This article is over two days old and may contain outdated advice from the authorities regarding the koronasmitten.
Keep yourself updated in The overview, or through the FHIs website.
Assume that someone had told us, only for a couple of weeks ago, that pretty soon the minister for health to come with the following statements: In the year, the government will prohibit people to travel on the easter holidays up to his cabin on the mountain – and those who do it anyway will be prosecuted. There is talk of large fines. Prison.
How would we have reacted? I think that we would not even have been upset or worried about – but simply lattermilde. It had not even passed as 1. april-joke – and now it is a reality.
Not only has the government secretly prepared, and later presented a bill, which, in principle, would undermine the maktfordelingsprinsippet which is fundamental for a democracy. Now met pretty much legal and political opposition that it was changed to something quite different, but the government has yet adopted a number of restrictive restrictions to combat koronaviruset.
the Crisis is upon us and we have no longer the time to engage in dialogue.
Even if it is both controversial and restrictive , so I’m not sure this necessarily is wrong. There are certainly arguments in favor of very restrictive measures, although it can be the basis to discuss the degree of it.
But it may still be necessary to ask the question: What does this do with us as citizens? What does it do to society? And, not least, what does it do with the politicians and with the understanding of what politics is about?
Politics is about power, and the power can be defined as the ability to make things happen. But it is not the power that makes this even. Power trades, strictly speaking, about the ability to get others to get things done. And how should you go forward to get to it?
The usual way to go forward is to get people through to make factual arguments – and thus also open to counter arguments. And in a democracy, should the process be long before the democratically may get passed a law.
We need to be aware of what instruments we use, and we must be on guard going forward.
And basically, this was also the strategy to limit the infection. The chief physician at the Norwegian institute of public health, Preben Aavitsland, described at a professional and at the same time simple-to-understand way the saksfeltet a pandemic represents. He explained what considerations that stand against each other and some basic principles related to the plot – and invited thus the individual citizen to take a rationally justified choice.
But eventually that fear has bank about , as skrekkinngytende pictures from Italy adheres to the retina has the tone been another. The citizens are no longer only to make rational informed choices, now it’s just a lot of talk about the precepts, prohibitions, sanctions, and in all a more authoritarian strategy.
Democratically elected politicians will now get a taste of a type of exercise of power which is more about what takes place in authoritarian states.
And one discerns an underlying legitimation: It is simply more efficient. The crisis is upon us and we have no longer time to engage in dialogue – now is the monologue that comes and monologue advocated for very restrictive measures: As to restrict the right to move freely, to use their own property, to gather and – well, who knows what the future brings with it – the right to speak?
Again, I claim not that this is objectionable or unnecessary – with the exception of the last point. But it is a fact that the democratically elected politicians is now getting a taste of a type of exercise of power which is more about what takes place in authoritarian states. And they may be experiencing, too, that this is effective – that it brings results. What will it do with our politicians?
I suspect not Erna Solberg to plan coups.
We now see that the authoritarian political leaders in some countries use koronakrisen to give himself absolute power. And no, I mean enough that it will happen in Norway.
I suspect not Erna Solberg to plan the coups, but it may be worth to think about that one now, albeit in good faith, builds a deep and democratic rooted resentment against the authoritarian and restrictive measures, with efficiency as the reason.
We see and hear citizens that instantly accepts this, and we know the underlying motivations: it is not the time for doubts, discussion and disagreement. Here it must be traded. And fear carries with it a desire for clear leadership and eventually the strong leader. Thus built also the citizens ‘ resentment and resistance against the authoritarian down, precisely because the authoritarian work – at least for now.
Power is all strictly about the ability to get others to get things done.
This can taste dangerous good for the politicians as well as for the citizens, and it can create dependency. Imperceptible be heading in a more authoritarian direction, imperceptibly, we begin to get used to it, and imperceptibly begins a slightly different society to take shape.
I’m not saying that it must happen, but we must be aware of what instruments we use, and we must be on guard going forward. This is very abnormal grip in a very unusual situation.
It can be difficult to get the toothpaste into the tube again. When in the future to have a important issue, I fear we will get pandemimetaforer and krisespråk with reference to the authoritarian efficiency.
When the politicians as well as citizens lose the democratic virtue, then it may be difficult to get it back.
More about koronaviruset StatusRåd and infoSiste nyttSpør NRK