[kfreds]

You presume wrong. He has nothing against immigrants as a group. He sees open borders as the ideal, and have since he was a teenager. As far as I can tell the only reason he doesn't actively advocate for it at the moment is because of mismanagement of the government. Something like that. I don't want to say more because I don't want to misrepresent his views.

[lightbritefight]

The above isn't believable. He gave $500,000 to a political org that has explicitly called immigrants "parasites," dehumanizing phrasing that mirrors Nazi speech and has been used to justify mass murder.

He is in fact the main financial patron of this racist political party. Saying he supports open borders at the same time is just a flat non sequitur.

[kfreds]

> The above isn't believable.

Ok. Let me try. Please note that I am in no way defending Daniel's decision nor Örebropartiet. I'm simply responding to your claim that my previous statement is not believable.

> He gave $500,000 to a political org that has explicitly called immigrants "parasites,"

That sounds horrible.

I looked it up. Here's [1] a video of that debate in the municipal government. FYI, I would characterise the website as quite right-wing and generally not very trustworthy, but there is a video of Markus Allard along with the quotes.

The title of the video is something about a proposal regarding long-term unemployed individuals. He seems to be talking specifically about long-term unemployed immigrants, 10-20 years. He's complaining that he doesn't think it's right to allow them financial living assistance while Örebro is defunding social services for older people. I have no idea about the actual truth value of any of his statements.

Horrible way of talking about people, but in this case not immigrants in general, it seems. Within the context of people who have supposedly been unemployed for 10-20 years, I understand (but don't agree with) why he says those individuals are parasites.

> dehumanizing phrasing that mirrors Nazi speech and has been used to justify mass murder.

Indeed. His choice of words is dehumanizing.

> Saying he supports open borders at the same time is just a flat non sequitur.

Daniel has a blog that goes back to 2016 where he talks about waste of tax payers' money. What he expresses in his blog is consistent with classical liberalism, which in turn is consistent with freedom of movement.

Where is the flat non sequitur?

[1]: https://www.friatider.se/kaosdebatten-allard-kallar-sverige-...

[timmytokyo]

Remigration -- which Örebropartiet stands for -- is the opposite of freedom of movement. Stop trying to rationalize away what your cofounder clearly supports.