Denmark

[CFLarsen]

And this is where comparing countries gets complicated. Because it sounds like in Alaska, the Attorney General is appointed, just like at the Federal level, whereas in Nevada the AG is an elected position. So obviously in my state, the AG is more politically motivated than in yours or a 'State' Attorney in Denmark. That makes any sort of comparison hard to make.

But in even when DAs and AGs are appointed, rather than elected, there is always the chance that they have their eye on an elected office down the line, a judgeship or a legislative seat, and their record as an attorney is definately going to play into that, so the playing of politics occurs even when they are theoretically outside of politics. I would presume that to be true for any suitably ambitious person in the "State" or "government" level in Denmark or the UK, too. I won't claim that it IS true, since I don't know, but if it isn't, I'd like to hear how they prevent it.

As for brawling, heck, this thread is downright civil compared to most politcal threads in these parts.

I see more problems with DAs and AGs being elected than appointed. If someone runs for a position that enables you to prosecute, we run a very real risk of pandering to the lowest instincts found. An agitated population in the heat of the moment could easily impose way too strict or unfair laws by electing the guy who promised to strike down the hardest.

There will always be ambitious people, regardless of what country they come from. I've never heard of a Danish DA or an AG seeking political power, though. Danish politicians have a wide range of educational backgrounds, but they most certainly aren't generally lawyers, like in the US! Here, civil servants tend to stay in that world. At least they don't get kicked out of office at the next election.

And I really don't think you want to compare playing of politics in Denmark with playing of politics in the US....

 

[Nyarlathotep]

I see more problems with DAs and AGs being elected than appointed. If someone runs for a position that enables you to prosecute, we run a very real risk of pandering to the lowest instincts found. An agitated population in the heat of the moment could easily impose way too strict or unfair laws by electing the guy who promised to strike down the hardest.

There will always be ambitious people, regardless of what country they come from. I've never heard of a Danish DA or an AG seeking political power, though. Danish politicians have a wide range of educational backgrounds, but they most certainly aren't generally lawyers, like in the US! Here, civil servants tend to stay in that world. At least they don't get kicked out of office at the next election.

And I really don't think you want to compare playing of politics in Denmark with playing of politics in the US....

I quite agree that I would prefer that AGs and DAs be appointed rather than elected, so do a lot of people I think, since the practice isn't universal here. Judges too. And for exactly the reasons you gave.

But from what you and Brodski say, it sounds like the main thing that prevents civil servants from moving into elected positions in your countries is just that it usually just isn't done by tradition, there don't seem to be any procedural barriers. Is this right?

 

[CFLarsen]

I quite agree that I would prefer that AGs and DAs be appointed rather than elected, so do a lot of people I think, since the practice isn't universal here. Judges too. And for exactly the reasons you gave.

But from what you and Brodski say, it sounds like the main thing that prevents civil servants from moving into elected positions in your countries is just that it usually just isn't done by tradition, there don't seem to be any procedural barriers. Is this right?

That's correct. Anyone can seek office.

ETA: You don't even have to be a Danish citizen to run for a seat in the municipal councils.

 

[Thomas]

Thomas is arguing opposite of what you are yet you do not disagree with him and yet disagree with me when I am arguing same as he is.

Well, not quite, the problem is that there are a few cases where the state are supposed to act independently of the government- with the state attorney being one of them.

The following sentence is why Claus agreed with me.

They are not seperated from eachother as such, because in many cases the state has to do what the government says.

In daily use the danes often mix up the state and the government, and that's why the state can be dictionary defined as part of the government, and the government can be defined as part the state. This is, however, only true in "many cases". Or most, rather.

 

[CFLarsen]

Well, not quite, the problem is that there are a few cases where the state are supposed to act independently of the government- with the state attorney being one of them.

The Ombudsmand is another. Appointed by the parliament, he is totally independent of political influence. In fact, it would result in undermining his authority if anyone sought to influence him politically. Not to mention a complete and utter political suicide...

Or, think of the recent Municipality Reform. A few years ago, it was decided that the 271 municipalities should be reduced in number but increased in size, to make a more efficient public sector. It meant removal of the intermediate layer, the "Amter" ("counties").

Who decided it? This was such a huge decision that every party was brought in. It wasn't just the government, dictating that This Is So. No, the whole of parliament was included, as well as the counties and the municipalities themselves. After long, hard negotiations, a solution was found, which resulted in just less than 100 bigger municipalities. Every involved party was not just heard - all were included in the negotiations.

It is said that over half of all political decisions in Denmark is done on a municipal level. I don't think that's far off.

I am aware that it can be difficult for non-Danes to grasp just how deep democracy runs in Denmark, but it is definitely worth pointing it out.

 

[Grammatron]

Well, not quite, the problem is that there are a few cases where the state are supposed to act independently of the government- with the state attorney being one of them.

The following sentence is why Claus agreed with me.

In daily use the danes often mix up the state and the government, and that's why the state can be dictionary defined as part of the government, and the government can be defined as part the state. This is, however, only true in "many cases". Or most, rather.

I completely understand the distinction between the two, however in the case of the OP, Jocko's use of state and government fall within the context of his point. Which is to say CFL is arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[Jocko]

I completely understand the distinction between the two, however in the case of the OP, Jocko's use of state and government fall within the context of his point. Which is to say CFL is arguing for the sake of arguing.

It's the difference between saying "the president" and "the office of the president." 99.9% of the time, it's a distinction without a difference, and certainly a case of meaningless hair splitting in this instance.

But this is nothing Claus doesn't know. He thrives within the florid insignificance of the remaining .1%, as most woos do.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

I am aware that it can be difficult for non-Danes to grasp just how deep democracy runs in Denmark, but it is definitely worth pointing it out.

Not at all. I am sure a comittment to democracy runs very deep, just as it does in most countries that have any experience with it. People pretty much want the same basic things worldwide; freedom, prosperity, security, etc. And democracy provides a very efficient means of providing those things, so people that have a taste of it, generally like it.

Nations and people just disagree on how best to implement it. The differences are more in the details, rather than in any deeper desire for democracy in some countries than others.

 

[DanishDynamite]

Nations and people just disagree on how best to implement it. The differences are more in the details, rather than in any deeper desire for democracy in some countries than others.

True.

But as everyone knows, the Devil is in the details.

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

The Ombudsmand is another. Appointed by the parliament, he is totally independent of political influence. In fact, it would result in undermining his authority if anyone sought to influence him politically. Not to mention a complete and utter political suicide...

This sounds like wishful thinking to me. But I never paid much attention to the Ombudsmand.

Who decided it? This was such a huge decision that every party was brought in. It wasn't just the government, dictating that This Is So. No, the whole of parliament was included, as well as the counties and the municipalities themselves. After long, hard negotiations, a solution was found, which resulted in just less than 100 bigger municipalities. Every involved party was not just heard - all were included in the negotiations.

It is said that over half of all political decisions in Denmark is done on a municipal level. I don't think that's far off.

I am aware that it can be difficult for non-Danes to grasp just how deep democracy runs in Denmark, but it is definitely worth pointing it out.

Just hair splitting here because I do love Denmark but I think part of what passes as "democracy" is more a Danish drive for collegiality and consensus. The downside to that is a lot of meetings...

I do miss the place sometimes...