“Independence” in Icelandic society today means we have no control over anything and none of the aforementioned jerks are accountable to anyone: this is why Bruxelles scares them, plain and simple. We are owned from within, and the irony with which this man stands on his soap box after being replaced at the national newspaper by one of the most deplorable members of team ‘let’s-fuck-Iceland’ would be hilarious were it not so nauseating. And this is the problem; the majority of the population thinks it’s ok that Davíð Oddsson is now controlling a once respected media source largely because he is an ‘Icelander.’ He is one of us, so when he manipulates reality, and history it’s OK, because he does it ‘independently.’
I think Iceland has Stockholm Syndrome.
What we have failed to comprehend or address in this debate is the fact that Iceland never really had independence (I include myself in that equation because, like I said, until recently I was really buying all this anti-Euro rhetoric—yeah, protect the nation!). But Iceland is part of the world and depends on other nations for almost everything, especially the members of the EU, and yet, we are currently democratically barred from having any say in the way in which it runs. I cannot think of anything more subservient. And yet, Iceland is clutching onto this word, “independence,” like a child with the last piece of chocolate cake, although nobody in Bruxelles has demanded we hand it over to the other kids.
As it stands we are living in a fake democracy, with a fake economy and a fake currency. Something needs to change and, recession or no recession, Iceland continues to prove in spectacular fashion, time and again, that—in spite of an overwhelming preference for transparent democracy and self-governance—it is not capable of that change alone.
Related posts:
goupil
1 year ago
If you think that being dependent on unelected commissioners in Bruxelles will be an improvement, please think again.
Case in point: How come that despite European people objection to genetically engineered agricultural products, Mr Barroso insist in making it legal. European parliament has no say in the matter.
EU is anti democratic. (and I can prove it)
Dadi
1 year ago
goupil???
The EU is certainly less “democratic” in the traditional sense than the Iceland which elects its leaders badly and holds meaningless national referendums.
But dependent how? Iceland can not claim be a modern state or uphold its preferred living standard without active international relations?
On Barroso insisting to make genetically engineered agricultural products, I found this within 2 minutes of searching: http://www.france24.com/en/20100303-amflora-genetically-modified-potatoes-europe-debate-france-basf
“The Amflora potatoes, produced by the German chemical powerhouse BASF, are not intended for human consumption. The genetically modified spuds are instead destined for industrial use, including paper production and animal feed.”
“Even as it blessed BASF with its approval, the commission stressed that each member state would need to decide whether or not to plant the new potato.”
But I am sure you can make this sound much worse than it probably is if you insist. To suggest that the special interests of Styrmir Gunnarsson and his friends are more desirable to voters than the EU indicates a lack of understanding of their previous work.
Blubber
1 year ago
Oh the horrors! The EU will make us eat clones! They will march over and force feed us! By tubes if necessary!
The level of the discussion is ridiculous. All fear, no fact. So right about the Stockholm syndrome.