3 ms·

"2. Media outlets individually (particularly in the US) decided not to cover the actions of the Icelandic government because they think most of their viewers do

"2. Media outlets individually (particularly in the US) decided not to cover the actions of the Icelandic government because they think most of their viewers don't care much about Iceland and/or because "check out what has slowly been happening in Iceland over the past 5 years" isn't much of a breaking news story." It's highly relevant because of the stark contrast in the manner in which Iceland prosecuted the bankers like the criminals they are, versus the crazy manner in which bankers are treated in the US and Europe. One law for the corrupt, rich, and connected bankers, and much harsher laws for ordinary people who are not connected, wealthy and powerful (e.g. individuals targeted for illegal downloads versus bankers blowing up the global economy causing untold economic hardship). This sends out a strong message from a government to it's electorate: fuck you, you miserable peasant. Not only will you go along with these bailouts, you'll cheer loudly for your bought candidate when he's re-elected. I'm from Ireland, and we should have copied Iceland to the letter. The difference is we're in the EU and our government is happy to be Angela Merkel's little bitch, and take the pain (sovereign debt burden) to maintain the illusion that everything is rosy in the garden. Iceland even had the balls to crowd-source it's new constitution, giving real, tangible power to it's people (you couldn't even imagine this in most countries). Talk about real democracy compared to crony capitalism: http://gigaom.com/2012/10/22/icelanders-approve-their-crowdsourced-constitution/ http://gigaom.com/2012/10/22/icelanders-approve-their-crowds... Great article on Iceland from Michael Lewis (Wall Street on the Tundra): http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/04/iceland200904 http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/04/iceland2...

arnarbi 14y ago
Icelandic here. What bankers did we prosecute? As far as I know, only two people of minor importance have been prosecuted. And we didn't "crowd-source" our constitution (which hasn't been changed yet, btw). The committee of 25 people simply maintained a website where they could collect opinions. They had no significance other than being input to the work of that committee. But I suppose many Icelandic are happy to let this kind of misunderstanding propagate, rather than explaining how we messed up the election of those 25 people, how their suggestion for a new constitution is actually only "advice" for the parliament, and how nothing has happened yet as we still have the same old constitution. We also don't like to mention that there is little wrong with our old constitution. It's pretty standard. The suggestions for the new one, as far as the banking crisis goes, are about more transparency in government. Other changes are about different things (such as ownership of natural resources, etc.) There is a lot of misinformation and hype in the foreign media around how Iceland has handled the crisis. As an Icelander living abroad, talking about this topic mainly consists of telling people "actually, that's not what happened..".
- zharko 14y ago
  Very interesting, indeed as an outsider it's hard to see what really happens there... no matter the media that reports on Iceland they will try to hype something. Can you please write here a list of facts about what happened there after the crisis besides what you already wrote? I'm curious to learn
  - arnarbi 14y ago
    You ask me to write an unbiased history essay for the last 5 years, which I'm neither qualified nor able to do. Haven't read these in detail, but the look ok on a quick glance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932012_Icelandic_financial_crisis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932012_Icelandic_fin... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icesave_dispute http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icesave_dispute
- yesbabyyes 14y ago
  Very interesting. Regarding ownership of natural resources, though, I think that's pretty relevant and related to the financial crisis. In other countries, that's exactly what's taken as collateral for loans. As I understand it, Iceland refused to give up the volcanic heat for debt -- a very wise decision. I think Iceland (and other countries) could do well looking at Alaska and their oil fund for inspiration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund

arnarbi 14y ago

Icelandic here. What bankers did we prosecute? As far as I know, only two people of minor importance have been prosecuted. And we didn't "crowd-source" our constitution (which hasn't been changed yet, btw). The committee of 25 people simply maintained a website where they could collect opinions. They had no significance other than being input to the work of that committee. But I suppose many Icelandic are happy to let this kind of misunderstanding propagate, rather than explaining how we messed up the election of those 25 people, how their suggestion for a new constitution is actually only "advice" for the parliament, and how nothing has happened yet as we still have the same old constitution. We also don't like to mention that there is little wrong with our old constitution. It's pretty standard. The suggestions for the new one, as far as the banking crisis goes, are about more transparency in government. Other changes are about different things (such as ownership of natural resources, etc.) There is a lot of misinformation and hype in the foreign media around how Iceland has handled the crisis. As an Icelander living abroad, talking about this topic mainly consists of telling people "actually, that's not what happened..".

zharko 14y ago
Very interesting, indeed as an outsider it's hard to see what really happens there... no matter the media that reports on Iceland they will try to hype something. Can you please write here a list of facts about what happened there after the crisis besides what you already wrote? I'm curious to learn
- arnarbi 14y ago
  You ask me to write an unbiased history essay for the last 5 years, which I'm neither qualified nor able to do. Haven't read these in detail, but the look ok on a quick glance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932012_Icelandic_financial_crisis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932012_Icelandic_fin... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icesave_dispute http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icesave_dispute
yesbabyyes 14y ago
Very interesting. Regarding ownership of natural resources, though, I think that's pretty relevant and related to the financial crisis. In other countries, that's exactly what's taken as collateral for loans. As I understand it, Iceland refused to give up the volcanic heat for debt -- a very wise decision. I think Iceland (and other countries) could do well looking at Alaska and their oil fund for inspiration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund