In listening to Professor Hedetoft, of the Saxo Institute, we gained a brief overview of Danish history highlighted multiple rationales as to why Denmark has become such a homogeneous society. Professor Hedetoft provided us with an excellent basis to begin examining the political and social structure within Denmark. The lecture pushed us to question whether the political and social structure of Danish society is capable of flexing under the pressure of future cultural diversity within Danish society. In cultivating a uniquely Danish identity, Denmark has placed itself in a precarious position entering into the age of globalization. It is, as of now, unclear whether Denmark has the capacity to shed some of its Danish identity to better integrate numerous cultures into Danish society. The homogeneity of Denmark has not been expressed in terms of overt racism or prejudice; instead, the Danish government has implemented an array of policies that are aimed at sublimating the cultural differences of potential immigrants. It is unclear whether Denmark will have to sacrifice, or reform, its cultural identity in order to maintain its prosperity and position in a world of globalization.
In the afternoon, two new speakers arrived to provide us with more aspects of the overall topic of “Danishness and the characteristics of Danish society”. The first speaker was Tim Knudsen - professor in public administration – whose main theme was the Danish population’s political engagement, which today is very low compared to what it used to be. To give an example only around 4 % of the population in contemporary Denmark are members of political parties, whereas this number was as high as 24% in the 1940’s. Knudsen provided us with three main reasons for this unfortunate development. First of all, the fact that fewer people read the newspaper - due to the rise in mass communication tools such as TV and the Internet - has a negative influence in people’s engagement in politics. Secondly, the political parties in Denmark are no longer directly linked to different social classes in society, which cause less loyalty towards one particular party and more people frequently shift party. Lastly, globalization has caused the population to perceive national politics as being less important. Besides the fall in political engagement, Knudsen points to a new tendency of a more divided civil society between an educated elite informed about politics and a group of less educated people who are not engaged in society at the same level. Knudsen’s suggestion for cultivating more public engagement in politics is the creation of more and smaller local governments so that the political agendas move closer to the population, which is part of the historical Danish political tradition.
After Tim Knudsen, Johan Malki Jepsen followed, who is a research associate at the Department of political science at the University of Paris VIII. His topic of debate evolved around the general view of Denmark from the European Union and visa versa. Summing up his speech, an evolution has happened with regards to the outside image of Danish society since the 1990’s, which can be characterized as a notion of nationalism and euro-skepticism. This image was established for the first time as a result of the referendum on the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, where Denmark chose to opt-out on four central issues of the treaty. Since then, the Danish society has been an object for fascination but also criticism from the rest of Europe.
-Najhee and Trine
No comments:
Post a Comment