I asked a few people to comment on my post about SAIH's support for the anti-Bush ad. SAIH withdrew the support, but seemed rather half-hearted about it.

Maria Serafia Fjellstad, who heads the Student Parliament at NTNU, agrees, and writes that they are "in no way content with SAIH's apology."

It is good that they've decided to withdraw the support - but it's a long way from that to an understanding of WHY students all over the country objected to this. SAIH donations are meant to go to humanitarian work - in this case they did not. How many percentage of their bugdet we're talking about or how many students who don't like Bush is irrelevant. Students all over Norway have great trust in SAIH and their selection of humanitarian causes - that trust was abused, and SAIH does not seem to have understood this.

Fjellstad claims that the donation to TellHim.no would have been at the expense of humanitarian projects, and I probably implied the same thing in my post. This turns out to be wrong. SAIH leader Eirik Gulseth points out to me that they have three separate budgets: One aid budget (>70% of the total), one administrative budget, and one information budget. The donation to TellHim.no would have gone from the information budget, and would not have caused any less money to be spent on humanitarian causes. They're entirely different budgets.

But who funds the information budget? The same people who fund the aid budget: students. And why should SAIH's information budget be spent on a campaign which has nothing to do with SAIH or education? Giving money to TellHim.no might not have been abuse of aid money, but it would still be abuse of student donations.

Gulseth continues:

SAIH has never claimed that it only works with education projects. But they make up most of the organization's work. ... SAIH does work in three different areas: education aid, information, and political change. Education aid alone is not necessarily enough to create development. For aid to work you need more than donations from the north to the south. It's just as important to work with the underlying structures that make the poor poorer and the rich richer. This is what we mean by political change. SAIH does its political work outside the party political arena. We've been doing political work for more than 40 years. We were central in the fight against apartheid, and we've worked closely with Nobel Peace Prize winners from both East-Timor and Burma.

I was wrong to claim that SAIH calls itself a non-political organization. They don't. They refer to themselves as a "party politically independent" organization whose "political base is the UN declaration of human rights." Of course they're political. All aid organizations are, at some level. To support human rights and work for education is itself a political statement, though not a very controversial one in our part of the world.

But that is not relevant here, and I'm not sure why Gulseth brings it up. Student donors expect SAIH to be more than "party politically independent" in the formal sense: an organization which isn't tied to any political parties. They also expect it to be bipartisan in spirit, and that is where Gulseth has failed by supporting a political campaign so strongly associated with the left, and so unrelated to education.

And it is not true as Gulseth writes that "SAIH has never claimed that it only works with education projects". It does claim that - in the short presentation students read on their semester fee bills. I'll quote the full text Tor Erling Bjørstad found on his bill:

The Norwegian Students' and Academics' International Assistance fund is the students' own solidarity organisation supporting education projects in Africa and Latin-America. Along with your semester fee, you may choose to pay an extra NOK 20 to support this work. For more information, see www.saih.no

Most students reading this will assume that SAIH "only works with education projects".

An interesting angle into this case, and an embarassing one for Gulseth, comes from Aslak Solumsmoen at the National Union of Students in Norway (NSU). NSU has a representative on SAIH's board. Here's their account of what happened:

SAIH has, as you wrote, discussed the question whether to support the Tell Him campaign, and AU [Arbeidsutvalget, the group in daily charge of operations -BS] made a decision NSU felt .. we could not stand behind. We made this clear for SAIH-AU, the media wrote about it, and our local groups protested the decision. ...

SAIH's board discussed this on Friday 20.08.04, and the board decided not to support the Tell Him campaign, and also decided that any similar cases will be placed before the board in the future. The board is the highest organ in SAIH, and is where SAIH's political views are decided. This case was handled correctly internally by SAIH, and the organization as a whole never decided to support the campaign. We therefore do not feel that SAIH's legitimacy has been harmed.

SAIH does not apologize because SAIH does not support the campaign. The media attention came at a time when the case had not yet been fully evaluated internally in the organization, and the result of that evaluation is of course known.

If this is correct, SAIH as an organization is not the problem here. The decision to support TellHim.no would have been vetoed by the board anyway. The problem is the current leadership - Eirik Gulseth and whoever else made this decision. They went beyond their mandate by defending a controversial political decision in public before it had been submitted to the board as it should have been. NSU does "not feel that SAIH's legitimacy has been harmed", but it is undisputable that it has been harmed, and Gulseth is to blame for that.

NSU does not share that conclusion. They're "convinced that [Gulseth] is well suited" to head the organization. The case has created a new precedence for how to make political decisions in SAIH. Won't ever happen again, case closed. But that's not good enough. Eirik Gulseth made an incompetent decision which destroyed much of SAIH's reputation. That reputation is their source of income, and that's what I'd focus on repairing if I was them. This can not be done by leaders who don't understand what they did wrong in the first place, and who reply, as Gulseth did in his last mail to me, that "SAIH considers itself done with this case". So do I, actually - but come next semester, thousands of students will ask for their money back for the first time.

OT: Oh, Yea!

Thieves made off with at least 50 AG3 automatic assault rifles, 22 Glock pistols and a marksman's rifle from a guarded military camp in Lillehammer, newspaper VG reports. A military van with its keys left inside was loaded up and then used to drive away the guns. /break/ Police and Defense officials believe the theft required detailed information about the interior of the camp. It is still unknown how a manned military camp can be robbed without anyone noticing.

---

Were those explosives, IIRC, ever found?

1. There's education and then there's "education."

2. --SAIH does not apologize because SAIH does not support the campaign. The media attention came at a time when the case had not yet been fully evaluated internally in the organization, and the result of that evaluation is of course known.--

In short, busted and CYA mode. Kind of makes you wonder what else those fees are spent on, doesn't it?

I clearly stated my disappointment and a request for a real apology in a letter included with the refund form, I encourage all other students who read this to do the same.

The url to the refund form can be found on the bottom of this page, you will get both your money and the postage back.

http://www.saih.no/Norsk/Om_SAIH/SAIH-tierne/Studentinfo/index.html

You can also let them know how you feel at saih@saih.no

Knut: I understand you're upset about losing a fraction of your hard earned 20 NOK to an organisation which sole pupose is the removal one of the greatest proponents to our way of life, our old friend Mr. Bush, I mean who wouldn't be? At the end of the day we're talking about a mandatory payment (as far as I gather, I don't study in Norway so I don't really know how it works) and the principle is just shocking on so many levels. It's almost as bad as if we had given REAL tax-cuts to low-income families, after all who are the worst off in society? Why it's us students isn't it? We have no money, just can't get that alchohol to balance, and should get an alcohol overdraft courtesy of the Norwegian tax-payer. After all, we will be paying sky-high taxes in a couple of years anyway, I want mine NOW!

Seriously, why such an (over)-reaction? your money is taken EVERY day and spent on things you disapprove of. And don't say: "it's a matter of principle, I'm a veary steadfast norwegian lad who tries very hard to maintain my (conservative) convistion in a difficult (commie-like) state". Get a grip!At the end of the day I don't really agree with it either but you know what? FUCK it! Would you have reacted in an equally disgusted manner if, perchance, the money had been donated to "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" or "Moorewatch"? Yes, a Norwegian student organisation should not have donated money to ANY American organisation. But in this particular case I would say bring it on. And my reasons for saying so? well, there are several actually, but if you want concrete sources read this week's "The Economist" and especially "The Contradictory Conservative". And for further reference read Kay: "The Truth About Markets" and Stiglitz: "The Roaring Nineties".

It should be reasonably clear that I disagree with the majority of punters on this blog, but that is why I come back! You're doing a great job Bjørn, and although I think you're a bit soft (after all you're an IT person, not a decent Economist such as myself). It is good to have you. That being said though, I find it slightly bizarre that you choose to write in english, why is this? I would think Norwegian would be better suited for
this discussion, especially given the topics most often discussed (internal Norwegian affairs).

By the by, I read the Aftenposten article about Norwegian journalists' party preferences, and it was slightly shocking. But I still maintain that given the popularity of Dagbladet, VG and Se og Hør (in terms of sales). The average norwegian is,
implicitly at least, agreeing with they're point of viwe. Dagbladet-"the political" (look Ms. P it's your inverted comma trick) and VG/Se og Hør-the cultural. (this last bit refers to the earlier discussion, but I'm lazy so wrting two DIFFERENT postings is worse that writing one long posting. This is just as it is worse to send someone a check rather than cutting taxes by the same amount, it is easier to spot the former.

Geir,

Your biggest mistake is assuming that I am a supporter of President Bush. Not that it should matter if I was, or that I should have to even announced my dislike for his policies to argue my point here. But you are actually doing what SAIH did (and did wrong), which is bringing politics into this.

Since you, doing that, virtually label the protests against SAIH as "partisan" and "conservative", I will tell you that I would like to see Mr Bush leave the White House in January, and Mr Kerry taking over. However, I will not stand by and watch SAIH give away students' money to something they never agreed to.

I, and I assume Bjørn and the other students who wrote in the previous thread, are all disappointed about the fact that an organization that claims to be doing education and development work, actually chose to give away money donated by students, to a political campaign.

Of course it is a matter of principle, and for your "it's just 20NOK" argument, go back and read what Bjørn wrote in the previous thread. That is a very good explanation of why we bother.

Cute Knut. We're all friends here, no point in getting a wee bit angry now is it. As I said, I agree with you in principle. It WAS totally wrong of SAIH to use your money in that way. Also, I've read Bjørn's thread, but I still don't understand why you are so angry, you get butt-fucked EVERY time you sign up for something. There is ALWAYS a catch. As for the presumption on your political convictions, I'm sorry if I offended you. I'm a conservative myself, at least I vote for Høyre. As always I tried my hand at a bit of exposition above, I guess I failed.

20 NOK from 40,000 students is alot of money. So the fact that they were in effect stealing money from you is appalling. But save your energy, there are more important battles to be fought, like getting rid of the infamous, and dreadful, blasphemy act. And other silly things in Norway.

I am not trying to pick a fight here, I am just slightly bemused at your reaction, that includes everyone who posted on this issue, about something of such non-importance in the aggregate. So I'm happy you got your money back, and I'm happy it wasn't a hassle. And finally, I hope neither SAIH nor any other organisation does this again, but they will, so never mind. Either get on the board or stop complaining.

Maybe you guys need a good lawyer. The point is, if you know about it, you can question it.

Like PIRC - when my daughter goes to school, she will opt out of that funding.

All NFP - not-for-profits-are going to get audited by the IRS.

Now it'll get interesting.

Geir:

Even more amusing, however, is perhaps the fact that you waste your time by reacting to Knuts reaction that was a waste of time in the first place? And then this post of mine must really be a waste of time, must it not?

SAIH did a stupid and morally questionable thing.

I hope that those who withdraw their support from SAIH, however, appreciate that they are then targetting also their humanitarian work. I hope they will consider donating their money to another humanitarian organization, for instance Amnesty, Save the Children, or PLAN.

Øyvind

Geir: "And don't say: "it's a matter of principle, I'm a veary steadfast norwegian lad who tries very hard to maintain my (conservative) convistion in a difficult (commie-like) state". Get a grip!"

Straw man.

"Would you have reacted in an equally disgusted manner if, perchance, the money had been donated to "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" or "Moorewatch"?"

Yes. That is, I wouldn't have to - other media would have done it for me.

"That being said though, I find it slightly bizarre that you choose to write in english, why is this? I would think Norwegian would be better suited for this discussion, especially given the topics most often discussed (internal Norwegian affairs)."

Because if I write in English there's already a potential reader base to tap into, if I write in Norwegien I'd have to build that up from scratch. And because there are many Norwegians who read English, but almost no foreigners who read Norwegian. And because I want to be part of a cross-cultural exchange of ideas, where Norwegians and people from all over the world meet to discuss political issues, hopefully being exposed to some new perspectives in the process.

I've written more about this here.

"I am not trying to pick a fight here, I am just slightly bemused at your reaction, that includes everyone who posted on this issue, about something of such non-importance in the aggregate."

I've written two long posts because nobody else has really dug into this case. It was open for some actual reporting, not just punditry. I don't believe this is very important, but it is important enough for at least one media to gather together all the facts about what happened. That's what I've done. Anyone who cares can now make an informed decision about whether to continue supporting SAIH.

Hvis du vil ha tilbake pengene fra SAIH så kan man gjøre det her. Dog ser det ikke ut til at det er mulig å få tilbake penger fra tidligere semestere.

http://www.saih.no/tierne/svarslipp.htm

Bjørn:

I know you have written about the language issue earlier, but I'm still not quite convinced. Never mind, some people are just difficult to please.

Øyvind:

True

So let's settle this issue as soon as possible. There is no question SAIH was in the wrong. I obviously think everyone is entitled to get a refund (if such is their choice). My point was that there are other more important issues to be resolved (in my mind at least). That being said, however, I applaud the fact that some of you actually take action when you feel that you've been mistreated-I would NEVER advocate apathy. So keep up the good work and let's hope that SAIH (and other organisations like it) think twice before doing this kind of thing in the future.

Geir,
your arrogance is quite amusing.

First you question the legitimity of discussing this case because the small amounts at question. Well, i don`t think this is as small a matter. From time to time we hear about humanitarian organizations who administrate away large percentages of their fundage, or who put large money into foolish projects. Another such case, as with SAIH here, is damaging for the reputation of more than themselves. They help giving humanitarian organizations a bad name.

Then you make a point out of Bjørn Stærk is only a IT person. That`s in my opinion an immature way to reduce someones authority, grow up. Same with the way you tease Knut here. Is Machiavelli on your curriculum, or do you study him on your spare time?

And finally you question why this blog is in english. And you are "still not quite convinced". Personally I find it refreshing find posters wiews from around the word on domestic and not so domestic themes here. The politically correct norwegian wiewpoints gets rather dull in the long run. I`m quite convinced.

As for why this blog is in English, I'm still not quite convinced either if Bjorn's goal is to convince big numbers of Norwegians that their political beliefs are mistaken (and not make contact with non-norwegians with similar views).

If I were Norwegian, no matter how fluent in English, reading other norwegians who write in English would be a very low priority, but then that's me.

Or, his long term strategy could be to become famous abroad (a surefire way to be paid attention to in a small country).

Michael: "If I were Norwegian, no matter how fluent in English, reading other norwegians who write in English would be a very low priority, but then that's me."

But the value of reading this site for a Norwegian is not just that they can hear what I think about everything, but that they can discuss these issues with foreigners like you. There may be some Norwegians who avoid reading English on the web, but I'm not here to start a political party. I don't care if those Norwegians (whoever they are - I find it difficult to imagine that mindset) ignore me. I just care about the rest.

English is the lingua franca of the internet. I'm Norwegian, but I play this by internet rules. I feel as much like a "netizen" (does anyone use that word any more?) as a Norwegian, kind of a hyphenated Norwegian. It would just feel wrong to me to do something I believe is important - and then restrict it to one small linguistic group. And whether you believe me or not, I believe we can create something that both spans linguistic borders and keeps local media in check. There's a tradeoff, and it might never take off the way I hope it will, but I believe that if it does, it will be more useful than something exclusively Norwegian.

"But the value of reading this site for a Norwegian is not just that they can hear what I think about everything, but that they can discuss these issues with foreigners like you."

I agree that's valuable, I'm just saying if I were Norwegian then I wouldn't be looking for Norwegian middlemen to discuss issues with foreigners, I'd look for more direct outlets. But again, that's me. I'm not Polish but the analogy is close enough, I completely ignore the English-language Polish press (small but it exists) and don't read what Poles write in English, if I want to know what's up with them I read the press or Polish writers in Polish and if I were convinced that Polish political thinking was deeply flawed and needed changing and I was the person to do it (none of these are the case) then I wouldn't spend time writing about that in English.

"There may be some Norwegians who avoid reading English on the web"

that's not what I wrote, I wrote that if I were norwegian and as fluent in English as you are, I wouldn't spend much (or any?) time reading English written by other Norwegians (or Danes or Swedes for that matter). reading English written by non-Scandinavians speakers is another issue altogether and yes, I'd find avoiding them strange.

And please, never use the word 'netizen' again, I beg you.

Michael: "I completely ignore the English-language Polish press"

The press, yes. English language newspapers are written for foreigners. Things are a bit different on the web.

"And please, never use the word 'netizen' again, I beg you."

My apologies. You're probably right, I haven't seen the word in use since the 90's. But that leaves us without a word to describe the way people can feel attached to an international culture on the internet. Cosmopolitan is the wrong word. I've never been outside of Europe. I feel culturally attached to the internet, like it's part of where I come from. And the internet is not Norwegian. Doesn't matter what I write about. I would never do anything on the internet that wasn't in English if I could help it.

"Doesn't matter what I write about. I would never do anything on the internet that wasn't in English if I could help it."

I was (half) joking about netizen, but I find this just plain bizarre, an attitude I can't imagine myself having in a million years (I've actively used half a dozen languages in the internet, most of them poorly).
I guess it takes all kinds, but it seems like self-censoring/self-denial to me.

Michael: "I guess it takes all kinds, but it seems like self-censoring/self-denial to me."

Denial of what? My "true" Norwegian nature, which I need to pay tribute to by using the Norwegian language even outside of Norway's borders? As I said, the internet is not Norway, and I only feel mostly Norwegian. Self-denial would be to use what on the internet feels like an inappropriate language, out of some national obligation you (and nobody else) try to explain to me, and I fail to understand.

I suggest you stop asking why the terrain looks so strange, and just update your map.

Thank you netizens for this wonderful english text !

Norwegians would not be so happy if Swift Boat Veterans funded the right wing opposition party in Oslo. This is the larger point of course.

Trackback URL: http://bearstrong.net/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/777