[fabian2k]

I don't know enough about this specific party, but a quick look at the Wikipedia page about them shows this quote, which to me does seem to suggest that the label is defensible:

> In a podcast segment about immigration and deportations Allard stated his opinion and said that "They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party

[muldvarp]

Sweden doesn't appear to have birthright citizenship (jus soli), so people whose only connection to Sweden is being born there are in fact not swedish. If this is your definition of ethnonationalism, then most of the world is already ethnonationalist.

[g-b-r]

> If this is your definition of ethnonationalism, then most of the world is already ethnonationalist.

The user you were replying to wasn't claiming that you're an ethno-nationalist state if you don't have birthright citizenship, or an ethno-naionalist if you're against it.

[muldvarp]

What are they claiming then? Allard says that people whose only connection to Sweden is being born there are not Swedish (which is correct) and that they would have to leave. I don't see the connection to ethnonationalism here.

[g-b-r]

The quote without context is absolutely ethno-nationalistic (but I've been told that there's a context).

[muldvarp]

Sadly your comment does not contain any actual argument as to _why_ you think the quote is ethnonationalist.

[g-b-r]

If saying that everyone who wasn't born in a place would be forced to leave it doesn't seem ethno-nationalist to you, I don't know what to tell you.

[g-b-r]

Not having birthright citizenship doesn't mean that you can't acquire citizenship.

[muldvarp]

Nobody said that they can't.

[g-b-r]

Alright, it was hard to make sense of your comment, anyhow the only way to have no connection to Sweden (besides the birth itself) despite being born there would be to have left it as an infant.