4 ms·
If that paragraph is not suggesting the far-right may be responsible, why does it refer to their "bitter protests" immediately after the theory that an "angry u
by quirkafleeg 10y ago
If that paragraph is not suggesting the far-right may be responsible, why does it refer to their "bitter protests" immediately after the theory that an "angry underclass" are burning cars?
Why even mention the far-right at all, if nobody is suggesting they have something to do with these crimes?
- panic 10y agoThey're implying that the far-right protests caused the "Arab ghetto kids" in question to become the "angry underclass", not that the "angry underclass" was itself far-right. The sentence could definitely be written more clearly.
- EJTH 10y agoI think it is a wrong thing to imply. Just looking at the crime statistics for the past decade debunks this hypothesis. The arab demographic has always been troublesome in Scandinavia.
- Cpoll 10y agoI interpret it as "individuals from an angry underclass" vs "far-right groups [that] have organized bitter protests against immigration" So the far-right is implied to have something to do with these crimes, in the sense that they created an environment that triggers the crime.
- argonaut 10y agoThe NYT clearly blames the crime on.... the people committing the crime. The NYT is not blaming the crime on the far right. If anything, they are blaming it on the Arab ghetto kids which is what the OP was claiming was the truth.
- argonaut 10y agoThey are suggesting the far-right is angering the underclass. If you're asserting the NY Times is therefore blaming the crimes on the far-right, good luck!