It happened last night in Sweden! But what happened in Sweden? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#14778002
noir wrote:There was a story about a journalist who entered an immigrants neighborhood and the Swedish police afraid to enter and rescue him, or whatever. He probably got the information from his aides who twisted the story and exaggerated it. Still he's point is, look what Sweden brought to itself by unrestricted immigration.

Wasn't that ages ago or am I thinking about another incident? Trump said something happened in Sweden Friday. Maybe he was refering to this? :lol:
#14778015
noir wrote:^ The reporter says, the policy is still very popular in Sweden. God knows what they are smoking. Probably, until the immigrants arrived, Sweden was a boring place. Now at least there are some action, thanks to all the rape and crime. Maybe @Owsley will tell us, why Swedes love so much immigrants.

When the refugee crisis started most people were for accepting refugees. In Denmark there was a poll that showed that over 60% wanted Denmark to help the refugees and I imagine the number was higher in Sweden. However, fewer and fewer people in the Scandinavian countries support refugee rights or at least they don't want anymore refugees in the countries. Sverigedemokraterna are currently at 28% in the polls, Dansk Folkeparti is the second largest party in Denmark, and new more extreme parties are popping up, and the established parties have definitely moved to the right on this issue. I don't think it is true that most Swedes still support the policy.
#14778110
Owsley wrote:Sverigedemokraterna are currently at 28% in the polls, Dansk Folkeparti is the second largest party in Denmark, and new more extreme parties are popping up, and the established parties have definitely moved to the right on this issue. I don't think it is true that most Swedes still support the policy.


In the flawed Scandinavian democracies, this will not led to anywhere, because the oppostion can't develop their ideas. There is heavy censorship to cover up the whole immigrants issue, and journalists are fired. They are dismissed as "racists" and "islamophobes". But Europe Islamization is very existential issue. The Muslims refugees (who destroyed their own countries) have where to go, there are enough Muslims countries not destroyed yet. Islam has antithetical culture to European culture, Europe has very solid ground to resist their invasion. According the prevail narrative in Scandinavia it's "humanitarian" issue, no it's not. The Muslims are fighting each other, they become refugees of their own making. In the future they will relocate these fighting to Europe. What will you do next?
#14778115
noir wrote:In the flawed Scandinavian democracies, this will not led to anywhere, because the oppostion can't develop their ideas. There is heavy censorship to cover up the whole immigrants issue, and journalists are fired. They are dismissed as "racists" and "islamophobes". But Europe Islamization is very existential issue. The Muslims refugees (who destroyed their own countries) have where to go, there are enough Muslims countries not destroyed yet.

Only racism is censored. Criticism of immigration policy is allowed.

Immigration laws have already become much stricter, however unless these far-right parties gain over 50% we will not withdraw from the Refugee Covention or Torture Convention, which is their proposed policy. They will never reach those numbers, so in my opinion our democracies are working just fine.
#14778116
so in my opinion our democracies are working just fine


With same ruling party for more than 50 years, it's not. You may think so because it's peaceful and slavishly obeying "human rights" and humanitarians laws. But you can't express non conformist views and the press is not really free. Scandinavia has this habit to move from extreme to extreme, in the 30's and 40's they believed in scientific racism with the same fanatic way.
And about refugees convention, Sweden adopted much wider definition than what the 1951 Geneva convention asked for. Wonder if the Swedish press informs this crucial detail to its readers.
#14778120
noir wrote:With same ruling party for more than 50 years, it's not. You may think so because it's peaceful and slavishly obeying "human rights" and humanitarians laws. But you can't express non conformist views and the press is not really free. Scandinavia has this habit to move from extreme to extreme, in the 30's and 40's they believed in scientific racism with the same fanatic way.
And about refugees convention, Sweden adopted much wider definition than what the 1951 Geneva convention asked for. Wonder if the Swedish press informs this crucial detail to its readers.

No single party has held power for more than 50 years here. Government changes hands between social democratic parties and liberal parties. The differences between the social democratic parties and the liberal parties are perhaps not so significant and there is a consensus between them to uphold international law and not withdraw from treaties and conventions and to maintain the welfare state. People are generally happy with our societies, even though there are problems, and they do not want radical change. So it's not just my opinion, but also the opinion of most Scandinavians, that our democracies are working just fine.
#14778122
Correction. A link from 2006 says, "Sweden has been described by some as a "one-party state," since the Social Democrats have been in power for 65 of the last 74 years." So, it's far worse.

The Swedish election campaign 2010, was labelled by Danish journalists as a reminder of an Eastern Block variant during the Cold War. But Swedes do not see that themselves. We are so well indoctrinated by our monolithic media culture that an article titled ‘KinderGulag in Socialstaat Schweden’ in the German Magazine der Spiegel in 1983, passes unnoticed by the Swedish people. 

And the very key problem in Sweden is: People do not realize the vast corruption in our legal system! Fake Court procedures have skillfully been developed after 50 years of Social Democratic Governments. The gradual shift to a Totalitarian Democracy has not, and can not, be observed by the well behaving Swedes, reduced to swedes by its well organized One-Party Reign.
Last edited by noir on 20 Feb 2017 10:21, edited 1 time in total.
#14778123
Correction. A link from 2006 says, "Sweden has been described by some as a "one-party state," since the Social Democrats have been in power for 65 of the last 74 years." So, it's far worse.

I don't understand your objection, noir. Once a political and social consensus has been achieved in a nation, why would it need more than one political party? :eh:

After all, even if another political party came to power, its policies would be almost indistinguishable from those of the previous government, due to the said consensus. We see this occurring in almost all societies with that sort of stable consensus, whether ostensibly 'democratic' or not - post-War Japan, Korea (North and South), China, Scandinavia, and so on and so forth. Once the Revolution is successful, there need be only one party; and once communism has been achieved, then there would be no need even for that one party to exist - it would dissolve into civil society.
#14778126
This slavishly nation is crazy. This is a government that knows perfectly well that their people will become a minority in their own country, yet is doing nothing to stop this.

Jens Orback, Minister for Democracy, Metropolitan Affairs, Integration and Gender Equality from the Social Democratic Party said during a debate in Swedish radio in 2004 that "We must be open and tolerant towards Islam and Muslims because when we become a minority, they will be so towards us."
#14778128
"Exit Folkhemssverige - En samhällsmodells sönderfall" (Exit the People's Home of Sweden - The Downfall of a Model of Society) is a book from 2005 about immigration and the Swedish welfare state model dubbed "the people's home," written by Jonathan Friedman, Ingrid Björkman, Jan Elfverson and Åke Wedin. According to them, the Swedish Multicultural elites see themselves first of all as citizens of the world. In order to emphasize and accentuate diversity, everything Swedish is deliberately disparaged. Opposition to this policy is considered a form of racism:
"The dominant ideology in Sweden, which has been made dominant by powerful methods of silencing and repression, is a totalitarian ideology, where the elites oppose the national aspect of the nation state. The problem is that the ethnic group that are described as Swedes implicitly are considered to be nationalists, and thereby are viewed as racists."
The authors fear that the handling of the immigration policies has seriously eroded democracy because the citizens lose their loyalty towards a state they no longer consider their own. "Instead of increasing the active participation of citizens, the government has placed clear restrictions on freedom of thought, freedom of speech and freedom of congregation."
Last edited by noir on 21 Feb 2017 07:01, edited 1 time in total.
#14778133
Owsley wrote:Only racism is censored. Criticism of immigration policy is allowed.

Immigration laws have already become much stricter, however unless these far-right parties gain over 50% we will not withdraw from the Refugee Covention or Torture Convention, which is their proposed policy. They will never reach those numbers, so in my opinion our democracies are working just fine.


The Swedish media should informed the public what the Refugee Convention states and why Sweden the "human rights super power" took unilaterally a broad definition to "refugee"


Discourse on Immigration in Swedish Mass Media

1951 United Nations Geneva Convention


The draft on the new Alien Law contained declaration on political refugees rights for asylum based on the 1951 United Nations Geneva Convention (Ibid). The Convention was ratified by Sweden in 1954, the same year that the new Alien Law was adopted (Ibid). Sweden, however, went even further than was presupposed by the Convention, applying wider definition of political refugee and accepting refugees under the so-called humanitarian grounds, as opposed to the Geneva Convention regulations. This made Swedish refugee policies probably one of the most liberal and permissive in the world (Schierup, Ålund 1991: 22). During the late 1950s the state bureaucracy system of control and regulation of migration began to emerge (1997: 47).

To deal with the question of immigration is, thereby, also to be faced with a variety of definitions, connotations and explanations of causes and effects which construct the meaning of immigration in each particular case.
 


http://megaslides.es/doc/1391866/link%C ... -economics
Last edited by noir on 20 Feb 2017 10:59, edited 1 time in total.
#14778135
@noir
Sweden is not a totalitarian country. They have free and fair democratic elections every 4 years. The Social Democrats prepared well for these elections and the opposition did not. So when the election arrived the Social Democrats were on message and could present a coherent vision to the electorate and Moderates could not.

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

@JohnRawls What if your assumption is wrong??? […]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

Only Zionists believe that bollocks and you lot ar[…]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]