[cryzinger]

The "radical tolerance" thing is also a little ironic, since the biggest controversy with the party that the founder donated to is that the party isn't tolerant of people from different backgrounds or nationalities...

[insert Paradox of Tolerance quote here]

[dijit]

Tolerant is the wrong word to choose because tolerant doesn't mean "accepting" it means... to tolerate.

And the most extreme position they have stated is that "it doesn't matter if you're born here, if you commit crimes and don't respect the culture you should probably leave".

That is an extreme position, but it's not as black as people seem to paint it, which implies heavily that the party is just simply racist against non-swedes.

The actual racist party is the second most voted for party in Sweden, I think because of how intolerant the society has been about talking about the issues caused by migration. That is my own opinion though, as a migrant, living in the city with the most migrants in Sweden.

[pstuart]

> don't respect the culture

That's where it gets messy, at least in the States.

note: I have family in Sweden that are non-white but I've never discussed the issue as it felt a bit too "delicate"

[dijit]

Well, Sweden had to recently ban cousin marriage (it wasn't an issue before) but aside from that (which is a problem for the health service, but not for me personally), there are very differing perspectives towards homosexuality and Womens rights, and it is the second generation that feel most entitled to expressing their dissatisfaction at Swedens attitude towards those topics.

I might be a migrant myself, but I have strong feelings about this too.

[pstuart]

Sure, one's origins should not lock one into a particular mindset.

There's a fair amount of "cultural" attitudes I'm not thrilled with: child genital mutilation, honor killings, child brides, hijabs, forced marriages, etc.

Tradition/culture gets treated as sacrosanct but all of it should be open to reconsideration as we ostensibly evolve as a civilization.

[bsoup]

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

'In 2026 Örebro Party leader Markus Allard sparked controversy on several occasions. In a debate hosted by Studio3 with Liberal member of parliament Martin Melin, Allard asked: "why won't the Liberals push for deporting 100 000 social welfare-Somalis?" and in the same debate said that "Sweden belongs to the Swedes. We have to make sure that we take care of our own damn people and we must deport these damn parasites who sit and live at our expense."

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."'

[dijit]

It's nice to cherry pick inflammatory things that have been stated without their full context.

The context in this case is that he was directly asked:

"What about the people born in Sweden who commit so many crimes and do not integrate at all, live their whole lives on welfare, as we are seeing in the statistics it is mostly the second-generation who are most represented" (I am adlibbing and translating, but this is the question).

Allard then said, as you put it: that being born here is not protection.

Now, that is an extreme position, nobody else would say such a thing, and to be totally clear: it's not possible in the Swedish constitution to strip someone of citizenship (even if they have a claim to another by blood- which is the most common method of attaining any citizenship btw) - it's also against international law to strip someone of a citizenship to leave them stateless.

However there's only 30,000 people (of 2.1M) foreign born people in Sweden whom are otherwise stateless (Palestinians; Balkans who did not reapply after the fall of Yugoslavia), and there is a huge issue with crime and integration.

There are no solutions, but it's kind of valid for Swedish people to be looking at people to ask difficult and stomach-churning questions in some way.

[bsoup]

Constitutions and laws are no protection for scapegoats once extremists gain power. Anyone who knows 20th century history knows where "we must deport these damn parasites" ends.

If they are called "social welfare-Somalis" (where do social welfare-Swedes get deported to?), if they are not included in "the Swedes" and "our own damn people", if "even if they are born in Sweden, [...] they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish", then integration is not what he wants.

[dijit]

Ok, but then you're saying Sweden is on the hook, in perpetuity, for an entire family tree of a stream of people that seems to never end unless racists take control of migration (which is what has happened now in Sweden).

Honestly, I really understand what you mean, but offering no solution and then talking down anyone who dares talk about it is exactly how extremists got support here in the first place.

If you're not living in sweden please keep in mind: this kind of demographic change is totally unprecedented in all of Europe and in all of history. In less than a 1/3rd of a generation, a decade, 10% of the population of a country was artificially added.

Such a thing has not happened historically unless a country was conquered. -- even then, it took 500 years for Skåne to be Swedish (in fact, many Swedes joke that they're still Danish). Just to say that a cultural shift of such magnitude is going to cause some tension no matter what, nobody has done it at this scale.

To then have those same people and their children, then, cause a disproportionate amount of violent and sexual crime while also being a disproportionate financial cost to the country: absolutely needs some kind of answer.

I'm not saying that Örebro Partiet or SD have that answer, but I sympathise with people who are tired of seeing this happening plainly with their own eyes, and being branded as racists, fascists or nationalists for clumsily trying to talk about it without the right verbiage because they've never had to exercise these kind of thoughts before.

[OkayPhysicist]

The key observation missing from the conversation here is that you're being judged by Americans, where damn near everybody (save ~1% Native Americans) belongs to "an entire family tree" of immigrants. Race relations are one of those things that the US catches a lot of shit for because we've had to deal with it for the entirety of our nation's history, which lets us look at the attitudes alarmingly prevalent in Europe and go, "hey, that's like when my granddaddy was burning crosses in his neighbor's lawn. That's fucked up".

[dijit]

I think the other lesson we could draw from America is that we shouldn't let everyone in, they'll kill us, take our place and feel bad about it a few hundred years later... maybe.