Hacker News Reader

Comment by dijit | Hacker News Reader

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".

View on HN

"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"

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-...

I feel like people are looking for a reason to be outraged and not the shape of the actual situation. It makes me skittish.

Has any ruling party with this kind of view ever not significantly expanded their definition of "not ${country}ish" while in power?

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.

Come now, this is a response to very obvious criminal situations, parties like this (and SD) don't just pop up in very egalitarian, sectarian and liberal societies like Sweden for no reason whatsoever.

I empathise with the point you're making, and I suspect we agree on a lot more than you expect, but there is a serious issue with crime as it is currently defined.

It could be a response, but the point I was making was that while saying "criminals should be expelled" might sound reasonable to many, defining what exactly you mean with criminal is extremely important.

If the party comes to power and the law they'll actually enact says "If you violated any law you can be expelled", it would make anyone easily expellable.

this kind of slippery slope is why I hate vague rules on forums, let alone national laws.

Selective enforcement of those you find disagreeable is a way of bullying people with impunity.

That said, I'm curious on how you would solve the issue that Sweden is faced with. It is a very outsized, pronounced, issue and the legal system in Sweden is not equipped to deal with it.

The Swedish legal system prioritises rehabilitation, but the scale of the problem and the reoffending rate being what it is for serious crimes of foreign born persons does need to be answered somehow.

Ignoring it will make the problem worse, people will keep reaching further right.

I don't know very much about Sweden's issues, but if you say that the legal system is not equipped to deal with them, maybe that's what should be fixed?

Do search for the causes and strive to solve them, I doubt that the only possible solution (if it were a solution) is mass deportations.

Insufficient integration efforts could well be at the root of a lot of the immigrant crime problems; I agree with striving to integrate immigrants, to the point that I agree to a lot of what I see at https://web.archive.org/web/20200120174720/http://www.orebro... (2020, not on their site anymore).

I think you should demand committed acceptance of some core values to new immigrants, and I can agree with expulsion after serious enough violations of those.

And I'm not a fan of having as much immigration as possible.

I don't know why your comments keep dying, btw, I vouched for them

I assumed he was shadowbanned because he wants an ethnic cleansing

what if you’re wrong?

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"?

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.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com