Democracy. A form of government now as obvious to the younger generation so that a study that SVT use as a basis for the new program, ”The Dictator”, shows that many young people today could imagine living in a dictatorship. One reason to the result can be a romanticized image of an efficient government that takes responsibility for unpleasant political decisions, leaving the individual alone. Let us for a moment imagine that the betrayed trust of democracy is an effect of elected officials inability to meet the little man, that debating and rhetoric is too high to reach the citizen. Professional politicians are shaped by the environment in which they live, which in turn erodes the political message as word choice and sentence constructed in political meetings widens the gap to the people. This is a problem because our politicians are elected and sitting on their positions on borrowed time. Democracy is based on the idea that the persons elected should represent the little man and for this they need to find the tools to succeed. Sweden Democrats’ successes and SVT’s study are clear effects on their failure. You cannot blame the people’s lack of intelligence or inability, but our politicians need to make an honest self-examination to continue its mission. How should they go about to reduce the gap and rebuild confidence?
SVT has taken its educational responsibilities and created the program ”The Dictator” based on the idea that Sweden’s young people would live under a dictatorship. Eight selected people are to live under a controlling rule they are not aware of. In the experiment, freedom of speech and respect for the individual’s ability are curtailed, a matter of course in a democracy. After a very short time two participants leave the program because they feel too bad. For the six participants that remains the next step is dehumanization. This is done by renaming the youths with numbers, in order to scale of emotions and personality and make the participants more easily controlled.
George Orwell’s novel 1984 is an unpleasant reflection of a totalitarian state where the author wants to portray a possible future scenario where humans are enslaved to the ” party” – a political construction probably inspired by the national Socialist Party in Germany in the 30 ‘s and 40’s . The novel was written in the postwar period, a time when those dark memories in Europe was still fresh in people’s minds. That the memories are now about to fade as the last people living during this time is disappearing makes Mr. Orwell’s novel all the more important. The criticism of the novel has come to focus on a comparison of the author’s other items such as ”Animal Farm” which was satirical, but where 1984 according to a review of the New York Times is not something to laugh about, only to be dismayed. That was exactly what Mr. George Orwell wanted to achieve. Being a social critic does not always mean that your work will be doctored. Sometimes they even have to give rise to unpleasant feelings to force a change in society’s thinking. I also think that Mr. Orwell wrote the novel for mankind to remember.
After the elections in 2014 the Sweden Democrats became Sweden’s third largest party. Never mind that they ”only” got about 12 percent of the vote but the fact that they are now the third largest power factor after the Social democrats and the Conservatives is very serious and something that the Swedish parliament and our established politicians need to take seriously. How can it be that we in the 2000s still vote for parties that in their political agenda blames the country’s problems on a general population group as Muslims? Do we recognize the pattern? Is there anyone who can draw parallels to human history or do we still trivialize the problem, shrug and laugh at it, thinking that we are enlightened?
The Sweden Democrats believe that we should significantly reduce immigration and instead help people in their own countries. Those who propose such a solution, thinking that one thing should exclude the other, should listen to someone who experienced war, someone who knows and can tell stories that get the enlightened Swede to fade. In the war in the former Yugoslavia the former president Slobodan Milosevic, in true dictatorial spirit, wanted to reduce Kosovo’s autonomy. Kosovo Albanians, who enjoyed autonomy since 1969, protested, prompting the Serbs to launch an attack. A person close to me, who along with his brother ran a restaurant in Kosovo during this time, have told me about the horrific moment when the Serbs with their sharp charged Kalashnikovs pulled into the capital and shot at everything that moved. Which Swedish political means would have helped the innocent people in such a situation? Why would Milosevic have listened to Swedish politicians when he wanted to consolidate his own dictatorial power? If we sometime in the future in Sweden would have to endure the same thing, where an oppressive power wants to enslave and control us, should we then not have the opportunity to seek political asylum in a democratic country?
That the party Sweden Democrats put the word democrats as a suffix in their name also is hard to understand when their own political agenda overthrows democracies ideas of equality and equivalence. In the name of democracy, we should like Charlie Chaplin rather shout out: In the seventeenth chapter of Saint Luke it is written: The kingdom of God is within man. Not one man, nor a group of men – but in all men – in you. You the people have the power.
Niklas Liiv 23rd of November.