The party in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party. Doesn't sound extremist far-right to me. Many of its positions would be considered center-left or even far left in much of the world.
For all the stuff about free dentists this sounds pretty right wing to me.
But if your kids spend the first dozen years of their life in a country, they should get to stay in that country.
If they don't speak the language because their parents actively kept them from integrating into the land's culture which they (the parents) consider to be bad in some way, they (the children) violated the laws of the land and have well-filled rap sheets, they go out of their way to voice their dislike of the culture which allowed their parents in and they live on welfare because working is for 'svenner' they are very much invited to leave on the first ship or train of plane whether they like it or not.
Instead of being in the country the day you're born, it's being in the country for something like 90% of your life from birth until somewhere in your teens.
It does!
Versus jus soli which includes people that are only days old...
> again, if their parents have no grounds for residence, it is typical
Again I'm talking about what I find moral, not what's typical.
And if you have no grounds for residence you're usually not staying there for over a decade. If someone does stay and raise a child for well over a decade, despite lack of grounds, there's a point where that child shouldn't be forced "back" to a "homeland" that isn't their actual home.
Also if it's more convincing we could stick to a threshold of 18 for right now. That would still do most of the job.
If you've heard the term "Dreamers" then you'll understand this isn't some weird isolated idea I have.