#alwayssomethingtolookforwardto

The narrative has been turned a certain way since the late 90s and especially after the financial crisis of 2008. The more you move the goalpost of what’s acceptable, the more you can get away with. So it’s not really about the refugee crisis at all - though the politicians sure are milking it - the story was written long ago. 

Denmark is prosperous. Crime rates are down. Those are the facts. But the narrative, the story we are fed by politicians and the media, is that we are under threat. That crime is up and our ressources dwindeling. And that this is the fault of all those who are other. “We can’t afford to help them - they don’t even give anything back!” It’s a classic example of scapegoating. ´

Ofc only the most horrific behave badly towards people they actually meet; most people will be kind or at least polite to refugees or Muslims they interact with directly, while maintaining this idea that there are many criminals and Syria-warriors and extremist imams and terrorists among these people and that we don’t have the ressources to help very many of them, anyway. The media tells them so, after all. 

Those in power have an interest in keeping us scared - it’s easier to pass whatever legislation you want with a scared populace - and so they feed these flames.

Personally I did see more refugees in iirc 2016 (that is to say, I noticed any at all) but most of them were bound for Sweden. 

There’s nothing nice about a tradition of opressing the people or of believing that an accident of birth make some people better than others. 

Every single human should be free and equal. We should not make exceptions just because it’s ~traditional~ to do so. I find it reprehensible that we do. For their sake, too - members of the royal family aren’t allowed to vote. 

Also, if they are so pointless, what is the point of keeping them, then? They cost us an unreasonable amount of money every, single year. We give them wealth while denying our poorest citizens more than scraps, while refusing refugees because we “don’t have the ressources.” But we have ressources for keeping something pointless around? 

It’s mainly about principles for me, but the economical angle is certainly part of it. People always counter with “oh but they earn us so much tourism money” but how can you possibly have reliable proof of that? That’s not a factor it’s easy to test for. 

Personally I find it far more likely that what attracts tourists is the castles and gardens associated with the royal family rather than the royal family itself, and I’m certainly in favour of keeping those in good shape. There is historical and cultural value in these places and without the royal family inhabiting them, they could all be open to the public. Maybe some of the castles could be turned into museums or put to other practical use. 

Honestly, though, ultimately I don’t give a shit how much money they do or don’t earn us. Monarchy goes against my morals, no matter how symbolic.