Gnarr (13 page)

Jón Gnarr’s letter to President Obama, dated November 19, 2012
.

Dear Mr. President,

I sincerely congratulate you and your family on your victory in the U.S. presidential election. The people of Reykjavík followed the elections with great interest and the majority of Icelanders were on your side.

Everything is going pretty well here in the City of Reykjavík after a few difficult years. The city is full of life and the atmosphere is positive. Recently, Reykjavík was designated as a UNESCO City of Literature, the fifth city in the world, and the first non-native-English-speaking city to receive this title. This was a great honor for our city because Icelanders see themselves as a nation of literature.

Iceland is also a peaceful nation, without an army, and I am eager to make Reykjavík a completely military free zone. I have a dream that Reykjavík could, in the future, become a center for peace and human rights in the world. As you know, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev held a remarkable meeting here in
the Höfði House in the year 1986, which defined the end of the Cold War.

The unique art installation by the Japanese artist Yoko Ono, the Imagine Peace Tower, is located on Videy Island in Reykjavík. Every year, from the 9th of October until the 8th of December, it shines in the sky with the Aurora Borealis, reminding us of Yoko and John’s hope for world peace.

I believe it is important for our city to recognize our obligation and contribute to promoting peace. Reykjavík is in a unique position to be a city of peace, and I’d like to suggest that you have our city in mind if you need a place for a meeting, peace negotiation, conference for peace, etc.

In the year 1972, Bobby Fischer and Boris Spassky met in Reykjavík to play chess. The match attracted more worldwide interest than any other chess match before or since. Bobby Fischer moved to Iceland in 2005 and he lived here until his death in 2008. He suffered from personal difficulties during the last few years of his life and is buried at Laugardælakirkjugarður in Iceland.

Reykjavík and the United States have a good relationship. The U.S. Embassy in Reykjavík has truly achieved success in its work. The ambassador, the honorable Luis E. Arreaga, is an active participant in the cultural life of our city and is a very admirable representative of the USA. Seattle and Reykjavík are sister cities, and Seattle was a special guest of honor at
our last Culture Night, which is one of our city’s main events. We also received a visit from the city council of Denver last summer, when Icelandair launched direct flights between our cities.

If I can assist you or your great country in any way, do not hesitate to contact me; send me an e-mail or call, and I will be at your service.

I know that you are a very busy man, but if you are ever on the move it would be a pleasure and an honor to have the opportunity to meet with you and tell you about my ideas regarding our special city, Reykjavík. Please feel free to drop by for a cup of coffee, we have an airport in the middle of the city. Last year, your grandmother, Sarah, came to Iceland. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the opportunity to meet her at that time, but she is doing a very good job indeed.

I hope you are in good health and I wish you every success in the future.

P.S. I know you’re a big fan of
The Wire
, and so am I. I had the honor to meet Clarke Peters (Lester Freamon) when he was in Iceland this summer to participate in the Spirit of Humanity Forum peace conference.

On March 30, 1949, the Icelandic Althingi, despite strong protests from the population, signed Iceland’s accession to NATO. I never understood what Iceland had to do with NATO. For decades, the U.S. Army had its military base in Keflavík—until they realized in 2006 that there was actually nothing for them to do here, whereupon they packed their bags and left. As it stands, our NATO membership means that if we are attacked, someone will defend us. But who’s going to attack us? And what for? Suppose North Korea invaded Iceland. Would our friends in the States and Europe leave us in the lurch just because we haven’t paid our annual membership fee?

I am unconditionally for Iceland’s withdrawal from NATO. Sure, NATO is a necessary organization in many ways, and I can understand why the Americans, French, Germans, and other military nations want to belong. But what has Iceland got to do with this club? Therefore, I am of the opinion that we should find a way to tactfully and discreetly leave this organization.

As we are currently in NATO, military aircraft and warships are regularly stationed here, either to refuel or simply to pay us an internal NATO courtesy visit.
Shortly after I took office, I learned that it is traditionally expected of the mayor that he invite the officers of foreign warships to a ceremonial reception at the Town Hall. I then explained that there would not be any such receptions under me, and that I had no intention of taking up any reciprocal invitations. On the other hand, I very frequently visit warships that are used as training ships or coastal rescue craft. As far as I know, the people in charge of these ships fully understand my position. Now I am looking for a way of keeping the rest of the navies away from Iceland and letting them maneuver to other ports.

Furthermore, the domestic airport in Reykjavík is widely used for military purposes, as a staging post for military aircraft, and by the American secret service, for example, which uses this airport for prisoner transports. I have put in a formal request to our government to stop any type of military use of the airport, and the agreement banning it has already been signed. But strangely enough, it seems to have had no effect so far.

Nature, culture, peace, and humanity, these are the fixed points in my life—as mayor, but also and above all as a human being. I dream of being able to declare one day that Reykjavík is a 100 percent military-free zone. Attentiveness and respect for others, for family, friends, and all the people around us, are the basis of any society. A sense of humanity is also high on the list, because without humanity everything else is futile: religions, political movements, or anything else at all.

Contrary to what many believe, I think the world is getting better. There are fewer wars, and humankind is developing increasingly effective, sophisticated methods to create and secure peace. The future belongs to democracy, but how well this democracy functions depends on how many of us actively participate in it. If there are too few, democracy is flat and banal. If a mass movement springs into being, this in turn runs the risk of being cumbersome and costly.

Of course democracy can also be as boring as hell. We all know what they’re like, those meetings that always seem to take place after work or on weekends and are known havens for oddballs of every kind whose main priority is basking in the glory of their own words, rather than contributing anything to the discussion.

Ever since I’ve been in office, I’ve organized numerous public meetings and information evenings that were meant to give people some definite ideas, plans, or concepts, and then answer any questions they might have about the relevant project. You can bet your
bottom dollar that sooner or later, some old fraud will turn up who monopolizes the proceedings and, instead of asking a simple question, bores everyone present to tears with a long-winded review of his life. Eventually the chair will interrupt and ask if he wants to ask a specific question, so the guy says yes, babbles on and, after ten or fifteen minutes, gradually comes to a conclusion that does not, however, produce any question, but loses itself in general, circuitous considerations about God and the world.

The biggest snag with democracy is that stupid people have as much right as intelligent people to express an opinion and that, of course, you have to treat the yokels respectfully. By “yokels” I don’t necessarily mean people who are a bit simple-minded or mentally handicapped. I’m talking about those who are ill-prepared and are much more interested in showing themselves off than in making a decent contribution to the public good or finding the solution to a problem.

Is it any wonder that the younger generation is usually conspicuous in its absence from such meetings? Why would you discuss something that you think is relevant in a closed group of fifty to one hundred people when you could spread the exact same thing on Facebook or Twitter and thus reach thousands? Plus block undesirable blabbermouths with one click.

The politics of the future is local politics—urban and district affairs. This does not mean that public,
democratic meetings are a thing of the past—but they have to be set up differently. The citizens’ meeting of today is a targeted, professionally well-founded exchange of thoroughly prepared participants who consequently achieve the desired goals. Citizens’ democracy is still just as important as direct democracy: we need both, because both are essential to life.

In ancient Athens, for instance, direct democracy worked outstandingly well—every single citizen was allowed to comment on each question and cast his vote. Apart from the fact, of course, that women and slaves were left out of it, the ancient Greeks had one of the most advanced forms of democracy. Although only about five thousand of the approximately forty thousand inhabitants of Athens were actively involved, this example shows that direct democracy can work if a certain percentage of citizens is ready to invest their time and energy. And people must also recognize the value of this personal involvement. It is also interesting that comedians played a major role in Attic democracy and decisively influenced the formation of opinion among the people.

If we want to reform our democracy today and improve it overall, we are dependent on the Internet. Only by digital means can we sustainably make any difference on this point—while limiting cost and time to a minimum.

In this sense, the online platform Betri Reykjavík,
which we presented to the public in October 2011 in Reykjavík city center, is a small revolution. It comes from the think tank of Gunnar Grimsson and Róbert Bjarnason, two talented computer nerds, and links an information pool containing material on the different city districts with a thematically organized idea exchange in which each and every person can participate. Since its activation, the website has received numerous awards at home and abroad, including the “Icelandic Internet Prize” for the most original and interesting website, and also—as the first Icelandic participant—the international “World eDemocracy Award” for 2011. Meanwhile, the portal has been online for a good two years and is enjoying ever-increasing popularity and participation.

As is well known, consideration of plans and projects in your own district can cause tempers to flare. On Betri Reykjavík you can find all the important information on such issues at a glance. You can read the ideas, opinions, and suggestions of others, discuss the proposed concept, present your own ideas, and then vote for or against. Instead of spending two hours in some stuffy office down in the city, drinking vending-machine coffee and listening to vacuous anecdotes about some employee’s private life, you can sit comfortably at home, in peace and quiet, at your computer, in your underwear if you feel like it, and within ten minutes you’ll get feedback to your questions. The possibilities opened up by such a portal are almost
inexhaustible, and accordingly the success of Betri Reykjavík has been making waves even in Parliament.

In addition, we have introduced direct elections for construction projects and renovation work in the various parts of the city—the first digitally conducted citizens’ elections in Iceland. Voters sign in with their personal data, log into their account, and cast their vote. This election process, in a sense a first step towards “participatory budgeting,” opens up entirely new paths and perspectives.

Unfortunately, however, not even direct digital democracy is a guarantee against lobbying and corruption. Large stakeholders and organizations can still feather their own nests with impunity—except that this now happens on the open stage rather than in secret wheeling and dealing behind the closed doors of some back room. Transparent corruption, so to speak. If the suspicion should arise that something isn’t quite right, it is of course up to each individual to dig deeper and take the persons concerned to task. To get people to assume responsibility themselves in this simple way is basically no more complicated than encouraging them to sort out their garbage for recycling. They just have to understand the principle and recognize the benefit of their contribution. It is perfectly legitimate to apply a certain pressure and, for example, threaten to abolish this opportunity for participation if the turnout slips below a certain percentage.

These may be subtle points that only become real
when they are actually put into execution, but as a rule they work extremely well: Those who refuse to sort out their garbage, or are simply too lazy to do so, first receive a few friendly phone calls. And if that doesn’t work, their trash cans are simply no longer emptied.

For me, a person is first and foremost a person. Nationality, ethnic origin, gender, and sexual orientation are all one to me. People are people. Not that I’m saying that I’m completely free of prejudice. Prejudices are probably just as human as anything else. From the information it gets, a brain draws certain conclusions in order to protect its owner from threats. If this information is limited, the conclusions turn out to be pretty obvious.

In my life, I’ve already had to deal with the most varied sorts of people. With people of all nationalities, men and women, gays and lesbians, people with transgender identity. I would never even think of placing them within any rigid, judgmental categories. With the best will in the world, I can’t discover anything in these people that would allow them to be divided up like that. Certainly not based on externals such as appearance, clothing style, political or religious beliefs, and the like.