Posts like this show a poor attempt, with entirely subjective observations, to justify some of these attitudes. What's particularly scary is how the poster tries to disguise his views with a belief in socialist politics.
There simply is no possible way to absorb and assimilate such volumes of people, period. Then you are merely creating ethnic enclaves, which due to incompatible language, culture and job skills become ghettos, which in turns brews crime, misery and extremism. Once the inflow has exceeded the capacity for absorbtion, further immigration only makes the problem worse. "
I don't know the author, but this sounds like it belongs in a Pegida handbook.
Can't really blame them, and to be sure crime and social costs are higher as a result of immigration. That said, there is every reason to believe that these effects will diminish over time as immigrants start to integrate, even some beneficial effects are already showing.
The problem is that 'integration' takes generations, and a very large influx jeopardizes this process. So the adverse effects remain very visible and most people are too short-sighted to take the long view. At the same time Europeans are so hypersensitive about 'racism' that the topic can't even be discussed in polite company (which leaves it to actual racists to even talk about the issues).
If anything it seems anti-correlated with presence of real live immigrants. The largest group of immigrants to Denmark go to Copenhagen. But Copenhagen isn't where you find the strongest anti-immigrant sentiment, as you'd expect if anti-immigrant sentiment were caused by contact with immigrants. Such sentiment isn't absent, but Copenhageners are comparatively okay with immigration and the majority take moderate views, focused on practical issues like programs to improve integration. The strongest worries and the more "militant" style of anti-immigrant politics comes from rural and small-town areas which do not really see large-scale immigration.
I believe this is also the case in a number of other European countries, for example in Austria and Switzerland, where immigrants go mainly to the cities, but anti-immigrant sentiment is concentrated in the rural areas and small towns. Some of this probably has nothing to do with immigration per se but is a result of preexisting cultural splits between cosmopolitan, liberally oriented cities, and more conservative countrysides (a 19th-century sort of romantic nationalism is very strong in rural Scandinavia).
The situation in Sweden is a bit different though. Many of them are people that have no chance of finding a job in the Swedish market, which leads to crime, ghettos and separated societies. Its essentially mis-managed on a political level. This will only lead to resentment, the rise of right-wing parties and social problems. I don't think this is a desirable outcome for either the immigrants nor for Sweden as a society.
> At the end of 2012 there were 1.87 million foreigners in Switzerland, the equivalent of nearly 23.3% of a total population that has passed the 8-million mark. In addition, more than 270,000 cross-border workers hold a job in Switzerland.
I bet that most of the permanent residents and virtually all of the seasonal workers are in the low-skill category.
And the previously non-regulated EU residents are from a more similar cultural background, so there is a qualitative difference from the situation in Sweden.
Enclaves are caused by "tipping" in a Schelling check-board model. It would be interesting to check the data to this type of model.
Are you really surprised that with a pitch like that that Europeans aren't falling over themselves to shape up? Especially if they lack your great and frankly historically baseless belief that their culture and their children are guaranteed to have a place in it?
Indeed, it's alsmost the same that we hear from nationalists in Germany, France, etc.
Sweden is not a paradise, we know that, but it's not kicking out the "blackies" that you will solve the long-term problem of keeping a social-democratic country running. Full-on fascism and full-on "freemarketism" are easier to run, of course, but they come with greater drawbacks.
Of course the right wing will gain popularity, and while I'm not sympathetic, its very understandable.
[citation needed]
For example: http://economics.handels.gu.se/digitalAssets/1455/1455743_fr... directly contradicts your claim.
I don't know enough to claim you're wrong. But the claim is rather extraordinary and sounds very much like common right-wing propaganda from other countries. So a good study would help.
Really? Then how come I get the impression that politicians and newspapers are full of talk about the topic?
Sweden currently spends half their health care budget on immigration costs.
On the national level [1]:
47 billion SEK spent on migration and foreign aid.
63 billion SEK spent on health care.
Note: most of the health care in Sweden is financed on the regional level; a rough approximation of total amount spent on spent on health care based on [2] would be about 260 billion SEK.
[1]: http://www.regeringen.se/artiklar/2015/04/statens-budget-201...
[2]: http://www.ekonomifakta.se/sv/Fakta/Offentlig-ekonomi/Offent...
The other thing I was referring to was that the Swedish newspaper Expressen exposed the identities of Disqus users, and at least one of them lost heir job as a consequence:
http://www.thelocal.se/20131212/millions-of-disqus-comments-...
I don't know what these people posted, and I suspect it wasn't that great a contribution, but this is unacceptable.
The aid part of that is 29 billion. If we did what we're expected to (what every country is expected to, even if few live up to it), that part should probably be 40 billion - the UN(?) has a goal that every country should spend 1% of GDP on foreign aid.
About the Disqus thing, I'd say that it's ok to expose "public persons" who claim one thing in public and do something different when they think nobody knows its them. This includes politicians, judges, police, other public authorities. Doing this to "normal" people isn't generally justified, IMHO. On the other hand, we have huge problems with bullying online that we need to do something about - and exposing bullies may be a useful part of that.
I have not seen any rise in fascism. Xenophobia, maybe. By the definition of the word it is the irrational fear of the foreign. The fear is often very rational as immigrants are over-represented in crime, unemployment etc. However people work with generalizations so it is not unlikely that some of the fears might be irrational.
(I'm from and live in Sweden)
Any time anyone dares to complain about the influence of ultra-reactionary immigrants on the quality and safety of public life, they are immediately branded "nationalist", "xenophobic" or "fascist".
Many of us, like myself, are from immigrant backgrounds. There is a world of difference between how our predecessors treated the country they immigrated to and what the recent waves of reactionary Islamists are doing.
People who aggressively and violently oppose the liberal values of our nations are not immigrants, they are invaders. And people of all races and political believes are getting tired of this shit.
Stop blaming the victims. We are not the aggressors, we are not the homophobic, antisemitic, anti-women criminal trash that terrorises public life.
We were once safe and progressive nations, and wanting to take that back does not make us fascist.
You guys should've done more to keep the Sweden Democrats out of the country then, I guess. ;)
Also, wanting life to be better doesn't make you fascist. But deciding that the only thing between you and a mythical past of glory is a tiny fraction of the population that needs to "defeated" is certainly goose-stepping in that direction. See Robert Paxton's 2004 book for more.
There are no races in the human species.
> Many of us, like myself, are from immigrant backgrounds.
So when do you plan to go back to your own country? What, you think that with the new designated enemy we forgot about you?
I thought he was stating the opposite, he comes across as very right wing, hates Obama (that bizarre ending), blames the leftist govt of the 60s onward for depleting abundant resources and blames liberals for overspending.
According to Wikipedia, It's a student town (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trondheim#Student_culture) with over 20% of the population being students. Why don't you blame them as easily as the gypsies?
There is a difference in bellowing "let's hurt anyone we don't like" and "we probably should address the real world"
Suppression of discussion serves no one. In Poland we accepted some chechens, romans, etc. A lot of them refuse to learn even the basics of reading or writing, they are completely dysfunctional on most basic of the levels, they periodically have a decent housing provided for freez which then they utterly ruin, because they now all it takes is to protest they "inhumam treatment" to have it all cleaned out and repaired, for free. They refuse to be a part of local society, the police, social services, etc all alarm about tgeurt utter lack of will to integrate, or even be functional. And every time someone tries to talk about it, a slew of "politically correct" media kills any meaningful discussion
My city is one of most racist, and i am deeply ashamed when there is an attack, be it verbal or physical, on an innocent human.
I live in Malmö; the "problem area" you're talking about is a couple of blocks by Seved, where one company (Postnord) won't deliver _large_ packages due to the possibility of theft. That's not "the police can't go there". That's not "DHL can't guarantee worker safety". I've walked these streets hundreds of times; they're no different than thousands of other streets in thousands of other cities. They're not especially dangerous. They are in fact probably safer than large parts of other cities.