That depends. If you are looking for excuses for racism, it obviously is not relevant. But if you claim that the Swedish society has turned dangerous because of the immigrant crimes, it should be highly relevant for the discussion.
That depends. If you are looking for excuses for racism, it obviously is not relevant. But if you claim that the Swedish society has turned dangerous because of the immigrant crimes, it should be highly relevant for the discussion.
Why is the conclusion that immigrants dominate the statistics of violence against women racist? I don't think there are many people who believe the cause of this statistic is genetic.
I thought women should be safe regardless the perpetrator but there is this weird dual standard where the whole company Uber (correctly!) gets the blame because of it's douchebag culture even when some of it's key executives don't directly partake in denigrating women, yet when migrants dominate negative statistics in far worse crimes against women all of a sudden imagined racism is the worst crime instead of actually abuse of women.
I think the problem with that particular violent subset of the Muslim subset of immigrants is exactly what you try to blame other people for: right-wing asshole mysogonist gay jew or "soft men" (i.e. respectful mostly left wing so yes you) hating retards. With absolutely no ground for respect let alone a chance of a better life in a modern society. And you should fight them with the same energy you fight "native" right wing hate groups.
People fleeing from that kind of violent and oppressive people should not go to Sweden only to be confronted by exactly the same people they were trying to get away of.
First, if the very first sentence of wikipedia article of racism[1] tells that racism can be against a race or ethnic group, it should be accepted that the word "racism" is used not only to genetically different groups, but also against ethnic groups.
Second, your claim that immigrants dominate the statistics is wrong. They are over-represented. But even if we take that as your claim, no, the conclusion in itself is not racist. However, if you read what I wrote more carefully, that conclusion can be used as an excuse for racism.
Because it appears to be a made up conclusion for the purpose of stoking anti-immigrant sentiment. You have yet to provide a source. OP has sources. GP has sources. You have fear mongering.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_crime#Sweden
If you don't think WikiPedia is correct feel free to change the lemma, I bet they can use a certified statistician like you with all kinds of sources to prove them wrong. But until then:
Five times as much
And now I need to believe that I'm the one that needs to be corrected?
And another thing: once you split it up to region there's a bigger difference. East Asian and Western immigrants generally have lower or similar statistics compared to natives, meaning there are also groups that exceed the five times average.
Your original claim was:
> immigrants dominate the statistics of violence against women
Let's see what "dominate" means [1]:
to be predominant in
And further, predominant [2]:
being most frequent or common
There is simply nothing to discuss here. Your original claim was wrong, even using your own statistics. (Of course, you may have tried to say or you meant that immigrants are over represented, which would be correct. But you did not say that. Thus you are the one to be corrected.)
[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dominate [2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/predominant
That is again another discussion where it may be relevant.
I took a quite specific discussion ("Sweden has turned dangerous because of crimes by immigrants") and in that discussion the fact(?) that total crime numbers have not increased is very relevant.
Not necessarily the case because demographics are never homogeneously distributed across territory. If the rape/crime numbers didn't fall uniformly across the whole population, then you could have scenarios where crime fell by 20% in some regions and increased 25% in others, and overall it would be constant. I'm making up the numbers to illustrate.
More data would make your point much more convincing.
Segregation of areas is however becoming stronger, as many minorities like to live in their own ethnic enclaves.
It's possible that Sweden became safer because Swedes commit fewer crimes, and this decrease outweighed a crime increase caused by immigrants. Crime-by-nationality data would help resolve this question. Why is the Swedish government hiding it?