3 ms·

From what I've learned (from these threads) the leader of the Orebro party said he wanted to expel those who commit crimes, even if they were born here (if they

by dijit 3mo ago

From what I've learned (from these threads) the leader of the Orebro party said he wanted to expel those who commit crimes, even if they were born here (if they have no "natural" connection to Sweden). It's an extreme position. Yet it's also now two degrees moved from the founder of Mullvad; who has not expressed these opinions nor issued direct support for them specifically, nor do they imply all non-Swedes as you imply. I'm not sure how you go from "Mullvad founder gave money to a party" to "that party leader said something extreme about criminals and welfare-abuse" to "the mullvad founder wants all non-Swedes deported".

inigyou 3mo ago
My guy, he contributed 70% of the party's funds. That's pretty strong support. And he's smart enough to keep an apparent firewall between him and the party to deflect criticism. What is a "natural connection to Sweden"?
- dijit 3mo ago
  Having a home, kids, a pet, a job and being part of a community that is integrated into the social fabric of the country. "Values" get thrown around a lot, but equality of women and acceptance of homosexuality is a big deal to Swedes, so if you shun those things then I wouldn't expect acceptance.
  - dijit 3mo ago
    [dead]
g-b-r 3mo ago
"They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish"
- dijit 3mo ago
  I listened to it, because of these threads. (My Swedish is passive rather than spoken, understanding it isn't the problem.) That quote is his answer to a question about people born here who commit crimes and live long-term on welfare; whether they can also be made to leave. It's not a freestanding statement about everyone born in Sweden to immigrant parents. And the passage continues past where your excerpt stops: "They have not become Swedes. It says Sweden in the passport, but they haven't been interested in becoming part of Sweden. That's a qualitative difference." "Have not become" only works if becoming is possible. So the criterion he's stating is failed assimilation, not ancestry; and the write-ups of the same interview describe his programme the same way: remigration for criminals and the long-term welfare-dependent. To be fair: that's still a subjective judgement about people's inner attitudes, which I've said elsewhere in this thread is arbitrary and I'd oppose. He also says he's prepared to "walk over corpses" on this, so I'm not selling him as a moderate. Extreme, yes. Ancestry-based, no. Those are different accusations, and only one of them survives contact with sources. Podcast (Swedish): https://aljosja.substack.com/p/satter-orebropartiet-sverige-forst https://aljosja.substack.com/p/satter-orebropartiet-sverige-... I feel like people are looking for a reason to be outraged and not the shape of the actual situation. It makes me skittish.
  - inigyou 3mo ago
    Has any ruling party with this kind of view ever not significantly expanded their definition of "not ${country}ish" while in power?
    - dijit 3mo ago
      [flagged]
  - g-b-r 3mo ago
    Ok, do fix the Wikipedia article. But, born here? Or not born here? Anyhow, "criminals" is a way too vague concept for expelling someone from a country, especially when your party could come to power and criminalize anything you want. And, Show me the man and I'll show you the crime: most people commit something illegal relatively frequently, sometimes without even realizing that it could be (e.g. copyright violations, libel, slight violations of obscure little-known laws...). They'll typically never face consequences for that; but if you target them, or if it becomes more interesting for law enforcement to find any violation of the law on the part of someone, more often than not something will be found.

by dijit 3mo ago

inigyou 3mo ago

My guy, he contributed 70% of the party's funds. That's pretty strong support. And he's smart enough to keep an apparent firewall between him and the party to deflect criticism. What is a "natural connection to Sweden"?

dijit 3mo ago
Having a home, kids, a pet, a job and being part of a community that is integrated into the social fabric of the country. "Values" get thrown around a lot, but equality of women and acceptance of homosexuality is a big deal to Swedes, so if you shun those things then I wouldn't expect acceptance.
- dijit 3mo ago
  [dead]

g-b-r 3mo ago

"They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish"

dijit 3mo ago
I listened to it, because of these threads. (My Swedish is passive rather than spoken, understanding it isn't the problem.) That quote is his answer to a question about people born here who commit crimes and live long-term on welfare; whether they can also be made to leave. It's not a freestanding statement about everyone born in Sweden to immigrant parents. And the passage continues past where your excerpt stops: "They have not become Swedes. It says Sweden in the passport, but they haven't been interested in becoming part of Sweden. That's a qualitative difference." "Have not become" only works if becoming is possible. So the criterion he's stating is failed assimilation, not ancestry; and the write-ups of the same interview describe his programme the same way: remigration for criminals and the long-term welfare-dependent. To be fair: that's still a subjective judgement about people's inner attitudes, which I've said elsewhere in this thread is arbitrary and I'd oppose. He also says he's prepared to "walk over corpses" on this, so I'm not selling him as a moderate. Extreme, yes. Ancestry-based, no. Those are different accusations, and only one of them survives contact with sources. Podcast (Swedish): https://aljosja.substack.com/p/satter-orebropartiet-sverige-forst https://aljosja.substack.com/p/satter-orebropartiet-sverige-... I feel like people are looking for a reason to be outraged and not the shape of the actual situation. It makes me skittish.
- inigyou 3mo ago
  Has any ruling party with this kind of view ever not significantly expanded their definition of "not ${country}ish" while in power?
  - dijit 3mo ago
    [flagged]
- g-b-r 3mo ago
  Ok, do fix the Wikipedia article. But, born here? Or not born here? Anyhow, "criminals" is a way too vague concept for expelling someone from a country, especially when your party could come to power and criminalize anything you want. And, Show me the man and I'll show you the crime: most people commit something illegal relatively frequently, sometimes without even realizing that it could be (e.g. copyright violations, libel, slight violations of obscure little-known laws...). They'll typically never face consequences for that; but if you target them, or if it becomes more interesting for law enforcement to find any violation of the law on the part of someone, more often than not something will be found.