Trump Promises

[Bjauck]

They get significant subsidies from denmark though and are danish/eu citizens. If they are independent both of those valuable things would end.

True. They were the first country to leave the EEC/EU and then negotiate an associate deal. The move to independence is popular. Maybe they could negotiate better association and mining deals with the USA?

[moka]

The Danish enforced contraception of Inuit women in Greenland in the 1960’s and 1970’s casts their Nordic social liberalism in a new light?

Inuit Greenlanders demand answers over Danish birth control scandal

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63049387

Interesting article, thanks for posting Bjauck. It seems to me that it is the ideology of colonialism rather than Nordic social liberalism that shaped the decisions of how the Danish enforced contraception on Inuit women in Greenland.

Nordic Social Liberalism and Colonialism in Greenland
Historical Context of Danish Colonialism
Denmark's colonial relationship with Greenland began in 1721 when Hans Egede established a trading post and missionary activities, marking the start of a long period of colonization. The Danish government sought to "civilize" the Inuit population while simultaneously monopolizing trade and exploiting local resources, which led to significant changes in Greenlandic society and economy.
Over the years, Denmark maintained a paternalistic approach, often justifying its actions as beneficial for Greenlandic society, despite the underlying economic motivations.

Decolonization and Integration
In 1953, Denmark formally integrated Greenland as a county within the Kingdom of Denmark, transitioning from a colonial status to one of administrative governance. This move was framed as decolonization; however, it paradoxically reinforced Denmark's influence over Greenland. The modernization efforts during this period aimed to develop infrastructure and education but were criticized for prioritizing Danish culture and language at the expense of Greenlandic identity.

Nordic Social Liberalism's Influence
Nordic social liberalism emphasizes social welfare, equality, and democracy. While these principles have guided contemporary policies in Denmark, their application in Greenland has been complex. The modernization initiatives in the 1950s and 1960s—often described as "Danization"—were intended to uplift Greenland but resulted in social disruption, including high suicide rates and cultural dislocation among the Inuit population.

Critics argue that these policies exemplified a form of neo-colonialism, where the imposition of Danish norms undermined indigenous practices and identities.

Current Implications
Today, discussions about Greenland's future are intertwined with its colonial past. As Greenland seeks greater autonomy and potential independence, the legacy of Danish colonialism continues to shape its social fabric and political landscape. The historical paternalism inherent in Danish governance has left lasting impacts on Greenlandic identity and societal cohesion.

The relationship between Denmark and Greenland serves as a critical case study in understanding how Nordic social liberalism interacts with colonial legacies—highlighting tensions between modern welfare ideals and historical injustices. As both regions navigate their evolving relationship, addressing these historical complexities is essential for fostering genuine partnership and reconciliation.
Written by Perplexity AI

https://nordics.info/show/artikel/th...d-its-legacies
https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/cgi/...=senproj_s2018
“By Gifts One Makes Slaves”: Long-term Effects of Denmark’s Colonization of Greenland
https://nordics.info/show/artikel/th...d-its-legacies The colonialism of Denmark-Norway and its legacies
https://www.britannica.com/place/Greenland/History
https://nordics.info/show/artikel/th...land-1945-54-1
The Danish decolonisation of Greenland, 1945-54

[moka]

I wasn’t aware of Denmark’s history of colonization. Denmark's history of colonization spans several centuries, with its colonial empire reaching across four continents: Africa, Asia, Europe, and North America. The Danish colonial era began in the early 17th century and lasted until the mid-20th century.
Key Colonial Possessions

• India: Denmark established its first colony in Tranquebar (Tharangambadi) on India's southern coast in 1620.
• Caribbean: The Danish West Indies, now the U.S. Virgin Islands, were Denmark's most significant overseas colony outside Europe and Greenland.
• West Africa: Denmark held colonial possessions on the Gold Coast (modern-day Ghana).
• North Atlantic: Greenland, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands were part of the Danish realm, with Greenland and the Faroes remaining autonomous territories within the Kingdom of Denmark today.

Timeline of Danish Colonialism

• 1620: Establishment of Tranquebar in India
• 1666-1917: Danish colonies created in the Caribbean
• 1721: Colonization of Greenland begins
• 1814: Norway ceded to Sweden, but Denmark retained overseas possessions
• 1845: Sale of Indian possessions to the British
• 1917: Sale of the Danish West Indies to the United States
• 1953: Greenland's colonial status officially ends

Characteristics of Danish Colonialism
Denmark's approach to colonialism was often characterized as "tutelary," particularly in Greenland. This form of colonialism involved:
1. Positioning Denmark as a benevolent guardian of colonized peoples
2. Attempts to "civilize" and modernize colonized societies while simultaneously preserving certain traditional practices for economic reasons.

In Greenland, this resulted in complex and sometimes contradictory policies that sought to both modernize Greenlandic society and maintain traditional hunting practices.
Written by Perplexity AI.

[moka]

I suspect Trump's rhetoric about Greenland is part of his strategy to pull Russia into line over Ukraine.

https://www.npr.org/2025/01/11/nx-s1...a-canal-canada
In the case of Greenland and Panama, those "real goals" include keeping China and other potential adversaries at bay — a sort of throwback to the Monroe Doctrine, a policy first espoused by President James Monroe more than two centuries ago as a warning to European powers not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere, which the U.S. viewed as its sole purview.
Some see Trump's tactics as a contemporary version of Nixon's "Madman Theory"
Former President Richard Nixon frequently gets the credit for a strategy aimed at making adversaries believe in a leader's capacity for madness as a way to instill fear and gain the upper hand in international relations.

The Monroe Doctrine is a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy, first articulated by President James Monroe on December 2, 1823, during his seventh annual State of the Union Address to Congress
It opposes European colonialism and intervention in the Western Hemisphere, considering any such action as a potentially hostile act against the United States.
The doctrine consists of four key principles:

1. The United States would not interfere in European affairs.
2. The U.S. recognized and would not interfere with existing European colonies in the Americas.
3. The Western Hemisphere was closed to future colonization.
4. Any attempt by a European power to interfere with or control any nation in the Americas would be viewed as a hostile act against the United States

The Monroe Doctrine was primarily written by then-Secretary of State John Quincy Adams and was intended to protect the newly independent Latin American nations from European recolonization attempts. It also addressed Russian ambitions to establish a colony on North America's Pacific Northwest coast.

Over time, the doctrine has been expanded and reinterpreted. In 1904, President Theodore Roosevelt added the Roosevelt Corollary, which allowed U.S. intervention in Latin American countries' internal affairs under certain circumstances. However, this was later reversed by President Franklin Roosevelt's Good Neighbor Policy in the 1930s.

The Monroe Doctrine has played a significant role in shaping U.S. foreign policy and its relationships with Latin American countries throughout history.

[moka]

The Monroe Doctrine is a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. It opposes European colonialism and intervention in the Western Hemisphere, considering any such action as a potentially hostile act against the United States.

The Western Hemisphere is the half of Earth that lies west of the Prime Meridian (0° longitude) and east of the 180th meridian. It encompasses the entirety of North and South America, as well as portions of Europe, Africa, and Antarctica.

Key features of the Western Hemisphere include:
Geographical extent: It contains all of the Americas, about half of Antarctica, and the westernmost parts of Europe and Africa.
Oceans: The Western Hemisphere includes most of the Atlantic Ocean and the eastern Pacific Ocean.

Population distribution: While containing all of the Americas, the Western Hemisphere is home to a smaller portion of the global population compared to the Eastern Hemisphere.
Cultural significance: The Western Hemisphere was once referred to as the "New World" due to its later exploration and mapping compared to the Eastern Hemisphere.

It's important to note that some countries are partially located in the Western Hemisphere, including the United Kingdom, France, Spain, and several African nations like Ghana and Mali. The Western Hemisphere is not only a geographical concept but also carries cultural and historical significance in the context of global exploration and development.
Written by Perplexity AI

[moka]

President-elect Donald Trump's recent statements about Canada, Panama, and Greenland do not strictly align with the traditional interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. While there are some similarities in the underlying motivations, Trump's approach represents a significant departure from the original doctrine's principles.

The Monroe Doctrine, established in 1823, primarily focused on:
1. Opposing European colonization in the Americas
2. Non-interference in European affairs
3. Protecting the Western Hemisphere from foreign intervention

Trump's recent rhetoric differs from the Monroe Doctrine in several key ways:
1. Targeting allies: Trump's comments about annexing Canada and reclaiming the Panama Canal target long-standing U.S. allies, rather than opposing European colonization.
2. Expansionist tone: The original Monroe Doctrine aimed to prevent further colonization, while Trump's statements suggest a more expansionist approach.
3. Focus on economic and strategic interests: Trump's interest in Greenland appears to be motivated by economic and strategic concerns, particularly related to countering Chinese influence in the Arctic.

However, some aspects of Trump's approach do echo elements of the Monroe Doctrine:
1. Asserting U.S. dominance: Trump's statements reassert U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere, similar to the doctrine's original intent.
2. Countering foreign powers: Trump's focus on preventing Chinese and Russian influence in the region aligns with the doctrine's goal of limiting foreign intervention.

In conclusion, while Trump's approach shares some broad goals with the Monroe Doctrine, such as asserting U.S. influence in the Americas, his specific tactics and targets represent a significant departure from the original policy's principles and applications.
Written by Perplexity AI

[moka]

'Malignancy': Historian says 'everything just feels worse all the time' with Trump

President-elect Donald Trump's unique talent, according to one historian, is his ability to despoil moments that should bring Americans together. Trump has even used the devastation from California's fires to lob attacks at his political opponents instead of trying to bring the country together.
"It does strike me as something novel about the right, certainly within the last 15 years... there is a combination of the malignancy of Donald Trump himself, who is constantly seeking ways to be in the headlines, the media environment in which we live that really favors this kind of outrage and negative emotion, and a conservative media ecosystem that takes that revved-up let's-make-everybody-angry dynamic and applies it to electoral politics," she said. "All those things come together to turn everything that happens into an opportunity for a fight."

[jonu]

'Malignancy': Historian says 'everything just feels worse all the time' with Trump

President-elect Donald Trump's unique talent, according to one historian, is his ability to despoil moments that should bring Americans together. Trump has even used the devastation from California's fires to lob attacks at his political opponents instead of trying to bring the country together.
"It does strike me as something novel about the right, certainly within the last 15 years... there is a combination of the malignancy of Donald Trump himself, who is constantly seeking ways to be in the headlines, the media environment in which we live that really favors this kind of outrage and negative emotion, and a conservative media ecosystem that takes that revved-up let's-make-everybody-angry dynamic and applies it to electoral politics," she said. "All those things come together to turn everything that happens into an opportunity for a fight."

Interesting to see the view of a leftie historian. It displays a complete lack of awareness of the over reach of the left that has caused an inevitable pendulum swing. Normal conservative views are now regularly labelled "Far right".

The LA mayor deserves all the stick she is getting. She has now sacked her fire chief who has been openly criticisng her for budget cuts for months. The LA fires have been exacerbated by well documented management incompetency of utilities and scrub (fire fuel).

I suspect Newsom will also come in for his fair share of criticism when the dust settles, perhaps impacting on any run he has for the Presidency. as a former mayor of San Francisco his track record is awful.

Both the LA mayor and Newsom are fair game for criticism by Trump or anyone else who witnesses glaring incompetency.

[blackcap]

Interesting to see the view of a leftie historian. It displays a complete lack of awareness of the over reach of the left that has caused an inevitable pendulum swing. Normal conservative views are now regularly labelled "Far right".

The LA mayor deserves all the stick she is getting. She has now sacked her fire chief who has been openly criticisng her for budget cuts for months. The LA fires have been exacerbated by well documented management incompetency of utilities and scrub (fire fuel).

I suspect Newsom will also come in for his fair share of criticism when the dust settles, perhaps impacting on any run he has for the Presidency. as a former mayor of San Francisco his track record is awful.

Both the LA mayor and Newsom are fair game for criticism by Trump or anyone else who witnesses glaring incompetency.

I agree with your sentiments here Jonu. I am actually quite thankful that these idiot lefties are ruining things and now even the people of LA and greater California are going to take note. Who knows, Trump got a larger share of California this time, maybe next election, Vance is going to take California.

[iceman]

Denmark’s imperial policies towards Greenlanders, just show that they are just another European imperial power with cavalier attitudes to locals. Maybe the local Greenlanders could play America off against Denmark, to get the best deal for their country as they head towards independence?

There are plenty of abuse scandals from around the World. How are they relevant to Greenland - and Trump’s policy statements?

The Greenland inquiry is ongoing.

An item from 2024.
Indigenous Women in Greenland Sue Denmark Over Involuntary Contraception in the 1960s and 1970s

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-n...960s-and-1970s

Meanwhile The Greenlander representative in The Danish parliament is stopped from speaking Greenlandic there.
Inuit lawmaker who intended to speak Greenlandic stopped from addressing the Danish Parliament

https://halifax.citynews.ca/2024/10/...sh-parliament/

I totally agree that Denmark has been and is a colonial power, even though they have very little influence over the Faroe Islands today, but still a lot of influence over Greenland, but for a reason. Read on.
I know a bit about this as my old country only started prospering a few decades after becoming independent from Denmark in 1944.

But, why do you think there is such a big difference between the situation with the Faroe Islands and Greenland, i.e. why does Denmark not have much say in the Faroes but basically controls Greenland.
Well a lot of that has got to do with criminal organisations like Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd, supported by do-gooder countries like NZ, Australia and USA (and others). In the 1980s, Sea Shepherd (run by the criminal Paul Watson) hired Inuit people and paid them money handsomely to go and gruesomely kill seal pups and drag them across the ice with the mum seal chasing them and crying. It made for a great tv and great propaganda. But it did not represent the way in which the Inuits killed seals for their own income and survival.
This was followed by a campaign by Greenpeace using Brigitte Bardot filmed in a studio in France holding a seal pup and then later hundreds of Greenpeace activists going to Greenland and out on the ice to spray paint the seals so their furs became worthless.
In 2-3 short years, these 2 organisations, supported by do-gooder countries like NZ, Aus & USA, had destroyed the livelihoods of the Inuits. They could no longer sell the skins so hunting of seals became an impossible task, leading to a complete destruction of the Inuit communities. The economic part of the seal hunt was the skins, The meat (human consumption) and the fat (energy) were by-products for personal use. Sorry moka, I know your AI won't tell you any of this because it doesn't follow the narrative they want you to repeat. I was close and I know.
NZ, AUS & USA then lead the anti-whaling campaigns that followed, based purely on emotion where all scientific evidence was ignored and POPULISM reigned. The last nail in the Inuits coffins
The following 3-4 decades saw the Inuit people become hopeless alcoholics and drug addicts because their livelihoods had been taken away.

As Panda correctly states in his comment, Denmark has actually poured money into Greenland because they became a basket case as they were not allowed to harvest their natural resources. But these people were put into apartment blocks in towns, both of these terms/words were foreign concepts to them. Meanwhile and ever since, I bet not one poster on this site or in NZ, would correctly answer a question on "what is the biggest whaling nation in the World". Why ? Because it is the USA. They have an indigenous quota that is larger than the quotas of Norway, Iceland, Faroes or Japan. But it's OK because it's somehow more indigenous than other people. Well my people have been in my old country since 874 so I am not sure how indigenous you have to be. Or is the definition of indigenous based on skin colour ?

I am sorry for this lengthy epistle but seeing the comments about Denmark and Greenland here makes me pretty upset. They are based on very selective knowledge and totally ignoring the main issues leading to the current situation.
Sadly for me, NZ has been one of the worst countries in the World with the stupid anti-whaling stance, where science, economics & historical culture have been pushed to one side to suit a totally emotionally driven nutcase and wealthy part of society. It killed the Inuit culture and livelihood. And the Maoris, whale harvesters from way back, went along with it. Why ?
Over & out.