Talk:Stram Kurs

Be careful not to try to normalise or excuse Stram Kurs or Paludan
I am quite baffled over this passage which seems to be defending Stram Kurs and Rasmus Paludan (well, the party is basically a one man show, literally):

''”Many Danes had, since at least the time Danish institutions had been threatened and attacked after Jyllands-Posten printed cartoons of Muhammad in 2005, seen an inevitable clash of ideals between Islam and nominally Lutheran but largely secular ethnic Danes, who are generally fond of many things frowned on by the religion, such as bacon, alcohol, and relaxed sexual attitudes. Paludan himself, though, is an immensely controversial and polarizing figure, having come to prominence through YouTube videos where he coarsely insults Islam, Muslims, and the Qur'an.”''

First, the description of ”Danish institutions” being ”threatened and attacked” during the Cartoon Crisis is vague and misleading, just as the subsequent trotting out of a seemingly monolithic ”Islam” whose ideals apparently inevitably clash with those of ”ethnic Danes” (note the shift from a general religious category to an ethnic one). This sounds like someone is rehashing a somewhat liberal version of Samuel P. Huntington using shifting categories of religion and ethnicity.

There is no discernible threat to “Danish institutions” (however we define them) by some sort of creeping “islamisation” outside of the fantasies of the far right.

Also, RP being ”an immensely controversial and polarizing figure” is quite a sanitised description. He literally wants to strip citizenship from and deport people who, he does not consider “ethnic Danes” (that’s what we usually call ethnic cleansing...), although he waffles a bit about a vague (but clearly small) category of “good Muslims” which might be allowed to stay. He has also distributed leaflets (though he later claimed they were only meant as a joke, a classic tactic among the alt-right) at the annual summit on the state of Danish democracy (Folkemødet) calling for 12 bans on Muslim behaviour which are not only unconstitutional but would create a de fact Apartheid state if carried out:


 * 1) Banning Muslim prayer and the Ramadan
 * 2) Banning the wearing of any clothes traditionally connected with Islam
 * 3) Banning halal food as well as the right to demand pork free meals (sorry, Jews...)
 * 4) Banning the use of any language connected with Islam, i.e. Turkish, Arabic, Urdu, Farsi etc.
 * 5) Barring any Muslim from receiving any kind of education (that’s even harsher than the laws of Nazi Germany)
 * 6) Muslims can only live in particular areas designated by the state and are barred from owning any property or land
 * 7) Banning Muslims from owning, driving or using any motor vehicle, including electrical ones (such as electric bicycles) and bicycles with more than one gear
 * 8) Banning Muslims from gathering two or more at the time in any public space
 * 9) No Muslim may speak to a Dane unless spoken to first
 * 10) Banning Muslims from public parks and all other recreational areas as well as from and from appearing in public squares and using public restrooms
 * 11) Banning Muslims from doing any work requiring 2 years’ education or more and from any work in which they will have to speak to a Daneafter the caartoons.
 * 12) Banning Muslims from shopping at venues frequented by Danes and from seeking to use any amusement venue, such as discos, bars, sports facilities amusement parks and similar facilities.

In short: Please don’t try to normalise Stram Kurs (SK) or Rasmus Paludan (RP) by this sort of veiled “Well, he has a point...” rhetoric. SK and RP are extremists and are viewed as such by the vast majority in Denmark (polls have him at somewhere around 2-3% of the vote in the upcoming general election). ScepticWombat (talk) 06:13, 17 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I cobbled this last edit together fairly hastily and it needs a thorough going over still. Will work on this soon to eliminate "bothsidesism." CogitoNotStirred (via telepathy) (talk) 06:20, 17 May 2019 (UTC)


 * No worries; I realise this article is a work in progress — though I’m a bit (if not unpleasantly) surprised to see someone willing to spend time on SK and RP so quickly after they’ve hit the broader news outlets. ScepticWombat (talk) 07:20, 17 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Certainly, the dust hasn't settled. I watch Scandinavian TV and read newspapers online so I'm maybe a little ahead of the curve as compared to English-only readers, and am happy to act as the canary. To me too this is part of a worrying and larger, ill-informed, knee-jerk populist movement that rejects both rightish neoliberalism and leftish social democracy in favor of often science-denying nationalist cranks and authoritarians (Trump, Bolsonaro, Netanyahu, increased AfD support, etc.) It's important to point out this trend is happening too in the places progressives have developed "crushes" on: Denmark (Stram Kurs), Norway (Selvstendighetspartiet), Canada (Doug Ford and People's Party), etc. CogitoNotStirred (via telepathy) (talk) 13:55, 17 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Actually, I’d be more surprised if such parties completely failed to develop in these countries. It’s hardly surprising that a small segment of the electorate has raving right wing convictions. A recent attempt (although based on a very small sample; note that it’s in Danish) to characterise those who claims to want to vote for Stram Kurs in opinion polls suggested that they:
 * Are predominantly male (three quarters of the self-reported SK voters)
 * Are less likely the ever have been married or live in households with children than the general populace
 * Are less likely to have voted in the last Danish general election in 2015
 * Are generally equally spread between age cohorts, though with a slight over representation of those aged 40-49 and 50-59 and under slightly represented among those above 60
 * Are less likely than the general populace to agree with the statement ”I like to have visitors”
 * Are more likely to accept government surveillance to fight crime and terrorism at the cost of diminished privacy
 * Are more likely to support a Danish exit from the EU
 * Are more supportive of harsher discipline in the schools (half of self reported SK voters as opposed to a quarter of the general electorate)
 * Are more supportive of nuclear energy (Denmark decided not to build nuclear power plants and the issue has been dead since the 1980s)
 * Are more supportive of the decriminalisation of cannabis
 * Are more supportive of a removal of the Danish monarchy
 * Are more likely to consider global population growth to be a problem
 * If this small scale sample presents a somewhat accurate picture of SK’s voters, the trends are quite interesting. Several elements are not surprising; e.g. the strongly gendered (i.e. male) aspects; but others are, at least to me, surprising, especially the cannabis legalisation aspect.
 * PS. I’ve given up on following the Danish general election campaign closely as it simply depresses me (a lot of brazen pandering by far too many political parties that should know better and which suggests that they think that the electorate generally consists of simpletons, as well as choreographed spin, PR and similar empty rituals). ScepticWombat (talk) 07:03, 19 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Lampooning Stram Kurs, one other candidate, Ida Auken who runs for the Social Liberals (Radikale Venstre) launched the slogan “Stram Kus”, which basically means “tight pussy”. Meanwhile, a Turkish chef who has grown up in Denmark (but never applied for citizenship) and made a name for himself in a recent documentary series depicting the travails of his family background (an absent father etc.) and his work in opening restaurants serving traditional Danish pork based food of high quality, also made fun of Stram Kurs. The chef made spoof fotos with himself in the style of Stram Kurs election imagery under the title “Sprød Kurs” (“Crispy Line”, a reference to pork rinds/scratchings/crackling) and the slogan “For flæsk!” (“For pork!”). So, at least Rasmus Paludan and Stram Kurs has not caused Danes to lose their sense of humour. ScepticWombat (talk) 07:18, 19 May 2019 (UTC)


 * So it might be largely the incel vote. The support among cannabis decriminalizers could be tied to Paludan's own work in defending clients who have claimed to use cannabis for medical purposes https://sn.dk/Holbaek/Moffe-sagen-Forsvarsadvokat-kritiserer-politiet/artikel/612430 (in Danish). But conspiracy ideation may already be tied into hallucinogen use http://dopamine.net.au/cannabis-conspiracy-theories/. Will try to work some more on this in the near future. CogitoNotStirred (via telepathy) (talk) 18:29, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Rating
Is it possible to revise the article rating from 0 to 1 (or just remove the rating) due to (1) significant revisions, and (2) the fact that stubs are not even supposed to be rated, as I understand it? CogitoNotStirred (via telepathy) (talk) 16:15, 27 August 2019 (UTC)