Week 35: Nordic Nonsense
A trip to Copenhagen to discuss the family court crisis, and how opposition to Australia's forthcoming referendum uses language
This week I took the train across to Copenhagen to first have a cup of tea with, and then on the spur of the moment, record a podcast episode, with Diana Maria Olsson. Originally from Lithuania, Diana is an all too familiar story of a mother trying to protect her son from an abusive father and the systems designed to protect children doing the very opposite. With her losing custody to this man.
Previously living across the bridge in Malmö, her custody case was in Sweden. While Sweden likes to project itself to the world has being advanced in issues of gender equality, when it comes to family court proceedings, it, like other countries, maintains a deep suspicion of mothers, and a careless disregard for the welfare of children.
Yet, like so many other mothers I have met and spoken to over the past few years, Diana has refused to be quiet, and has instead utilised her skills as a film-maker to document this institutional betrayal. Her film “First Class Citizen” has been screened at film festivals throughout the world, and won several awards.
Her film has a particular focus on the unique way the Swedish state behaves, and the ingrained culture that protects it. It highlights that Swedes have an instinctive faith in the state to act in the public’s best interests, making it incredibly difficult to be believed if the state is instead acting with brutality. Attempting to question or challenge the state will also be met with a stern response.
Her film also highlights the plight of non-citizen mothers in custody cases. This is a global phenomenon, where non-citizen mothers face an extra hurdle with courts and social services that instead privilege of the interests of citizen fathers. Regardless of how these men have behaved.
Of added note is that, despite Maria’s film having received awards and screened at film festivals throughout the world, it is unable to be shown in Sweden. This is due to Sweden’s unique defamation laws, where, effectively, the reputations of men are considered more important than a woman’s right to speak publicly about their abuse (although the film doesn’t name her ex-partner, he could be identified through her name).
In an article concerning a high profile accusation of rape in the New York Times in March 2022, the Swedish journalist, Jenny Nordberg, explained how the protection of men’s reputations works in Sweden. The accuser in this case had to pay damages to the accused for defamation.
"Unlike in the United States, where truth is widely considered to be an absolute defense in defamation cases, Swedish law takes a two-step approach. The court first decides whether the alleged defamation is "justifiable"— that is, whether it's of broad public interest. Only if the court decides that a statement is justifiable will it move on to consider whether or not it is true. In this case, despite Mr. Virtanen's being one of the highest-profile writers at the country's largest newspaper, the court concluded that he was not enough of a public figure to justify public interest in his personal conduct. Ms. Wallin's posts, in other words, were not justifiable, and as a result, it didn't matter whether her account of their encounter was accurate. 'The court will not review whether the statements were true,' the verdict read."
The Malappropriation of Language
This week the Australian government government announced that its forthcoming referendum to include a recognition of First Nations people in the constitution and establish a Voice to Parliament will be held on 14 October.
As I follow the campaigning in the Australian press, a noticeable tactic from the “No” campaign has emerged. This is the specific language that they are using to make their case. Their campaign has been claiming that the “Yes” campaign are being “divisive” and “driving a wedge” between Australians.
This is a neat little trick that authoritarian personality types use as a tactic – always accuse others of what you yourself are guilty of. It is common with people who are personally abusive, and it is common with nefarious forms of politics (Trump is the master of “I know you are but what am I?”). It’s a form of DARVO - deny, attack, reverse victim and offender. It’s not just the misappropriation of language, but the malappropriation of language – an intentional misuse of terminology with the aim of demonstrating gall and being deceiving.
It, unfortunately, works in politics because it is able to gain traction with those who feel that something that may benefit one group comes at the cost of their group. This is a deeply rooted psychological impulse, very difficult to counteract, and very easy to exploit.
By contrast, the Yes campaign have just released a positive advert, placing the referendum in the context of other important developments in Australia’s recent history. It is clearly an advert attempting to be inclusive. And hopefully one that can sway those who may be on the fence.
This Week’s Reading
Grant Wyeth - International Blue
“This confusion between positive liberty, social democracy, socialism and modern progressive politics forms the basis of America’s use of the word “liberal”. The word acts as an umbrella term for these distinct political ideas and dispositions. It has become a means to condense a great variety of thought into a two-party system and an incessant binary discourse. In doing so Americans have forgone – to their detriment – a comprehensive political lexicon that explains the actual complex multitude of political ideas.
To be fair to Americans there is a space where these ideas do intersect. This is the belief that all societies should be rationally striving for progress and development. However, liberalism is cautious of any utopian ideals and sceptical of human perfectibility. The improvements it seeks are motivated by reason, but grounded in pragmatism, recognising reason’s limits. Liberalism – unlike other political and social frameworks – delegates the responsibility of maturity and discipline to the individual. Tying individual agency to the cultivation of character, and recognising the importance of voluntary forms of organisation in civil society.”
Australian Lawmakers Tinker Around Hague Convention Flaws
Grant Wyeth - The Diplomat
Additional amendments to the Family Law Act to try and protect mothers and children fleeing domestic abuse internationally would be welcome. It would be an acknowledgment from the Australian government that it understands how deeply flawed the Hague Convention has become, and how it is now harming the people it was initially designed to protect.
Yet this does pose the question of why the government continues to uphold a convention it knows is dangerously flawed. The best explanation I can think of is that it still believes the Hague Convention is important for the quarter of cases that are genuine forms of child abduction. It is, of course, vital that there is some international framework to coordinate and address this serious problem. But at the moment a large number of mothers and children are losing their rights to live free from violence in order to address this minority of cases. This is a callous way to continue.
For the Melanesian Spearhead Group, West Papua Presents a Challenge
Grant Wyeth – The Diplomat
“However, as four of the five members of the MSG are sovereign states, they have strategic calculations that are often in tension with the values that the MSG was founded upon. Indonesia’s growing stature in the Indo-Pacific, and a willingness to use this burgeoning power for regional influence, has complicated the issue of West Papua for the MSG. Papua New Guinea, which shares a long land border and maritime space with Indonesia, especially has to be mindful of its relationship with its large and increasingly influential neighbour.
As a country with a significant Melanesian population, Indonesia was given associate status to the MSG in 2015. Jakarta claims Indonesia has a Melanesian population of 11 million people distributed over five of its 34 provinces (which would make it the largest Melanesian state). However, while the provinces of West Papua and Papua are recognised as being regions of Melanesian ethnicity, there remains some debate over classification of the inhabitants of the Maluku Islands and other provinces in eastern Indonesia.
Jakarta’s “Pacific Elevation” is Indonesia’s attempt to establish a more Pacific-facing posture, a way of expanding its regional engagement beyond ASEAN and its relationships in northeast Asia. But it has also been a strategy to blunt support for the ULMWP within the Pacific. And with this, it looks to have been successful.”
Women, Peace, and Security in the Pacific
Heather Wrathall & Elizabeth Kopel – The Diplomat
“Traditional culture and institutions also exacerbate gender-based violence in communities where maintaining the collective and communal interests are given prominence over individual rights of women and girls. Violence related to sorcery accusations is also an exacerbating factor affecting women, girls, and other vulnerable members of society in the Pacific region.
In the Pacific, security is enriched by the prominence of traditional mechanisms and culture, such as chiefs, churches, and local institutions. These can provide greater space for women’s participation but can also impose restrictions on women’s agency in relation to security. The embrace of the perspectives within the Women, Peace, and Security agenda by these traditional structures can prove highly influential and potentially transformative to the lives of women and girls who face the daily terror of gender-based violence.”
Nathan Levine – Foreign Affairs
“When U.S. leaders press Chinese leaders to permit “competition” to be the conceptual basis for their countries’ relationship, they are drawing on a specific conception of what competition entails, one based on the ideals envisioned by classical democratic liberalism. In this vision—core to the liberal tradition of political philosophy—political competition is competitive in the sense of a sporting match: a contest of ideas that may be waged with great passion but that, at the end of the day, can be resolved peaceably, even amicably. Both competitors know the outcome is not final and the loser has the right to return and compete again. Political competition is, if not a game, at least not a matter of life or death.
This understanding of competition could not differ more from the vision of politics held by Xi and the CCP leadership. While the modern CCP has tried to leave behind aspects of Mao Zedong’s legacy—by reforming and opening the economy after 1979 and loosening its collectivist ambitions—Mao’s Marxist-Leninist view of political “competition” remains central to its thinking. This vision presented politics as precisely the life-or-death struggle the democratic liberal ideal claims it is not. In this view, political competition is a raw struggle for power between groups or factions that can only be a prelude to the eradication of one’s competitor; indeed, the history of Leninist politics in China is replete with purges, prison camps, and political murders. As Mao framed it, political competition comes down to “Ni si; wo huo” (You die; I live).”
The End Will Come For The Cult of MAGA
Peter Sagal – The Atlantic
“Steven Hassan, another former cult member (also a Moonie), published his book The Cult of Trump in 2019, long before the attack on the Capitol, even before Trump persuaded thousands of his followers to gather indoors unmasked during the worst airborne pandemic in a century. Hassan told me that the MAGA movement checks all the boxes of his “BITE” model of cult mind control—behaviour, information, thought, and emotional control. Like all cult leaders, he argues, Trump restricts the information his followers are allowed to accept; demands purity of belief (beliefs that can change from moment to moment, as per his whims and needs); and appeals to his followers through the conjuring of primal emotions—not just fear but also joy.
His rallies, as so many have reported, are ecstatic events; people cheer and laugh as their various enemies are condemned and insulted. Hassan will be the first to tell you that being part of a cult means you’re empowered, special, one of the elect, close to the person who has all the answers/will lead us to paradise/will “make America great again.” That, in fact, may be the greatest disincentive to turn away from Trump: Nothing is more fun than knowing that you and your friends are the ones who are right about everything.”
Brad Stulberg – New York Times
“Allostasis is defined as “stability through change,” elegantly capturing the concept’s double meaning: The way to stay stable through the process of change is by changing, at least to some extent. If you want to hold your footing, you’ve got to keep moving.
From neuroscience to pain science and psychology, allostasis has become the predominant model for understanding change in the scientific community. The brain is at its best when it is constantly rewiring itself and making new connections — what we experience as a thriving and stable consciousness is actually a process of ongoing change. Overcoming pain, be it physical or psychological, is not about resistance (which often worsens the experience) or trying to get back to where you were before a distressing event or situation. It’s about balancing acceptance with problem-solving and moving forward to a new normal. A healthy response to change and disorder, whether it’s within ourselves or our environments, is one based on the allostatis process. And yet this concept is still little known to laypeople. This is unfortunate.
Adopting an allostatic outlook acknowledges that the goal of mature adulthood is not to avoid, fight or try to control change, but rather to skillfully engage with it. It recognises that after disorder, there is often no going back to the way things were — no one form of order, but many forms of reorder. Via this shift, you come to view change and disorder not as something that happens to you but as something that you are working with, an ongoing dance between you and your environment. You stop fearing change, which is to say you stop fearing life.”