Last election in Sweden, we got a new government. The socialists were replaced by a coalition of the four non-Socialist parties, the Moderate Party, the Liberals, The Center party and the Christian Democrats. The Swedish people were tired of the old government and wanted a thorough change.
Now, after almost three and a half years, we can ask ourselves the question: what has actually been changed? Well, one good thing is that the non-Socialists have tried to lower the highest burden of taxation in the world, and have succeeded to change this into being the country with the second highest burden of taxation! Unfortunately the retired elderly people have not benefitted from this decision at all.
Sweden’s national defence has been minimized and there is almost nothing left. The compulsory military service is practically abolished. Young men can choose not to participate simply by ticking the no-box on an Internet site.
People who wanted to see a reduction of the – in those days – already elevated immigration figures, voted probably for the non-Socialist. Now afterwards it is easy to observe that this government even has increased these figures. During 2009, about 102,000 immigrants got permanent residence permit. The previous year the figures were well above 90,000 and just below in 2007. NB! Only less than 10% of all these immigrants are “real” asylum seekers according to the UN criteria.
Was this what the Swedish voters expected? They expected probably a more moderate policy but the Government has proved to pursue a policy that is even more wasteful than the former’s as regards immigration. The migration minister, Tobias Billstrom, wrote recently in a debate article on the Internet site Newsmill, that the present government is the only alternative for voters when it comes to immigration policy. He claims that the government now has passed a law according to which the majority of our immigrants, i.e. family members of asylum seekers, from April an onwards must themselves be responsible for their support. The interesting thing is that this decision has so many exceptions that it would have been easier to state those who do not have to support themselves .
To sum up, all the seven parties in the Swedish parliament have the same immigration policy. There is one party though, outside the parliament, the Sweden Democrat Party, that has another more responsible migration policy and that criticizes the immigration policy of today and the last 20 years. The Sweden Democrat Party is always defamed by all the seven parliament parties as being xenophobic, when the party points out the results of the existing policy. Almost no debates are held. The parliamentary parties do never answer the facts that are presented and collected from Swedish authorities by the Sweden Democrat Party.
It will be interesting to see how this suffocating debate climate will develop up to the election in Sweden in September and for how long time it will be possible to deceive people in Sweden. In my opinion, people living a bit away from the ghettos are not aware of the situation and what is actually happening in this multicultural experiment.