Maybe one of the most stupid PR coups I have heard in the last years. Kristina Axén Olin, Stockholms Mayor, decided to declare Stockholm the Capital of Scandinavia. I need to ask some questions to try to understand:
– What are the chosen criteria? Business environment, quality of life, beauty, etc.?
– Why should Kristina Axén Olin do that?
– What is the truth?
To the first question, and just by reading the headlines of SVD, i think that the criteria are completely taken out of the blue. I quote: “Cleany streets and elimination of graffitis will make Stockholm shine the most” (“Städade gator och klottersanering ska få Stockholm att glänsa mest”). Is that really what people want? Does a city shine because there are no graffitis? Doesn’t Berlin or New York shine?
To the second one: Why should Kristina Axén Olin do that? It is obvious that Stockholm is progressively losing the race against Copenhagen. I should say the races: cultural and economical. Business is doing best (or even better) in Copenhagen. Culture in Stockholm is one of the most narrow minded and limited of all capitals in Europe.
To the third one: What is the truth? You can decide yourself, people make a city what it is. No one asked Kristina Axén Olin to do it for the region, especially not without consultation from the other countries. It seems like she wants to take advantage of beeing the first to claim this role. And puts Copenhagen and Olso in a bad situation.
Copenhagen can relax and ignore the debate, and let the people decide. I live in Stockholm, and i can tell that Copenhagen has everything to be named Capital of Scandinavia. A capital has a role of gathering all cultures and beeing an attraction point, not only for business. I would compare it to Berlin in Germany. Berlin is just the best Capital you can imagine: tolerant, open minded, adapting and progressive. Stockholm has not a lot of that.
It’s my opinion – i hope Kristina Axén Olin gives me the right to share it.