Stefan Svallfors: "Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset"
Sydsvenskan publicerar idag 29 augusti en artikel av Professor Stefan Svallfors: *"Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset"* http://www.sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuella-fragor/lat-snowden-fa-sacharovpri... Nedan en engelsk version. //Erik *A Sakharov for our time? * Since 1988, the European Parliament has awarded the Sakharov Prize. According to its statutes, this is given to a person or group "who made remarkable efforts to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms" and thus "worked against intolerance, fanaticism and oppression." The award is given in memory of the Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989), known as one of the men behind the hydrogen bomb but even more as a Soviet dissident with his Human Rights Committee and his defense of political prisoners. Sakharov stands as a symbol of the individual human being who dares to stand up against tyranny and oppression, even when the personal cost is very high. A most deserving recipient of the 2013 price would be the American whistle blower Edward Snowden. In May, The Guardian published his disclosure of the extensive, illegal and deeply intrusive monitoring conducted by the American National Security Agency. For this heroic effort Snowden has paid a heavy personal price. He is hunted as an outlaw by the U.S. government, accused of crimes that will put him in jail for the rest of his life. The U.S. government has threatened the governments that dare to offer him asylum with serious consequences. In a painful irony, the only sanctuary that had been found for Snowden is Russia, a country whose democratic problems and authoritarian tendencies are obvious. But is really Snowden a worthy recipient of the prize, someone may sneeze. Is not America the world's leading democracy, a friend of Europe, committed to the rule of law? Yes. But even democracies can hide pockets of tyranny in their hearts, a democratic state may well coexist with other systems that are characterized by anything but democracy and law. As the monitoring system which now puts its global tentacles far into the private lives of citizens. By exposing this system Snowden made it possible for us to say No -- this is not a development and a society we want, we protect our civil rights and freedoms when they are threatened. Snowden's revelations make explicit demands on citizens and politicians to act and react. How have we responded to these demands? Not in any impressive way one must say. Individual politicians and many citizens have reacted, expressed support for Snowden, trying to act in his defense. They see the unpleasant consequences of a surveillance system where innocent citizens get their electronic communication and their phone calls tapped and mapped. The German President Joachim Gauck, with his personal East German experience, for example stated that Snowden "deserves respect" for his actions. But otherwise an awkward silence, evasive answers, gentle tiptoeing. Merkel hums, The European Commission whispers, the parliaments remain silent. On the Swedish side, even more depressing inaction is observed. Sweden acts together with Britain to make sure the question should not be addressed at European level. This is a bilateral issue and by the way, no Swedish interests are at stake, the Foreign Minister distractedly announces before returning to Twitter. The government obviously sees no reason to allow this issue to eclipse the splendor of Obama's forthcoming state visit. From the political left, a complete disinterest is shown. No social democratic position is advanced or even formulated. It is tragic to see how thin the liberal veneer is in many places. When liberalism is no longer easy and obvious, when it requires courage and sacrifice, when we are forced to choose and our choices have real costs, what happens then? We fall into line, we bend to power. Without grumbling we let fairly manageable threats from terrorists sweep away fundamental rights and freedoms. We must demand more of ourselves and our elected officials than that. We could start by giving Edward Snowden the price whose name symbolizes a man who refused to bow to oppression and thereby actually changed history. Stefan Svallfors Professor of Sociology at Umeå University & the Institute for Future Studies
Shit vad bra!!! Vad är nästa steg? Aug 29, 2013 kl. 11:35 skrev Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com>:
Sydsvenskan publicerar idag 29 augusti en artikel av Professor Stefan Svallfors: "Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset" http://www.sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuella-fragor/lat-snowden-fa-sacharovpri... Nedan en engelsk version.
//Erik
A Sakharov for our time?
Since 1988, the European Parliament has awarded the Sakharov Prize. According to its statutes, this is given to a person or group "who made remarkable efforts to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms" and thus "worked against intolerance, fanaticism and oppression."
The award is given in memory of the Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989), known as one of the men behind the hydrogen bomb but even more as a Soviet dissident with his Human Rights Committee and his defense of political prisoners. Sakharov stands as a symbol of the individual human being who dares to stand up against tyranny and oppression, even when the personal cost is very high.
A most deserving recipient of the 2013 price would be the American whistle blower Edward Snowden. In May, The Guardian published his disclosure of the extensive, illegal and deeply intrusive monitoring conducted by the American National Security Agency. For this heroic effort Snowden has paid a heavy personal price. He is hunted as an outlaw by the U.S. government, accused of crimes that will put him in jail for the rest of his life. The U.S. government has threatened the governments that dare to offer him asylum with serious consequences. In a painful irony, the only sanctuary that had been found for Snowden is Russia, a country whose democratic problems and authoritarian tendencies are obvious.
But is really Snowden a worthy recipient of the prize, someone may sneeze. Is not America the world's leading democracy, a friend of Europe, committed to the rule of law? Yes. But even democracies can hide pockets of tyranny in their hearts, a democratic state may well coexist with other systems that are characterized by anything but democracy and law. As the monitoring system which now puts its global tentacles far into the private lives of citizens. By exposing this system Snowden made it possible for us to say No – this is not a development and a society we want, we protect our civil rights and freedoms when they are threatened.
Snowden's revelations make explicit demands on citizens and politicians to act and react. How have we responded to these demands? Not in any impressive way one must say. Individual politicians and many citizens have reacted, expressed support for Snowden, trying to act in his defense. They see the unpleasant consequences of a surveillance system where innocent citizens get their electronic communication and their phone calls tapped and mapped. The German President Joachim Gauck, with his personal East German experience, for example stated that Snowden "deserves respect" for his actions. But otherwise an awkward silence, evasive answers, gentle tiptoeing. Merkel hums, The European Commission whispers, the parliaments remain silent.
On the Swedish side, even more depressing inaction is observed. Sweden acts together with Britain to make sure the question should not be addressed at European level. This is a bilateral issue and by the way, no Swedish interests are at stake, the Foreign Minister distractedly announces before returning to Twitter. The government obviously sees no reason to allow this issue to eclipse the splendor of Obama's forthcoming state visit. From the political left, a complete disinterest is shown. No social democratic position is advanced or even formulated.
It is tragic to see how thin the liberal veneer is in many places. When liberalism is no longer easy and obvious, when it requires courage and sacrifice, when we are forced to choose and our choices have real costs, what happens then? We fall into line, we bend to power. Without grumbling we let fairly manageable threats from terrorists sweep away fundamental rights and freedoms.
We must demand more of ourselves and our elected officials than that. We could start by giving Edward Snowden the price whose name symbolizes a man who refused to bow to oppression and thereby actually changed history.
Stefan Svallfors Professor of Sociology at Umeå University & the Institute for Future Studies
On 08/29/2013 11:47 AM, Hanna Larsson wrote:
Shit vad bra!!! Vad är nästa steg?
Nu gäller det att få ihop ett gäng moderater och/eller kristdemokrater att hålla med Svallfors. Det lär inte finnas några i Sverige, så det är lika bra att försöka utomlands. Börja med grannländerna runt Östersjön. Börja medsols: Finland, Estland, Lettland, Litauen, Polen, Tyskland och sist Danmark. MEParna finns listade här: http://parltrack.euwiki.org/meps/?date=29/08/2013 Skriv helst på modersmålet. Översätt gärna artikeln till Finska, Estniska och Polska (skaka fram kompisar som är tvåspråkiga och/eller deras släktingar). Sacharovpriset kommer att diskuteras i alla politiska grupper Europaparlamentet nästa vecka, antagligen på Tisdag 2 september. Vore bra om alla EPP MEPar från norra Europa åtminstone sett förslaget innan dess. *Target:* An independent cross party nomination by 40 EPP+ALDE+ECR MEPs. Deadline för nominering är 12 september. //Erik
Aug 29, 2013 kl. 11:35 skrev Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com <mailto:erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com>>:
Sydsvenskan publicerar idag 29 augusti en artikel av Professor Stefan Svallfors:
*"Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset"* http://www.sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuella-fragor/lat-snowden-fa-sacharovpri...
Nedan en engelsk version.
//Erik
*A Sakharov for our time? * Since 1988, the European Parliament has awarded the Sakharov Prize. According to its statutes, this is given to a person or group "who made remarkable efforts to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms" and thus "worked against intolerance, fanaticism and oppression."
The award is given in memory of the Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989), known as one of the men behind the hydrogen bomb but even more as a Soviet dissident with his Human Rights Committee and his defense of political prisoners. Sakharov stands as a symbol of the individual human being who dares to stand up against tyranny and oppression, even when the personal cost is very high.
A most deserving recipient of the 2013 price would be the American whistle blower Edward Snowden. In May, The Guardian published his disclosure of the extensive, illegal and deeply intrusive monitoring conducted by the American National Security Agency. For this heroic effort Snowden has paid a heavy personal price. He is hunted as an outlaw by the U.S. government, accused of crimes that will put him in jail for the rest of his life. The U.S. government has threatened the governments that dare to offer him asylum with serious consequences. In a painful irony, the only sanctuary that had been found for Snowden is Russia, a country whose democratic problems and authoritarian tendencies are obvious.
But is really Snowden a worthy recipient of the prize, someone may sneeze. Is not America the world's leading democracy, a friend of Europe, committed to the rule of law? Yes. But even democracies can hide pockets of tyranny in their hearts, a democratic state may well coexist with other systems that are characterized by anything but democracy and law. As the monitoring system which now puts its global tentacles far into the private lives of citizens. By exposing this system Snowden made it possible for us to say No – this is not a development and a society we want, we protect our civil rights and freedoms when they are threatened.
Snowden's revelations make explicit demands on citizens and politicians to act and react. How have we responded to these demands? Not in any impressive way one must say. Individual politicians and many citizens have reacted, expressed support for Snowden, trying to act in his defense. They see the unpleasant consequences of a surveillance system where innocent citizens get their electronic communication and their phone calls tapped and mapped. The German President Joachim Gauck, with his personal East German experience, for example stated that Snowden "deserves respect" for his actions. But otherwise an awkward silence, evasive answers, gentle tiptoeing. Merkel hums, The European Commission whispers, the parliaments remain silent.
On the Swedish side, even more depressing inaction is observed. Sweden acts together with Britain to make sure the question should not be addressed at European level. This is a bilateral issue and by the way, no Swedish interests are at stake, the Foreign Minister distractedly announces before returning to Twitter. The government obviously sees no reason to allow this issue to eclipse the splendor of Obama's forthcoming state visit. From the political left, a complete disinterest is shown. No social democratic position is advanced or even formulated.
It is tragic to see how thin the liberal veneer is in many places. When liberalism is no longer easy and obvious, when it requires courage and sacrifice, when we are forced to choose and our choices have real costs, what happens then? We fall into line, we bend to power. Without grumbling we let fairly manageable threats from terrorists sweep away fundamental rights and freedoms.
We must demand more of ourselves and our elected officials than that. We could start by giving Edward Snowden the price whose name symbolizes a man who refused to bow to oppression and thereby actually changed history.
Stefan Svallfors Professor of Sociology at Umeå University & the Institute for Future Studies
Jag tror att det inte skulle vara omöjligt att övertala Christian Engström och Amelia Andersdotter på något sådant här från Piratpartiet. /Erik On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Erik Josefsson < erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> wrote:
On 08/29/2013 11:47 AM, Hanna Larsson wrote:
Shit vad bra!!! Vad är nästa steg?
Nu gäller det att få ihop ett gäng moderater och/eller kristdemokrater att hålla med Svallfors.
Det lär inte finnas några i Sverige, så det är lika bra att försöka utomlands. Börja med grannländerna runt Östersjön. Börja medsols: Finland, Estland, Lettland, Litauen, Polen, Tyskland och sist Danmark.
MEParna finns listade här: http://parltrack.euwiki.org/meps/?date=29/08/2013
Skriv helst på modersmålet. Översätt gärna artikeln till Finska, Estniska och Polska (skaka fram kompisar som är tvåspråkiga och/eller deras släktingar).
Sacharovpriset kommer att diskuteras i alla politiska grupper Europaparlamentet nästa vecka, antagligen på Tisdag 2 september. Vore bra om alla EPP MEPar från norra Europa åtminstone sett förslaget innan dess.
*Target:* An independent cross party nomination by 40 EPP+ALDE+ECR MEPs.
Deadline för nominering är 12 september.
//Erik
Aug 29, 2013 kl. 11:35 skrev Erik Josefsson < erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com>:
Sydsvenskan publicerar idag 29 augusti en artikel av Professor Stefan Svallfors:
*"Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset"*
http://www.sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuella-fragor/lat-snowden-fa-sacharovpri...
Nedan en engelsk version.
//Erik
*A Sakharov for our time?* Since 1988, the European Parliament has awarded the Sakharov Prize. According to its statutes, this is given to a person or group "who made remarkable efforts to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms" and thus "worked against intolerance, fanaticism and oppression."
The award is given in memory of the Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989), known as one of the men behind the hydrogen bomb but even more as a Soviet dissident with his Human Rights Committee and his defense of political prisoners. Sakharov stands as a symbol of the individual human being who dares to stand up against tyranny and oppression, even when the personal cost is very high.
A most deserving recipient of the 2013 price would be the American whistle blower Edward Snowden. In May, The Guardian published his disclosure of the extensive, illegal and deeply intrusive monitoring conducted by the American National Security Agency. For this heroic effort Snowden has paid a heavy personal price. He is hunted as an outlaw by the U.S. government, accused of crimes that will put him in jail for the rest of his life. The U.S. government has threatened the governments that dare to offer him asylum with serious consequences. In a painful irony, the only sanctuary that had been found for Snowden is Russia, a country whose democratic problems and authoritarian tendencies are obvious.
But is really Snowden a worthy recipient of the prize, someone may sneeze. Is not America the world's leading democracy, a friend of Europe, committed to the rule of law? Yes. But even democracies can hide pockets of tyranny in their hearts, a democratic state may well coexist with other systems that are characterized by anything but democracy and law. As the monitoring system which now puts its global tentacles far into the private lives of citizens. By exposing this system Snowden made it possible for us to say No – this is not a development and a society we want, we protect our civil rights and freedoms when they are threatened.
Snowden's revelations make explicit demands on citizens and politicians to act and react. How have we responded to these demands? Not in any impressive way one must say. Individual politicians and many citizens have reacted, expressed support for Snowden, trying to act in his defense. They see the unpleasant consequences of a surveillance system where innocent citizens get their electronic communication and their phone calls tapped and mapped. The German President Joachim Gauck, with his personal East German experience, for example stated that Snowden "deserves respect" for his actions. But otherwise an awkward silence, evasive answers, gentle tiptoeing. Merkel hums, The European Commission whispers, the parliaments remain silent.
On the Swedish side, even more depressing inaction is observed. Sweden acts together with Britain to make sure the question should not be addressed at European level. This is a bilateral issue and by the way, no Swedish interests are at stake, the Foreign Minister distractedly announces before returning to Twitter. The government obviously sees no reason to allow this issue to eclipse the splendor of Obama's forthcoming state visit. From the political left, a complete disinterest is shown. No social democratic position is advanced or even formulated.
It is tragic to see how thin the liberal veneer is in many places. When liberalism is no longer easy and obvious, when it requires courage and sacrifice, when we are forced to choose and our choices have real costs, what happens then? We fall into line, we bend to power. Without grumbling we let fairly manageable threats from terrorists sweep away fundamental rights and freedoms.
We must demand more of ourselves and our elected officials than that. We could start by giving Edward Snowden the price whose name symbolizes a man who refused to bow to oppression and thereby actually changed history.
Stefan Svallfors Professor of Sociology at Umeå University & the Institute for Future Studies
Tvärt om, och just därför är det viktigt att fokusera på moderater och kristdemokrater. PP sitter i Gröna gruppen och Gröna gruppen har ~7% av rösterna i EP. Det är alltså lite som att jobba med Vänsterpartiet i riksdagen: bra folk, goda ideer, men ingen majoritet... Man måste fokusera på att dra ihop en majoritet i EP när det är så kort om tid och det finns chans att Snowden/Sacharov blir en tvärpolitisk symbolfråga på EU-nivå. Annars kan man lika gärna låta bli. //Erik On 08/29/2013 02:24 PM, Erik Lönroth wrote:
Jag tror att det inte skulle vara omöjligt att övertala Christian Engström och Amelia Andersdotter på något sådant här från Piratpartiet.
/Erik
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com <mailto:erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 08/29/2013 11:47 AM, Hanna Larsson wrote:
Shit vad bra!!! Vad är nästa steg?
Nu gäller det att få ihop ett gäng moderater och/eller kristdemokrater att hålla med Svallfors.
Det lär inte finnas några i Sverige, så det är lika bra att försöka utomlands. Börja med grannländerna runt Östersjön. Börja medsols: Finland, Estland, Lettland, Litauen, Polen, Tyskland och sist Danmark.
MEParna finns listade här: http://parltrack.euwiki.org/meps/?date=29/08/2013
Skriv helst på modersmålet. Översätt gärna artikeln till Finska, Estniska och Polska (skaka fram kompisar som är tvåspråkiga och/eller deras släktingar).
Sacharovpriset kommer att diskuteras i alla politiska grupper Europaparlamentet nästa vecka, antagligen på Tisdag 2 september. Vore bra om alla EPP MEPar från norra Europa åtminstone sett förslaget innan dess.
*Target:* An independent cross party nomination by 40 EPP+ALDE+ECR MEPs.
Deadline för nominering är 12 september.
//Erik
Aug 29, 2013 kl. 11:35 skrev Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com <mailto:erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com>>:
Sydsvenskan publicerar idag 29 augusti en artikel av Professor Stefan Svallfors:
*"Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset"* http://www.sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuella-fragor/lat-snowden-fa-sacharovpri...
Nedan en engelsk version.
//Erik
*A Sakharov for our time? * Since 1988, the European Parliament has awarded the Sakharov Prize. According to its statutes, this is given to a person or group "who made remarkable efforts to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms" and thus "worked against intolerance, fanaticism and oppression."
The award is given in memory of the Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989), known as one of the men behind the hydrogen bomb but even more as a Soviet dissident with his Human Rights Committee and his defense of political prisoners. Sakharov stands as a symbol of the individual human being who dares to stand up against tyranny and oppression, even when the personal cost is very high.
A most deserving recipient of the 2013 price would be the American whistle blower Edward Snowden. In May, The Guardian published his disclosure of the extensive, illegal and deeply intrusive monitoring conducted by the American National Security Agency. For this heroic effort Snowden has paid a heavy personal price. He is hunted as an outlaw by the U.S. government, accused of crimes that will put him in jail for the rest of his life. The U.S. government has threatened the governments that dare to offer him asylum with serious consequences. In a painful irony, the only sanctuary that had been found for Snowden is Russia, a country whose democratic problems and authoritarian tendencies are obvious.
But is really Snowden a worthy recipient of the prize, someone may sneeze. Is not America the world's leading democracy, a friend of Europe, committed to the rule of law? Yes. But even democracies can hide pockets of tyranny in their hearts, a democratic state may well coexist with other systems that are characterized by anything but democracy and law. As the monitoring system which now puts its global tentacles far into the private lives of citizens. By exposing this system Snowden made it possible for us to say No – this is not a development and a society we want, we protect our civil rights and freedoms when they are threatened.
Snowden's revelations make explicit demands on citizens and politicians to act and react. How have we responded to these demands? Not in any impressive way one must say. Individual politicians and many citizens have reacted, expressed support for Snowden, trying to act in his defense. They see the unpleasant consequences of a surveillance system where innocent citizens get their electronic communication and their phone calls tapped and mapped. The German President Joachim Gauck, with his personal East German experience, for example stated that Snowden "deserves respect" for his actions. But otherwise an awkward silence, evasive answers, gentle tiptoeing. Merkel hums, The European Commission whispers, the parliaments remain silent.
On the Swedish side, even more depressing inaction is observed. Sweden acts together with Britain to make sure the question should not be addressed at European level. This is a bilateral issue and by the way, no Swedish interests are at stake, the Foreign Minister distractedly announces before returning to Twitter. The government obviously sees no reason to allow this issue to eclipse the splendor of Obama's forthcoming state visit. From the political left, a complete disinterest is shown. No social democratic position is advanced or even formulated.
It is tragic to see how thin the liberal veneer is in many places. When liberalism is no longer easy and obvious, when it requires courage and sacrifice, when we are forced to choose and our choices have real costs, what happens then? We fall into line, we bend to power. Without grumbling we let fairly manageable threats from terrorists sweep away fundamental rights and freedoms.
We must demand more of ourselves and our elected officials than that. We could start by giving Edward Snowden the price whose name symbolizes a man who refused to bow to oppression and thereby actually changed history.
Stefan Svallfors Professor of Sociology at Umeå University & the Institute for Future Studies
Om vi sprider det här via EDRi och försöker få in det i deras nyhetsbrev så kanske det kanske tillochmed blir något bra utav det? Skadar ju inte att försöka :) mvh -- Emil Tullstedt On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com> wrote:
Sydsvenskan publicerar idag 29 augusti en artikel av Professor Stefan Svallfors:
"Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset" http://www.sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuella-fragor/lat-snowden-fa-sacharovpri...
Nedan en engelsk version.
//Erik
A Sakharov for our time?
Since 1988, the European Parliament has awarded the Sakharov Prize. According to its statutes, this is given to a person or group "who made remarkable efforts to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms" and thus "worked against intolerance, fanaticism and oppression."
The award is given in memory of the Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989), known as one of the men behind the hydrogen bomb but even more as a Soviet dissident with his Human Rights Committee and his defense of political prisoners. Sakharov stands as a symbol of the individual human being who dares to stand up against tyranny and oppression, even when the personal cost is very high.
A most deserving recipient of the 2013 price would be the American whistle blower Edward Snowden. In May, The Guardian published his disclosure of the extensive, illegal and deeply intrusive monitoring conducted by the American National Security Agency. For this heroic effort Snowden has paid a heavy personal price. He is hunted as an outlaw by the U.S. government, accused of crimes that will put him in jail for the rest of his life. The U.S. government has threatened the governments that dare to offer him asylum with serious consequences. In a painful irony, the only sanctuary that had been found for Snowden is Russia, a country whose democratic problems and authoritarian tendencies are obvious.
But is really Snowden a worthy recipient of the prize, someone may sneeze. Is not America the world's leading democracy, a friend of Europe, committed to the rule of law? Yes. But even democracies can hide pockets of tyranny in their hearts, a democratic state may well coexist with other systems that are characterized by anything but democracy and law. As the monitoring system which now puts its global tentacles far into the private lives of citizens. By exposing this system Snowden made it possible for us to say No – this is not a development and a society we want, we protect our civil rights and freedoms when they are threatened.
Snowden's revelations make explicit demands on citizens and politicians to act and react. How have we responded to these demands? Not in any impressive way one must say. Individual politicians and many citizens have reacted, expressed support for Snowden, trying to act in his defense. They see the unpleasant consequences of a surveillance system where innocent citizens get their electronic communication and their phone calls tapped and mapped. The German President Joachim Gauck, with his personal East German experience, for example stated that Snowden "deserves respect" for his actions. But otherwise an awkward silence, evasive answers, gentle tiptoeing. Merkel hums, The European Commission whispers, the parliaments remain silent.
On the Swedish side, even more depressing inaction is observed. Sweden acts together with Britain to make sure the question should not be addressed at European level. This is a bilateral issue and by the way, no Swedish interests are at stake, the Foreign Minister distractedly announces before returning to Twitter. The government obviously sees no reason to allow this issue to eclipse the splendor of Obama's forthcoming state visit. From the political left, a complete disinterest is shown. No social democratic position is advanced or even formulated.
It is tragic to see how thin the liberal veneer is in many places. When liberalism is no longer easy and obvious, when it requires courage and sacrifice, when we are forced to choose and our choices have real costs, what happens then? We fall into line, we bend to power. Without grumbling we let fairly manageable threats from terrorists sweep away fundamental rights and freedoms.
We must demand more of ourselves and our elected officials than that. We could start by giving Edward Snowden the price whose name symbolizes a man who refused to bow to oppression and thereby actually changed history.
Stefan Svallfors Professor of Sociology at Umeå University & the Institute for Future Studies
participants (4)
-
Emil Tullstedt -
Erik Josefsson -
Erik Lönroth -
Hanna Larsson