It’s election year in Sweden.
Every four years, those Swedes who are eligible to vote will, by secret ballot, pick 349 people to Riksdagen — the Swedish Parliament.
Well, technically they’ll pick parties, and the parties will then get to send proportionally as many representatives to parliament. It is possible to name a specific person from a specific party, but no guarantee there.
Much as elections work in most democracies, with the odd difference here and there.
So, this year, Swedes of various configurations will, on the 19th of September, elect their representatives to Parliament, and to various local councils and similar.
One might suspect, then, that newspapers and other sources of information are filled with, well, election stuff. They ain’t.
They are filled with SverigeDemokratene («The Swedish Democrats») and various pro– and cons thereof. Now, I hear you ask, who might they be that garner such attention?
According to themselves they are a party «in the middle» who disown both Marxism and Nazi–ism. They wish to create an atmosphere of «love for one’s country», and a society where «idealism, accepting responsibility, and cooperation is encouraged». Endquote. My translation. They don’t have an English website, so live with it.
Anyone getting a whiff here? Oh, yeah. Let’s look at their policies. What little there is thereof.
Most importantly, they are for restrictions on immigration, as too much of that sort will «threaten the swedish national identity». They are against multiculturalism, racism and so forth.
They are also of the opinion that asylum is a form of immigration and that Swedish interests should be the basis of asylum, that refugees should be assisted next to that which they run away from, that families consist of one male, one female, and a number of offspring, and that Der Vaterland is of utmost importance.
That’s the party program. Sorry. They wrote «Fäderneslandet», which is Swedish for «the father country». Der Vaterland. Fatherland.
The odd detail regarding such things as women’s rights, and LGBT questions, have appeared in other contexts, such as speeches by representatives, and interviews. It isn’t pleasant reading; not unless you happen to be a middle–aged, white — sorry: pink — heterosexual «ethnic swede» male.
Luckily they have been stuck below the 4% required for entry in Parliament. That’s 281,320 out of 7,033,019 who can vote. The other 96% are not too happy with’em.
But everyone are talking about them. Constantly. You just can’t buy attention like that, folks. Good work.
Here’s the really interesting bit, however.
They, and those supporting them, are against multi–culturalism, ie. the idea that cultures are, basically, equal in worth. They are also anti–immigration, ie. pro a more restrictive immigration policy.
One comment in a newspaper went: «I hate the word anti–immigration! Just because one is critical towards school politics one doesn’t become anti–school!» — endquote.
Too true. But, see, you guys are not really against immigration, or a multi–cultural society. That’d be too easy. You object to very specific immigration and culture.
Or are you going to give preferential treatment to the Swedish hamburger chain Max over McDonalds? Restrict immigration from the US? Ban Chinese, Thai, Turkish, and Mexican restaurants?
Their food’ll do nicely, but their skin colour and religion won’t?
Oh, I get it. It’s because «[insert name of culture] is evil!» simply because of aspects of it, or some «owners» of it, are. Oddly how you guys don’t appear to mind shish kebab, as long as the people preparing it ain’t allowed to live here while they do.
Gotta hurt, that one.