding and appreciation. Pia is only courageous in daring to express her selfish and racist views. More dangerously, she encourages mistrust and hatred. Germans or Serbs were not uneducated or predisposed in any way to commit their respective atrocities in history. They were encouraged into mistrust and hatred by a handful of selfish and racist leaders. As far as I am concerned, Pia is the only burden in Denmark today - and a dangerous one at that.
Yann