Interruption over…

It’s been quite a while since my last post now. Out in the real world, I’ve had a few complaints about the less “political” turn my blog has taken since the election, as well as about not having written anything at all since Christmas. Well, I’m going to try and get back into the habit of posting and will be aiming for a mixture of “serious” and less “serious” posts. To add to becoming party secretary, I’m also now a replacement member for Kalle Fogelström in “stadstyrelse”, the town council’s executive body. That means I’ll be getting deeper into town politics, so I shall hopefully find plenty to write about there. Something which is both “current” on the agenda and which I’m personally very interested in is the fate of Bio Savoy, the town’s recently-demised cinema.

For now, I’ll just update the blog with my sporting progress. In my first session back after Christmas, I thought I’d take it easy and drop back to a 70kg squat (down from 80kg after nearly three weeks without lifting anything). Thank God I did, because I was aching for a full week afterwards. I’ve now got back up to a couple of sets at 75kg without killing myself. The basketball is also getting a bit more serious now, and I am aiming to be playing twice a week.

The Voting Machine

Even though I can’t vote, I thought it might be interesting to see whose answers are near/ nowhere near mine. My results from the voting machine. Unsurprisingly, Fredrik and I are not in full agreement.

Nedan finner du två listor med kandidater; en vars svar är närmast dina samt en vars svar är längst från dina.
Klicka på en kandidats namn för att jämföra dina enkätsvar med kandidatens.

Följande fem kandidater är de vars svar är MEST lika dina:
Namn Parti Överensstämmelse
Karlsson Peter Socialdemokraterna 92%
Ahlbeck Hillevi Socialdemokraterna 90%
Nyberg Kjell Socialdemokraterna 88%
Aaltonen Carina Socialdemokraterna 88%
Beijar Christian Socialdemokraterna 88%

Följande fem kandidater är de vars svar är MINST lika dina:
Namn Parti Överensstämmelse
Karlsson Kristian Ålands Framtid 52%
Blomberg Tom Centern 50%
Lindholm Gun-Mari Obunden Samling 50%
Karlström Fredrik ”Frille” Obunden Samling 48%
Gustafsson Fredrik Liberalerna 47%

Multi-tasking

Some people are multi-taskers and some are better at concentrating on one thing at a time. I fall firmly into the later category, but at the moment I’m getting a crash course in the later as the elections approach. My head was literally buzzing today with all the various things I was meant to be keeping track of. I’m somewhat of a perfectionist, so I like to do things well, and that, obviously, becomes harder as you have more things to do.

Politics is designed for multi-taskers. Frankly, my mind boggles at how those at the top of the political food chain manage it. I guess the key is compatmentalisation and the ability to prioritize well. Hopefully, I will develop them with practice!

Damn Your Principles! Stick to your Party!

My dissertation, for those who don’t know, is about party cohesion in the Lagting. Among other things, I’ve been looking at budget roll call votes to get an idea of how cohesive the parties are. The other day there was a leader in Nyan by Nina Fellman saying that Anders Englund, Centre, as good as never votes with his party. Obviously this was newspaper speak, a bit over the top, but it’s true that he votes against his party more than any other member of the Lagting. However, he still voted with his party over 60 % of the time in the roll call votes I looked at. It seems pretty likely he votes with them even more often than that on standing votes as the opposition parties tend to ask for roll calls when it concerns issues that have the potential to cause splits.

Anyway, my guess is that Englund will look like a paragon of party loyalty in comparison with Fredrik Gustafsson, if he gets elected and votes in line with what he has been saying. From a purely academic point of view, it would be very interesting to see what would happen.

Just a quickie!

I’ve been extremely poor on the old blogging of late due to spending all my free time on trying to finish my dissertation. The deadline is only a couple of weeks away, so after that I shall be getting back into the swing of things for the election.

It’s not just the politics side of things I’m missing out on either. The town is currently overflowing with beautiful bodies because of the international beach volleyball tournament, and I’ve not had a chance to go and see any games. It’s not often I feel small, but I was stood at the checkout in citylivs yesterday behind two girls both of whom must have been at least three or four inches taller than me. There’s a more than usual multicultural feel about the place, and it always gives me a buzz when I hear people with different mother tongues all communicating in English.

P.S. Check out our new website!

Sometimes it’s better not to be Consistent

There was a very thought-provoking leader in today’s Nya Åland. Nina Fellman brings up the case of the deputy chairman of the Swedish People’s Party in Finland; it appears that thirty years ago he was the editor of a a virulenty communist newspaper.

What the leader got me to thinking about was consistency. It’s often thought to be damaging to a person’s credibility if they’re not consistent. Strictly adhering to a given principle is therefore attractive, because it gives the adherent the reassurance of consistency. The search for one guiding principle on which we can build to solve the many problems that life provides us with is nothing new. I studied philosophy at university in England, and the choice was, in part, motivated by just such a desire. I still remember being told by one of my lecturers, correctly as it turned out, that studying philosophy wouldn’t be of much help in that direction.

Anyway, assuming the principle you adhere to is sound and you apply it consistently, how can you go wrong? The first problem is deciding whether a principle is sound. How do we know a principle is sound? How else but in how we feel about it, how we feel about the conclusions applying it leads us to and, most importantly, in how we feel about the results of that principle being applied in practise. The danger with overzealous dedication to one principle is that it becomes more than a guide. If our desire to be consistent leads us to override our feelings about what is right and wrong, or to conclude that we must learn to adjust the way we feel about something in order that we can be consistent, then I’d tentatively suggest that it is sometimes better not to be consistent.

Double Standards and Anonymity

Nyan has a report today on the case of a “leading politician” who has been reported for assualting one of his sons. The article is meant to provide the man in question with anonymity, but for anyone at all invovled in politics here, and probably for many who aren’t, it’s pretty obvious who it is from the description provided. In the report he’s called “Fredrik”, so at least you know it’s not anyone called Fredrik.

I notice there’s nothing about it in Ålandstidningen. They were quick to pounce on Barbro Sundback with very flimsy evidence (she was falsely accused of bullying a cleaner), so it’ll be interesting to see if they follow this case up with the same vigour. It also made me wonder about the way the press here provide people with anonymity. It’s such a small place that giving details about a case like this effectively “outs” the person in question before a decision has been made as to whether or not they’re guilty. Personally, I’d rather the press waited until all the facts are in, but if they can’t manage that, shouldn’t they at least be consistent, rather than pretending to give the accused person anonymity, and treat this leading politician just as they treated Barbro?

The Poltical Artform of Not Answering Awkward Questions

Political Stripes

It’s common here on Åland to set a letter or combination of letters in brackets after someone’s name to denote their party allegiances. For example: Andrew Hagmark-Cooper (s) tells you that I’m a social democrat. In today’s paper, Nya Åland have a piece about the false claims that Barbro Sundback has been bullying a cleaner in the Lagting.

The article is a good one and explains the situation fairly clearly. However, I note that Nya Åland failed to put a (lib) after Carl-Johan Wikström’s name. Given that he says he doesn’t get on with Barbro (an understatement), that he works at the Lagting, that he apparently told the cleaner Barbro was badmouthing her behind her back, that he took the issue up with the “arbetarskyddskommission” (commission for workers rights?), that the cleaner had not made any formal complaint, that the press mysteriously found about the whole affair and that he has been elected to the town council for the liberals, I would have thought it would have been worth noting.

Letter to the Editor

Have had a letter to the editor published in Ålandstidningen. Here’s a link to it. It was a response to this.