6 ms·

Swedish PM says integration of immigrants has failed, fueled gang crime

60 points by jdrc 4y ago

reallybiteshu 4y ago
How can he state the obvious like that? Better ban his Reddit account, his twitter account, remove his comments, etc.
- usrn 4y ago
  I wonder if people are actually going to start acknowledging reality. That would be an incredible improvement.
- benchtobedside 4y ago
  > How can he state the obvious like that? Better ban his Reddit account, his twitter account, remove his comments, etc. Worth noting that Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson is female and has been in power since 2021; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalena_Andersson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalena_Andersson
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
tus666 4y ago
Sweden admits the Left is IN-correct?
- gbanfalvi 4y ago
  Not sure it was “the left’s” fault. It was Olof Palme, a famously leftist prime minister that facilitated refugee immigration – but Sweden also had much more “aggressive” integration policies. There was more effort put into training to get immigrants into the labor market, housing was less segregated… a lot of that ended and it will continue to get worse as the country turns right wing. But it’s going to happen with other staples of Swedish society. Give it just a year or two until there’s a “is Swedish welfare unsustainable?” and the answer will be the same: No, the right is just strangling it.
  - reallybiteshu 4y ago
    The country is turning right wing because your precious refugees do grenade attacks on a daily basis. There is a point where the left needs to wake up, smell the coffee and realize that not all people are alike, not all groups are alike. The idea that you can absorb any culture into any culture is completely absurd on its face, and now we have a proof of that not just in Sweden but in basically any Western country that tried to do the same thing (and in fact non-Western countries too, although in their cases they rarely welcomed mass immigration of people from different cultures on purpose, it's generally more a series of unfortunate incidents of history, because everyone has known for ages that it was generally a bad thing).
    - throwawaymanbot 4y ago
jleyank 4y ago
[flagged]
- adamrezich 4y ago
  I wonder if we'll ever get over the hump in human development of assuming "bigotry" as the root cause of everything bad in the world. obviously it exists, but the world is more nuanced than "bigots ruin everything for non-bigots" being the core of every issue. by no means is it a mystery as to how we got here, but still, it's disappointing that we seem to have sort of high-centered on this false idea that unlimited tolerance is the only solution to everything and anything short of it is just plain old-fashioned "bigotry", and we seem to lack the means of getting unstuck. it's pretty hard to be optimistic about this—the "bigotry" narrative is very appealing and easy to take at face value without putting any further thought into the issues at play. everyone wants to be a good person (or at least think of themselves as such).
  - jdrc 4y ago
    actually yes we will. a little external pressure has already brought a lot of nations to reconsider their priorities
  - jleyank 4y ago
    Bigotry is a piece of jargon meaning “those who hate them”. What else do you call somebody burning a religious book for the sole purpose of generating a response? Would you prefer fascist? Nihilistic performance artist? There is no sane way to defend these actions, so those offended by what I’m writing must be nuts or participants frustrated on being outed. And it’s quite disappointing the right wing leaning of at least some of hacker news. As there’s anonymity in up and down grades, they might all be trolls. But there’s a lot of fondness for cash here along with much less interest in helping others with it. Y’all win. Have fun in the stew.
    - adamrezich 4y ago
      I don't pay very much attention to goings-on in Sweden but just to make sure we have our causality straight here: how far into their mass migration did these book-burnings begin, and how was integration doing before that? (seeing as how you're blaming book-burning—which, without examining things further, I assume to be a political stunt distastefully attempting to make a point/draw attention to the issue—for the integration difficulties.)
peepop6 4y ago
This was obvious from the start just looking at their refugee numbers and the fact that they didn't have enough experience with immigration. This whole thing is a bit of a mindfuck for me because I can't find any logical reason for what Sweden has done. I think the government has actually acted out of pure humanity and accepted so many refugees without thinking through any of it and now they're paying the price. Compare that with Canada who picks and chooses their immigrants and has a 100-year outlook on the future of their demography.
- throwawaymanbot 4y ago
  [dead]
- Ekaros 4y ago
  One could argue from Finnish immigrant population in Sweden that they had experience with immigration. But it was entirely different type of immigration. Skilled trained workers with outside language near same ethnicity and similar cultural background. It is just that later groups were different. Not that certain ones like Vietnamese haven't integrated well enough without too many issues.
- Gnob 4y ago
  >This whole thing is a bit of a mindfuck for me because I can't find any logical reason for what Sweden has done. I think the government has actually acted out of pure humanity and accepted so many refugees without thinking through any of it and now they're paying the price. I hope you don't think they're that stupid. nobody is, they did it and they keep doing it to make more "liberal Muslims", who are just like most Christians today, atheists who don't care really about anything related to the religion itself, they just keep repeating their prayers because they find peace in it, not because they care about God or his commandments or going to heaven.
drtrq 4y ago
- arinlen 4y ago
  > Disrespect these immigrants. Burn their holy book, call them terrorises when they demonstrate legally. Then talk about “integration failure”. Can you please provide your best example of how any immigrant was "disrespected"? Keep in mind you're talking about a nation which welcomed them with open arms when they needed the most, and was extremely generous with it's support. > Burn their holy book, call them terrorises when they demonstrate legally. Sweden is a liberal democracy, where freedom of speech is one of its founding principles. Mishandling a religious book does not justify aimless riots, specially if what you're directing your protests at the society which welcomed you.
  - Gnob 4y ago
    >Keep in mind you're talking about a nation which welcomed them with open arms when they needed the most, and was extremely generous with it's support. Not generous when you exchange food and safety for forcing your principles onto people by insulting their own ideology because you disagree, quite the opposite, it's a very filthy action, not even "extremists" or "fundamentalists" would do that, but as you so preach liberalism, you won't see that. it's clearly stated and known for each Muslim that one shouldn't force people into Islam ( nobody really can force anyone into Islam unless the person is born muslim I think and even that part was a bit controversial idr honestly ), or provoke people and insult them so they won't pull these sorts of action like depicting God or the prophet, and I think these people who try to follow their religion to their best would be considered by yourself and your people as "fundamentalists" or something I guess. >Sweden is a liberal democracy, where freedom of speech is one of its founding principles. Mishandling a religious book does not justify aimless riots, specially if what you're directing your protests at the society which welcomed you. They burned it in the one holy month of the muslims, in the areas where muslims aggregate. it wasn't mishandling, it was permitted by the city hall, they gave him the permit and the police protection. I am against the riots but I think they should have burned the flag and the constitution where the far right people aggregate and let them start the violence. the aimless riots were definitely wrong if it was like that but no media seemed to actually report the exact details of how things got escalated.
armchairhacker 4y ago
It’s not fair to flat-out ban refugees (or ban types of refugees such as men): these are, by definition, people escaping unstable authoritarian governments where they aren’t safe and don’t have fundamental human rights. But that’s it. And refugees take up land and social services, so they should be required to give back (if only because refugee programs simply won’t work otherwise, and countries will try to block or pass on refugees. Exactly what the US/Europe are doing and have been doing the last few years). I see no issue in: - Relocating refugees to another developed country (not Libya, not Turkey, maybe Greece) - Requiring able-bodied refugees to work (in decent conditions, not back-breaking labor, but still in manufacturing or service or IT if they’re capable. Again, because there’s literally no other alternative to pay for these refugees) - Swiftly deporting refugees when they commit crimes (with a fair trial and evidence beyond considerable doubt, but given these people are being videotaped that should be pretty easy) - Cracking down on protests like these and making it very clear that refugees can keep their own religion and culture, but can’t enforce it on others, who also can burn books and say whatever they want. - Tracking and monitoring refugees, at least for a couple years, for the sake of security and to assure people they aren’t terrorists. Sweden’s approach of just letting in refugees is too liberal. Nationalism and flat-out anti-refugee rhetoric like Trump and Marine Le Pen is too conservative. The bottom line is: give refugees space, essentials, freedom, and refuge, but require them to behave and give back.
- skissane 4y ago
  > - Relocating refugees to another developed country (not Libya, not Turkey, maybe Greece) Refugees fleeing the war in Syria – let's agree they had the right to go somewhere safe, and the rest of the world had a duty to provide them with somewhere safe to go – but does a refugee have a right to refuge in a developed country in particular? Especially when the country from which they came wasn't, prior to the start of the war/conflict, generally counted as "developed"? The idea that refugees from a conflict should primarily be hosted by neighbouring countries, who are likely to have much greater cultural/linguistic similarity, rather than by substantially more distant countries with far less cultural commonality, doesn't seem unreasonable. If a country is developing/middle income, and so are most of its neighbours – you can understand why refugees might greatly prefer to seek refuge in a much richer country much further away, rather than its economically more similar immediate neighbours – but are we obliged to honour that preference? Given the majority of Syrian refugees were Muslim – why didn't the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation take the lead in resettling them in Muslim-majority countries? Or similarly – given Syria is part of the Arab world, why didn't the Arab League resettle them in other Arab states?
throwawaymanbot 4y ago
[dead]
aaomidi 4y ago
Gangs are literally directed caused by poverty and otherism. Neoliberal politics doesn't work with integration, but sure let's just use all the xenophobic and antisemitic dog whistles
Gnob 4y ago
[flagged]
- joeman1000 4y ago
  How exactly could Sweden or any other country destroy Islam by having a minute fraction of its population migrate there? What percentage of Islamic people in the world are actively being ‘oppressed’ in countries they voluntarily fled to? The key word here is voluntarily. What you’re seeing, the watering-down of Islam, also happens to Christianity and all other religions in Western countries. It’s what happens when there’s a bazaar, rather than a monoculture. Your sentiment is correct, if not slightly unhinged. But there is nobody out to get you, no more than everybody is out to get everybody else. It’s not all a big plot. In my opinion, refugee intake in Sweden has been more about Swedish white guilt (for whatever reason) and thus self-destruction.
  - Gnob 4y ago
    >How exactly could Sweden or any other country destroy Islam by having a minute fraction of its population migrate there By making this minute fraction the elites, the highly educated, the role models and putting them under the spotlight, the same way they abuse children and females misery to shape a perspective that's filled of hate and mistrust of males in the west, then you have sexual fluidity and gays rights, wanna guess what happens next? That's how selective sympathy and indirect dictatorships work as far as I have seen. Is Islam democratic? it's not, but it makes far sense to me than the pathetic attempts the west does to make Islam look bad. why? long story short, Islam doesn't make total sense to me still, but I have yet to see a semi-intelligent argument about why Islam is bad beyond fearmongering people from the punishments or taking verses out of context etc. if you have any, please do offer them and I am willing to change my mind but as far as I have seen, neither lgbtq+ nor nazism makes any sense to sustain a healthy society, nor does lessening the severity of the punishment for the crimes committed by people who sometimes don't even deserve to live. >The key word here is voluntarily. I have noticed one thing, that is a lot of people, in a lot of seemingly different cultures where so into the western culture, and that was the moment when I said to myself: well, that is quite weird now. and long story short, the western culture is massively imported in the Islamic-majority countries it turns out, and it's idealized and romanticised as sort of the "elites traditions / club", why? because the governments there are merely proxy governments, if you have any better reason for this, I would love to hear it. >What you’re seeing, the watering-down of Islam, also happens to Christianity and all other religions in Western countries. Yes, that's the problem. people won't accept that, not me, not the rest of the Muslims, nobody. Not even me as an agnostic, just a big flat NO. I would love to be able to mock the western culture and their base beliefs without being taken to jail or called with derogatory slogans such as "fundamentalist", "terrorist", "extremist" etc. If you don't respect others' core beliefs and values I can't think of any reason for them to respect yours, do you have any good reason for them to do so? riots where wrong if they started that wildly out of the blue but I wasn't able to find details about how it evolved into rioting last time I checked. >In my opinion, refugee intake in Sweden has been more about Swedish white guilt (for whatever reason) and thus self-destruction. Not really, if anything at all it's the white burden imo, not exactly the white guilt. and I would be very much concerned more about the Swedish political system than the refugees issue if they just act on their whims and sympathy. Not sure what's with romanticizing the fact that they accepted a lot of refugees, but I guess well each gotta be biased to his own eventually. I don't see it as a good thing, I don't really support screaming at / hitting your children whatsoever, but do I think it's proper to take one's children and throw them away with a gay family that will abuse and change them eventually and not even allow their parent to have contact with them? to threaten the children and their family if any of them contact each other? to use these cases to gain money? for the government to ignore these issues for years and then give all that support of police and whatnot for a nazi scum to burn the holy book of some people minding their own business? all because that some people might actually scream at their kids or hit them in a non-harming way or if they teach them to live by their religion? Good God if not the Swedish government is pretty good at radicalizing people then pulling the white angel card.

60 points by jdrc 4y ago

reallybiteshu 4y ago

How can he state the obvious like that? Better ban his Reddit account, his twitter account, remove his comments, etc.

usrn 4y ago
I wonder if people are actually going to start acknowledging reality. That would be an incredible improvement.
benchtobedside 4y ago
> How can he state the obvious like that? Better ban his Reddit account, his twitter account, remove his comments, etc. Worth noting that Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson is female and has been in power since 2021; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalena_Andersson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalena_Andersson

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

tus666 4y ago

Sweden admits the Left is IN-correct?

gbanfalvi 4y ago
Not sure it was “the left’s” fault. It was Olof Palme, a famously leftist prime minister that facilitated refugee immigration – but Sweden also had much more “aggressive” integration policies. There was more effort put into training to get immigrants into the labor market, housing was less segregated… a lot of that ended and it will continue to get worse as the country turns right wing. But it’s going to happen with other staples of Swedish society. Give it just a year or two until there’s a “is Swedish welfare unsustainable?” and the answer will be the same: No, the right is just strangling it.
- reallybiteshu 4y ago
  The country is turning right wing because your precious refugees do grenade attacks on a daily basis. There is a point where the left needs to wake up, smell the coffee and realize that not all people are alike, not all groups are alike. The idea that you can absorb any culture into any culture is completely absurd on its face, and now we have a proof of that not just in Sweden but in basically any Western country that tried to do the same thing (and in fact non-Western countries too, although in their cases they rarely welcomed mass immigration of people from different cultures on purpose, it's generally more a series of unfortunate incidents of history, because everyone has known for ages that it was generally a bad thing).
  - throwawaymanbot 4y ago

jleyank 4y ago

[flagged]

adamrezich 4y ago
I wonder if we'll ever get over the hump in human development of assuming "bigotry" as the root cause of everything bad in the world. obviously it exists, but the world is more nuanced than "bigots ruin everything for non-bigots" being the core of every issue. by no means is it a mystery as to how we got here, but still, it's disappointing that we seem to have sort of high-centered on this false idea that unlimited tolerance is the only solution to everything and anything short of it is just plain old-fashioned "bigotry", and we seem to lack the means of getting unstuck. it's pretty hard to be optimistic about this—the "bigotry" narrative is very appealing and easy to take at face value without putting any further thought into the issues at play. everyone wants to be a good person (or at least think of themselves as such).
- jdrc 4y ago
  actually yes we will. a little external pressure has already brought a lot of nations to reconsider their priorities
- jleyank 4y ago
  Bigotry is a piece of jargon meaning “those who hate them”. What else do you call somebody burning a religious book for the sole purpose of generating a response? Would you prefer fascist? Nihilistic performance artist? There is no sane way to defend these actions, so those offended by what I’m writing must be nuts or participants frustrated on being outed. And it’s quite disappointing the right wing leaning of at least some of hacker news. As there’s anonymity in up and down grades, they might all be trolls. But there’s a lot of fondness for cash here along with much less interest in helping others with it. Y’all win. Have fun in the stew.
  - adamrezich 4y ago
    I don't pay very much attention to goings-on in Sweden but just to make sure we have our causality straight here: how far into their mass migration did these book-burnings begin, and how was integration doing before that? (seeing as how you're blaming book-burning—which, without examining things further, I assume to be a political stunt distastefully attempting to make a point/draw attention to the issue—for the integration difficulties.)

peepop6 4y ago

This was obvious from the start just looking at their refugee numbers and the fact that they didn't have enough experience with immigration. This whole thing is a bit of a mindfuck for me because I can't find any logical reason for what Sweden has done. I think the government has actually acted out of pure humanity and accepted so many refugees without thinking through any of it and now they're paying the price. Compare that with Canada who picks and chooses their immigrants and has a 100-year outlook on the future of their demography.

throwawaymanbot 4y ago
[dead]
Ekaros 4y ago
One could argue from Finnish immigrant population in Sweden that they had experience with immigration. But it was entirely different type of immigration. Skilled trained workers with outside language near same ethnicity and similar cultural background. It is just that later groups were different. Not that certain ones like Vietnamese haven't integrated well enough without too many issues.
Gnob 4y ago
>This whole thing is a bit of a mindfuck for me because I can't find any logical reason for what Sweden has done. I think the government has actually acted out of pure humanity and accepted so many refugees without thinking through any of it and now they're paying the price. I hope you don't think they're that stupid. nobody is, they did it and they keep doing it to make more "liberal Muslims", who are just like most Christians today, atheists who don't care really about anything related to the religion itself, they just keep repeating their prayers because they find peace in it, not because they care about God or his commandments or going to heaven.

drtrq 4y ago

arinlen 4y ago
> Disrespect these immigrants. Burn their holy book, call them terrorises when they demonstrate legally. Then talk about “integration failure”. Can you please provide your best example of how any immigrant was "disrespected"? Keep in mind you're talking about a nation which welcomed them with open arms when they needed the most, and was extremely generous with it's support. > Burn their holy book, call them terrorises when they demonstrate legally. Sweden is a liberal democracy, where freedom of speech is one of its founding principles. Mishandling a religious book does not justify aimless riots, specially if what you're directing your protests at the society which welcomed you.
- Gnob 4y ago
  >Keep in mind you're talking about a nation which welcomed them with open arms when they needed the most, and was extremely generous with it's support. Not generous when you exchange food and safety for forcing your principles onto people by insulting their own ideology because you disagree, quite the opposite, it's a very filthy action, not even "extremists" or "fundamentalists" would do that, but as you so preach liberalism, you won't see that. it's clearly stated and known for each Muslim that one shouldn't force people into Islam ( nobody really can force anyone into Islam unless the person is born muslim I think and even that part was a bit controversial idr honestly ), or provoke people and insult them so they won't pull these sorts of action like depicting God or the prophet, and I think these people who try to follow their religion to their best would be considered by yourself and your people as "fundamentalists" or something I guess. >Sweden is a liberal democracy, where freedom of speech is one of its founding principles. Mishandling a religious book does not justify aimless riots, specially if what you're directing your protests at the society which welcomed you. They burned it in the one holy month of the muslims, in the areas where muslims aggregate. it wasn't mishandling, it was permitted by the city hall, they gave him the permit and the police protection. I am against the riots but I think they should have burned the flag and the constitution where the far right people aggregate and let them start the violence. the aimless riots were definitely wrong if it was like that but no media seemed to actually report the exact details of how things got escalated.

armchairhacker 4y ago

It’s not fair to flat-out ban refugees (or ban types of refugees such as men): these are, by definition, people escaping unstable authoritarian governments where they aren’t safe and don’t have fundamental human rights. But that’s it. And refugees take up land and social services, so they should be required to give back (if only because refugee programs simply won’t work otherwise, and countries will try to block or pass on refugees. Exactly what the US/Europe are doing and have been doing the last few years). I see no issue in: - Relocating refugees to another developed country (not Libya, not Turkey, maybe Greece) - Requiring able-bodied refugees to work (in decent conditions, not back-breaking labor, but still in manufacturing or service or IT if they’re capable. Again, because there’s literally no other alternative to pay for these refugees) - Swiftly deporting refugees when they commit crimes (with a fair trial and evidence beyond considerable doubt, but given these people are being videotaped that should be pretty easy) - Cracking down on protests like these and making it very clear that refugees can keep their own religion and culture, but can’t enforce it on others, who also can burn books and say whatever they want. - Tracking and monitoring refugees, at least for a couple years, for the sake of security and to assure people they aren’t terrorists. Sweden’s approach of just letting in refugees is too liberal. Nationalism and flat-out anti-refugee rhetoric like Trump and Marine Le Pen is too conservative. The bottom line is: give refugees space, essentials, freedom, and refuge, but require them to behave and give back.

skissane 4y ago
> - Relocating refugees to another developed country (not Libya, not Turkey, maybe Greece) Refugees fleeing the war in Syria – let's agree they had the right to go somewhere safe, and the rest of the world had a duty to provide them with somewhere safe to go – but does a refugee have a right to refuge in a developed country in particular? Especially when the country from which they came wasn't, prior to the start of the war/conflict, generally counted as "developed"? The idea that refugees from a conflict should primarily be hosted by neighbouring countries, who are likely to have much greater cultural/linguistic similarity, rather than by substantially more distant countries with far less cultural commonality, doesn't seem unreasonable. If a country is developing/middle income, and so are most of its neighbours – you can understand why refugees might greatly prefer to seek refuge in a much richer country much further away, rather than its economically more similar immediate neighbours – but are we obliged to honour that preference? Given the majority of Syrian refugees were Muslim – why didn't the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation take the lead in resettling them in Muslim-majority countries? Or similarly – given Syria is part of the Arab world, why didn't the Arab League resettle them in other Arab states?

throwawaymanbot 4y ago

[dead]

aaomidi 4y ago

Gangs are literally directed caused by poverty and otherism. Neoliberal politics doesn't work with integration, but sure let's just use all the xenophobic and antisemitic dog whistles

Gnob 4y ago

[flagged]

joeman1000 4y ago
How exactly could Sweden or any other country destroy Islam by having a minute fraction of its population migrate there? What percentage of Islamic people in the world are actively being ‘oppressed’ in countries they voluntarily fled to? The key word here is voluntarily. What you’re seeing, the watering-down of Islam, also happens to Christianity and all other religions in Western countries. It’s what happens when there’s a bazaar, rather than a monoculture. Your sentiment is correct, if not slightly unhinged. But there is nobody out to get you, no more than everybody is out to get everybody else. It’s not all a big plot. In my opinion, refugee intake in Sweden has been more about Swedish white guilt (for whatever reason) and thus self-destruction.
- Gnob 4y ago
  >How exactly could Sweden or any other country destroy Islam by having a minute fraction of its population migrate there By making this minute fraction the elites, the highly educated, the role models and putting them under the spotlight, the same way they abuse children and females misery to shape a perspective that's filled of hate and mistrust of males in the west, then you have sexual fluidity and gays rights, wanna guess what happens next? That's how selective sympathy and indirect dictatorships work as far as I have seen. Is Islam democratic? it's not, but it makes far sense to me than the pathetic attempts the west does to make Islam look bad. why? long story short, Islam doesn't make total sense to me still, but I have yet to see a semi-intelligent argument about why Islam is bad beyond fearmongering people from the punishments or taking verses out of context etc. if you have any, please do offer them and I am willing to change my mind but as far as I have seen, neither lgbtq+ nor nazism makes any sense to sustain a healthy society, nor does lessening the severity of the punishment for the crimes committed by people who sometimes don't even deserve to live. >The key word here is voluntarily. I have noticed one thing, that is a lot of people, in a lot of seemingly different cultures where so into the western culture, and that was the moment when I said to myself: well, that is quite weird now. and long story short, the western culture is massively imported in the Islamic-majority countries it turns out, and it's idealized and romanticised as sort of the "elites traditions / club", why? because the governments there are merely proxy governments, if you have any better reason for this, I would love to hear it. >What you’re seeing, the watering-down of Islam, also happens to Christianity and all other religions in Western countries. Yes, that's the problem. people won't accept that, not me, not the rest of the Muslims, nobody. Not even me as an agnostic, just a big flat NO. I would love to be able to mock the western culture and their base beliefs without being taken to jail or called with derogatory slogans such as "fundamentalist", "terrorist", "extremist" etc. If you don't respect others' core beliefs and values I can't think of any reason for them to respect yours, do you have any good reason for them to do so? riots where wrong if they started that wildly out of the blue but I wasn't able to find details about how it evolved into rioting last time I checked. >In my opinion, refugee intake in Sweden has been more about Swedish white guilt (for whatever reason) and thus self-destruction. Not really, if anything at all it's the white burden imo, not exactly the white guilt. and I would be very much concerned more about the Swedish political system than the refugees issue if they just act on their whims and sympathy. Not sure what's with romanticizing the fact that they accepted a lot of refugees, but I guess well each gotta be biased to his own eventually. I don't see it as a good thing, I don't really support screaming at / hitting your children whatsoever, but do I think it's proper to take one's children and throw them away with a gay family that will abuse and change them eventually and not even allow their parent to have contact with them? to threaten the children and their family if any of them contact each other? to use these cases to gain money? for the government to ignore these issues for years and then give all that support of police and whatnot for a nazi scum to burn the holy book of some people minding their own business? all because that some people might actually scream at their kids or hit them in a non-harming way or if they teach them to live by their religion? Good God if not the Swedish government is pretty good at radicalizing people then pulling the white angel card.