Lutheranism Works in Norway

[Whag]

Well you got the swarming bees part right.

Okay, bad Wagner. But I consider all Wagner bad. It made Hitler invade Poland.

[shunyadragon]

I mainly thought it would be a good topic of discussion, since Norway has a strong Lutheran background. What do you think accounts for their emotional restraint?

Considering Lutheran history, particularly the writings of Martin Luther, I do not consider this manner of Norwegians an attribute of Lutheranism, but an attribute common to Scandanavians.

[Whag]

Considering Lutheran history, particularly the writings of Martin Luther, I do not consider this manner of Norwegians an attribute of Lutheranism, but an attribute common to Scandanavians.

I didn't know what you were talking about so I went looking. Wow.

[ZackMartin]

Considering Lutheran history, particularly the writings of Martin Luther, I do not consider this manner of Norwegians an attribute of Lutheranism, but an attribute common to Scandanavians.

I agree with you completely about Martin Luther, but there is much more to Lutheranism than Luther.

One thing that came to my mind is the Pietist movement in Lutheranism. Pietism is definitely an element in Norwegian Lutheranism, although I don't know it well enough to say how big an element. I wonder if Lutheran Pietism, as opposed to Lutheranism simplicter, might be a factor here. Whereas Luther is famous for his literary venom against those who disagree with him, the founder of Lutheran Pietism (Philipp Spener) by contrast emphasised treating heretics and unbelievers with kindness and sympathy. Pietists also emphasised being more Christlike in one's behaviour and attitudes that Martin Luther did (whose personal attitudes were far from being Christlike). So I wonder if through Lutheran Pietism Norwegian culture may have truly imbibed Jesus' words in Luke 6:27-36 (NIV):

27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

32 “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. 35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

Is not Norway treating Breivik in the manner in which Jesus instructed?

Zack

[Whag]

I agree with you completely about Martin Luther, but there is much more to Lutheranism than Luther.

One thing that came to my mind is the Pietist movement in Lutheranism. Pietism is definitely an element in Norwegian Lutheranism, although I don't know it well enough to say how big an element. I wonder if Lutheran Pietism, as opposed to Lutheranism simplicter, might be a factor here. Whereas Luther is famous for his literary venom against those who disagree with him, the founder of Lutheran Pietism (Philipp Spener) by contrast emphasised treating heretics and unbelievers with kindness and sympathy. Pietists also emphasised being more Christlike in one's behaviour and attitudes that Martin Luther did (whose personal attitudes were far from being Christlike). So I wonder if through Lutheran Pietism Norwegian culture may have truly imbibed Jesus' words in Luke 6:27-36 (NIV):

27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

32 “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. 35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

Is not Norway treating Breivik in the manner in which Jesus instructed?

Zack

Maybe shuny has a point. Perhaps scandinavian morality naturally evolved to recognize that societal rage simply begets more rage. After all, Japan seemed to have had its emotions in check after that lunatic messiah gassed the subway.

[ZackMartin]

After all, Japan seemed to have had its emotions in check after that lunatic messiah gassed the subway.

True to a point, but one notable difference is that Japan has the death penalty and Norway doesn't; furthermore, in Japan, opinion polls show capital punishment has majority support, while in Norway, there is only 16% support, 68% opposition. More interesting is that the latter poll was taken after Breivik's massacre, which does not appear to have had anything more than a minor impact on Norwegian attitudes towards the death penalty. By contrast, many commentators argue the subway gas attacks strengthened support for the death penalty in Japan and constituted a setback for the abolitionist cause. So this vast gap in public opinion between the two countries, even in reaction to mass murder, is an interesting cultural observation.

Zack

[Whag]

True to a point, but one notable difference is that Japan has the death penalty and Norway doesn't; furthermore, in Japan, opinion polls show capital punishment has majority support, while in Norway, there is only 16% support, 68% opposition. More interesting is that the latter poll was taken after Breivik's massacre, which does not appear to have had anything more than a minor impact on Norwegian attitudes towards the death penalty. By contrast, many commentators argue the subway gas attacks strengthened support for the death penalty in Japan and constituted a setback for the abolitionist cause. So this vast gap in public opinion between the two countries, even in reaction to mass murder, is an interesting cultural observation.

Zack

So it would probably be helpful to get some data so as to not draw false conclusions about correlations. If it's true, I'd find it very gratifying that liberal Christianity in Norway would have such a calming influence on the culture, but it's probably more likely a combination of factors with religion not being especially dominant.

From wiki:

In Norway, 82.7% of the population are members of the Evangelical Lutheran Church as compared to 96% in the 1960s.[citation needed] Kevin Boyle, a professor of history at the Ohio State University says, "Most members of the state church are not active adherents, except for the rituals of birth, confirmation, weddings, and burials. Some 3 per cent on average attend church on Sunday and 10 per cent on average attend church every month."[18]

[ZackMartin]

So it would probably be helpful to get some data so as to not draw false conclusions about correlations. If it's true, I'd find it very gratifying that liberal Christianity in Norway would have such a calming influence on the culture, but it's probably more likely a combination of factors with religion not being especially dominant.

I think it is very difficult to say what role Christianity may or may not play in this difference between Japan and Norway. Probably religion has some role in the uniqueness of any culture, but I doubt it is the only factor. It is likely impossible to determine how big a factor it actually is.

One factor is likely that in societies in which the death penalty has been abolished, support for the death penalty declines at the time. This page has some interesting stats. In most cases where the death penalty is abolished, majority opinion at the time is in favour of retention - but the political elites (including democratically elected ones) make the decision to disregard public opinion on the issue - death penalty opposition is more of a top-down than than bottom-down process. (Those who think democracy is an absolute good will decry this, whereas those like me who think that democracy is a good thing in moderation would be less likely to agree.)

I'm not sure why Japan retains it when Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada have abolished it. While abolition has never tended to be a particularly democratic decision, I don't think it is feasible to argue that Japan is somehow more democratic than those countries - anyone who knows Japanese politics knows that isn't true, with 54 years of continuous LDP rule from 1955 to 2009. I think the answer has to be that the Japanese elites were never convinced in the way that the elites in those other countries were. The US is a different story - elements of direct democracy in some states, election in many states of prosecutors and judges (something which would in many other countries be considered repugnant to notions of judicial and prosecutorial independence), a party system which strongly two-party yet which simultaneously has very weak party discipline, a presidential system which produces legislative-executive disunity, all combine to make the US system more responsive to popular opinion, at least on some issues.

But anyway, what then tends to happen, is that even though the abolition of the death penalty is rarely a popular measure, as the years and decades roll by, the death penalty falls in popularity, as the population gets less used to the idea of it, and it comes to be seen by more and more people as something backward and foreign. That page mentions this happening in Germany and France (and I take it, the same is observed in most or all countries of Western Europe).

Another page shows the same phenomena in my own country, Australia - in this series of polls, support fell from 53% in 1962 to 43% in 1975 - the last execution took place in 1967. For some reason, it becomes majority supported again in 1989, with 52% support, compared to 49% in 1987. It falls to the 20s range in the 2005-2009 period. So the overall trend here is down, although there are some bumps along the way. It was only formally abolished in the mid-1980s, so I wonder if the uptick in support in the late 1980s and early 1990s could be due to campaigns for its reintroduction, whereas since those campaigns have proven to be a hopeless cause, they have lost influence. Just a theory.

One oddity, is that a majority from 1986 through to 2009 appear to support the death penalty in overseas countries for Australian drug traffickers, even when a majority clearly oppose the death penalty for murder locally. But it's not clear to me if people saying "Yes" to this question actually favour drug traffickers receiving the death penalty, or if they simply mean to say "Well, if that's the law in that country, it should be enforced". It seems somewhat inconsistent to oppose the death penalty for murder but support it for drug trafficking.

Zack

[Darth Executor]

America has higher rates of people in jail because of longer prison sentences than most nations, and because America is more likely to jail people for nonviolent crimes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world/americas/23iht-23prison.12253738.html?pagewanted=all

Despite the recent decline in the murder rate in the United States, it is still about four times that of many nations in Western Europe.

But that is only a partial explanation. The United States, in fact, has relatively low rates of nonviolent crime. It has lower burglary and robbery rates than Australia, Canada and England.

People who commit nonviolent crimes in the rest of the world are less likely to receive prison time and certainly less likely to receive long sentences. The United States is, for instance, the only advanced country that incarcerates people for minor property crimes like passing bad checks, Whitman wrote.

Efforts to combat illegal drugs play a major role in explaining long prison sentences in the United States as well. In 1980, there were about 40,000 people in American jails and prisons for drug crimes. These days, there are almost 500,000.

© source where applicable

It also has a steady supply of third world criminals coming from Mexico and fuelling gang activity.

[ZackMartin]

It also has a steady supply of third world criminals coming from Mexico and fuelling gang activity.

The US is scarcely the only country with a high level of illegal immigration. Look at what Europe gets - a constant stream of people from North Africa (many of whom have come from further south in Africa), turning up on the coast of Italy and Spain and other countries. The Italians I've heard are not too concerned, because they know that most of the immigrants are just passing through, and don't want to stay in Italy, they want to go to France or the UK.

And many people question if the US illegal immigration "crisis" still exists. Immigration from Mexico has been falling for years, and recently the net flow has turned, with more people moving from the US to Mexico than there are people moving from Mexico to the US (source). Part of that might be a temporary issue due to the economic downturn in the US, but there are other factors that suggest it could be more long-term: declining Mexican birth rates, growth in the Mexican economy - they reduce some of the pressures in Mexico that drive people to move to the US

[Darth Executor]

The US is scarcely the only country with a high level of illegal immigration. Look at what Europe gets - a constant stream of people from North Africa (many of whom have come from further south in Africa), turning up on the coast of Italy and Spain and other countries. The Italians I've heard are not too concerned, because they know that most of the immigrants are just passing through, and don't want to stay in Italy, they want to go to France or the UK.

Which has what to do with Norway?

And many people question if the US illegal immigration "crisis" still exists. Immigration from Mexico has been falling for years, and recently the net flow has turned, with more people moving from the US to Mexico then there are people moving from Mexico to the US (source). Part of that might be a temporary issue due to the economic downturn in the US, but there are other factors that suggest it could be more long-term: declining Mexican birth rates, growth in the Mexican economy - they reduce some of the pressures in Mexico that drive people to move to the US

I doubt drug dealers and the gangbangers they're working with are leaving, it's just the ones looking for more legitimate work that are out of luck.

[ZackMartin]

Which has what to do with Norway?

People were comparing the Norway to US, in terms of imprisonment rates. I don't think Norway is hugely distinctive by West European standards, although it is probably at the more left-wing end, but the bigger comparison here is really US vs. Western Europe. Other West European countries face similar immigration problems to the US, yet have a lot lower imprisonment rates, indicating you can't explain the US distinctiveness simply through an illegal immigration problem.

I doubt drug dealers and the gangbangers they're working with are leaving, it's just the ones looking for more legitimate work that are out of luck.

I think you overestimate what percentage of illegal immigrants are in to those sort of activities. Most of them work in legitimate jobs (or at least, they would be legitimate were it not for the immigration status issue). Some are gangsters or drug dealers, but the vast majority aren't. And a lot of legal residents and citizens are gangsters and drug dealers too.

[Darth Executor]

People were comparing the Norway to US, in terms of imprisonment rates. I don't think Norway is hugely distinctive by West European standards, although it is probably at the more left-wing end, but the bigger comparison here is really US vs. Western Europe. Other West European countries face similar immigration problems to the US

No they don't. Not even close.

I think you overestimate what percentage of illegal immigrants are in to those sort of activities.

How do you know what I estimate given that I haven't given any percentage (and I haven't because it doesn't matter)? The reality is that drugs are produced in Mexico and other South American countries (since it's a lot harder to get caught there) then brought into the States thanks to lax border security, and the competing gangs are fighting and killing each other (as well as innocent bystanders) for market share in the US resulting in considerably higher incarceration rates. What % of illegal immigrants are involved in it are irrelevant.

[ZackMartin]

No they don't. Not even close.

Would be nice if someone had some actual numbers to do a proper comparison, but I don't think either of us do. We're just exchanging impressions.

How do you know what I estimate given that I haven't given any percentage (and I haven't because it doesn't matter)? The reality is that drugs are produced in Mexico and other South American countries (since it's a lot harder to get caught there) then brought into the States thanks to lax border security, and the competing gangs are fighting and killing each other (as well as innocent bystanders) for market share in the US resulting in considerably higher incarceration rates. What % of illegal immigrants are involved in it are irrelevant.

Illegal drugs don't just go the US. Illegal drugs are found in most countries of the world. Drug dealers, drug gangs, shootings and killings, are found in most countries of the world. Drug dealers have been trying to kill each other in Sydney, Australia a fair bit recently. Mexicans or Latin Americans aren't involved in Sydney's drug gangs to any significant extent. Most of the recent cases of drive-bys in Sydney have involved people from Middle Eastern backgrounds. I'd say almost all the Latin Americans in Australia are from middle class or better backgrounds. Yet, despite other countries having a drug problem too, the US still leads the world in imprisonment rates.