Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Reinfeldt’

In the wake of the despicable terror attacks in Oslo, the predictable hate speeches against those who criticize Sweden’s immigration policy have already begun. I am not going to waste time on quoting them; let us just note that the hate mongers who are trying to capitalize on the Oslo massacre typically were very quick to say that the suicide bomber in Stockholm was a “mad loner” who did not represent Islam. When an equally “mad loner” strikes, who happens to be critical of immigration, then all of a sudden everyone who may have uttered a critical word of Sweden’s immigration policy is guilty by association.

The leftist hate mongers are also conspicuously silent on the arrests in Denmark of Islamists – Swedish residents, by the way – who planned a terror attack on a Danish newspaper.

Terrorism is terrorism, just as totalitarianism is totalitarianism. It does not matter who the Oslo madman was before he set off on a killing spree – as soon as he triggered that bomb he crossed the same line as the Islamists did on 9/11, or in Madrid 2004, or in London 2005. He turned people around him into instruments for an ideology. Just like the Islamists preach hatred by killing infidels, Anders Breivik preached hatred by killing people who were just as innocent as the victims in the World Trade Center in New York or on the commuter trains in Madrid.

And just like the jihadists in Iraq have used Islam as an excuse to kill innocent Iraqi children, Breivik used his nationalism as an excuse to wipe out the young lives of his fellow countrymen. If we, for a moment, elevate ourselves above the horror of terrorism, we may notice the irony in his: the jihadists who claim to fight for a pure Islamic state kill Muslim children in a Muslim country; Breivik, who apparently wanted to fight for a purely Norwegian Norway killed Norwegian children.

I should not have to point this out, but I will anyway: every life is sacrosanct. From the fetus in your wife’s womb to the old woman in a nursing home whose life is endangered by a government-run, cash-starved health care system. It does not matter if jihadists kill Muslims or Christians or whoever. They are savages all the same. This goes for Breivik as well: it does not matter who he assassinated: he is a lowlife terrorist whose future in eternal torment is the only appropriate punishment for his crimes.

Established Swedish media outlets have already begun exploiting the terror attacks in Oslo, and it is almost self-evident that Prime Minister Reinfeldt, one way or another, will associate the Swedish Democrats with this attack. Such is the political climate in Sweden. That is something Swedes will have to live with until they elect another parliamentary majority in 2014. What they will hopefully not have to live with is an escalation of politically driven crimes against Swedish Democrat politicians. In the shadows of the horrible events in Oslo, let us not forget the low-level, but relentless terrorism that leftist activists direct toward their political adversaries.

Let us not forget Swedish Democrat politicians who have been attacked in their homes, in public, when exercising their right to freedom of speech, etc. Let us not forget the bomb that the police found at a Swedish-Democrat rally in Sodertalje during the election campaign last year.

Again: terrorism is terrorism. When someone shows indifference toward other people’s lives in advancing his or her political agenda, he is a terrorist. Major Hasan, a psychologist in the U.S. Army, who killed 13 people on an army base in Texas in 2009, did so in the name of Islam. Anders Breivik killed people in the name of some anti-Islamic agenda. They are both terrorists and deserve to be treated accordingly.

You would hope that this common-sense logic is apparent and can be embraced by everyone. But we have yet to see the left step up to the plate. The Oslo attacks will provide a litmus test for them: are the leftist activists, who conduct a low-level political war against critics of Sweden’s immigration policy, willing to recognize that terrorists are always terrorists? Are they willing to agree that life is sacrosanct and no one should be sacrificed in the name of an ideology (or a religion)?

Sven R Larson, Ph.D.

Follow my blog with bloglovin

Read Full Post »

Author: S R Larson (presentation)

Before Sverigedemokraterna (the Swedish Democrats) won seats in the Swedish national parliament in September last year there was not a critical word uttered in the Riksdag about Sweden’s immigration policy. Today the situation is different: SD politicians take every opportunity to challenge the reckless open-borders policies imposed by the political elite. The first reaction from that elite was to expand an already excessively generous immigration policy to invite even more immigrants from far-away corners of the world. Though this might have been expected (I personally did not think they would have the audacity) it is nevertheless refreshing to see that the SD challenge is not going unnoticed by the elite.

The fact of the matter is that the SD challenge has come at the very last moment: the open borders policy has overwhelmed Sweden with immigration of a size and character that begs the question if the prime minister actually knows what he is doing. The official motive for allowing massive immigration is that Sweden is in desperate need of workforce immigration. Presumably, the retirement of the baby boomers born in the 1940s leaves so many open spots on the labor market that native Swedes cannot possibly fill them. Therefore, the story goes, Sweden needs to invite as many marginally educated Somalis and Afghans as possible.

The flaws in this argument are so many that it is surprising it is still being used. To begin with, the 1940s generation has been retiring for about eight years already. The average retirement age in Sweden has been hovering around 62-63 for a long time, which means that of almost one million 40s boomers, some 700,000 have already retired. Any student of the Swedish economy knows that this has not caused any massive shortage of labor at all. On the contrary, over the past ten years the employment rate of the Swedish work force has actually dropped from 67 percent to 64 percent. A larger share of the work force is without a job today than during the Millennium recession, despite the baby boomer generation’s retirement.

It is easy to see why this drop in employment has taken place. In an economy that creates 60,000 new jobs per year in good economic times, the employment rate cannot rise if there is also a large net immigration taking place. Over the past ten years immigration has increased from 60,000 per year to 100,000. During the same time, according to Statistics Sweden migration data, emigration has risen from 33,000 to 48,000 resulting in a significant growth in net migration: ten years ago immigration exceeded emigration by 27,000 people. Today net immigration exceeds 52,000 per year, with a record high of 63,000 in 2009.

These numbers should be considered in view of Sweden’s population of only nine million. To make matters worse, there is a persistent education gap between people leaving and coming to Sweden. Very few immigrants have a high school degree, while the average emigrant has at least a BA university degree.

It is obvious that the arithmetic of Sweden’s immigration policy is working against the best interests of the Swedish people and the Swedish economy. Exporting educated workers and importing uneducated people is bad enough; importing two uneducated workers for everyone who leaves is directly irresponsible. Who is going to pay for the education of these immigrants? If Sweden really had an insatiable need for workforce immigration, then how come the 30 countries within the EU and the Nordic region cannot satisfy that need? Why would Sweden have to rely on the remotest – geographically, culturally and socially – corners of the world to fill its workforce need, provided such a need existed? (Which, again, it does not.)

A couple of factoids from Eurostat, the statistics agency of the EU, further underscore how out-of-control irresponsible this immigration policy actually is. Sweden is Europe’s second-largest recipient of immigrants – in absolute numbers – from the least-developed nations in the world. Only Britain takes in more least-developed immigrants, and its rationale lies in its commonwealth past. Furthermore, in 2007 this small nation, with less than three percent of the EU population, took in 16 percent of all asylum seekers absorbed by the EU. No other EU country accepted a larger share than Sweden.

The asylum-driven inflow is steadfastly growing. Apparently, Sweden has made a name for itself as having open borders: from 2007 to 2010 the number of asylum seekers coming to Sweden increased by 50 percent, with a 32-percent increase from 2009 to 2010 alone.

There is no way to motivate Sweden’s immigration madness, no matter how you slice immigration and labor market statistics. The country has opened its borders, lowered the bar for immigrants with questionable documentation and made its welfare state available even to those who are denied immigration or asylum. The challenge from the Swedish Democrats came in the nick of time. The question is: will it make a difference in the nick of time?

Follow my blog with bloglovin

pi, pi, pi, biv, biv, tg, tg, vg, vl, vl, vl, po, po, ft, ft, ft, nr, nr, nr, dt.

st, st, av, pcf, bt, bt, db, db, db, gd, gd, ek, ek, ek, ne, ne, ne, mn, mn, mn, mn, al, al, bk, bk, ln, ln, dm, svt, svt, nm, nm, svt, svt, ft, ft, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, kj, kk, cc, ha, ai, kt, dn, dn ,dn, dn, svd, svd, svd, svd, ex, gp, gp, gp, gp, gp, smp, smp, smp, sd, sd, sd.

Read Full Post »