Back when I was a kid in the 1960s, the universal assumption among right-thinking Americans was, "They do it better in Sweden." The blue-eyed utopias of Europe were widely admired for such policies as paying generous welfare to single mothers.
Over time, though, you heard less about Sweden, in part because, outside of places like Minnesota, Swedish-style welfare policies had unexpected consequences in America. Also, increasingly after 1967 in American intellectual life, whose side were you on in WWII became the touchstone of all morality, and, while few quite came out and spoke openly about Swedish neutrality (unlike that of those evil Swiss, who were constantly denounced), American pundits' enthusiasm for Sweden waned.
A new generation of liberal commentators is growing up, however, innocent of all that history, and their enthusiasm for the blue-eyed utopias is growing. Their chief spokesman is young Matthew Yglesias, currently vacationing in Stockholm. (I mean, where else would one vacation in Europe in October? Venice? Florence? Lake Como? Corfu? Siena? Barcelona, or some other brown-eyed dystopia? Don't be silly.)
Over time, though, you heard less about Sweden, in part because, outside of places like Minnesota, Swedish-style welfare policies had unexpected consequences in America. Also, increasingly after 1967 in American intellectual life, whose side were you on in WWII became the touchstone of all morality, and, while few quite came out and spoke openly about Swedish neutrality (unlike that of those evil Swiss, who were constantly denounced), American pundits' enthusiasm for Sweden waned.
A new generation of liberal commentators is growing up, however, innocent of all that history, and their enthusiasm for the blue-eyed utopias is growing. Their chief spokesman is young Matthew Yglesias, currently vacationing in Stockholm. (I mean, where else would one vacation in Europe in October? Venice? Florence? Lake Como? Corfu? Siena? Barcelona, or some other brown-eyed dystopia? Don't be silly.)
Matt’s entire political philosophy is like the old joke about the economist shipwrecked on a desert island with a can of beans: “Assume we have a can opener …”
His philosophy of public policy for the U.S. begins: “Assume we have 300,000,000 Swedes …”
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
Posts
75 comments:
Assume that half of "The Atlantic 50".....
I remember this attitude and was not immune from it myself until I grew up. "Assume we have 300,000,000 Swedes...", indeed. That is a very excellent way of putting it.
I believe there is an old story (I may have heard it here) about Milton Friedman being told by a Swedish economist, "We have no poverty in Sweden," to which Friedman replied, "You know that's interesting, because in America we have no poverty among Swedes either."
Over time, though, you heard less about Sweden, in part because, outside of places like Minnesota, Swedish-style welfare policies had unexpected consequences in America
I wonder what it is about Minnesota that makes Swedish-style welfare work? Must be the cold weather.
I think my favorite quote so far from his trip is:
Sweden’s life expectancy is among the best in the world though as always this probably has more to do with other aspects of Swedish public health than with health care policy.
One aspect of Swedish public health being that it deals with Swedes, I guess...
"I mean, where else would one vacation in Europe in October? Venice? Florence? Barcelona, or some other brown-eyed dystopia? Don't be silly"
Steve brave of you to use this angle again, stand by for all those commenters defending Italy for whom irony is an alien concept.
Did anybody read Yglesias' most recent praising of Sweden for having such well behave beta males?
He even had a picture of a Swedish house husband pushing a baby in a stroller. It was probably the most beautiful thing Mathew has ever seen.
I agree with Yglesias, we should copy Sweden:
- School choice (a de facto voucher system)
- No inheritance tax
- Abolish the minimum wage.
What's not to like?
i hope he wanders into an algerian or somoli neigborhood - there are large swathes of all major cities in sweden that are no go zones for whites....
Unless he is literally mugged I doubt he will 'see' it
The debate over Sweden's and Switzerland's alleged neutrality begins momentarily.
Ha, very true and funny. But I do appreciate that Yglesias is more empirical and less shrill than most left pundits.
Everybody that I know who came from Sweden is a drunk. Really rude, obnoxious drunks! I really don't know how Ireland got the reputation when the Swedes are like they are! I can't imagine 300 million of them!
You crack me up, Steve!
Yglesias is one thrift-shop cardigan from being a SWPL parody.
Americans with Swedish ancestry earn somewhat more than 50% higher income than native born Swedes (US national income is about 25% above Sweden, and American Swedes are about 20% above average American income).
Child poverty in the United States is 18%, and 5% among Americans with Swedish ancestry.
It isn't just the fact they are Swedes. The fact that Sweden is so damn small makes a difference as well. Sweden wouldn't be the US with it's current population expanded to 300 mill, but it wouldn't be like it is now either. It'd be more screwed up, most likely.
No, it's more like this: "assume I'm not a moron whose talking out of his hat."
Here are two truths about socialists (and these apply to socialists in Sweden and any other socialists all across the HBD spectrum):
1. Socialists are nothing after they run out of money.
2. They always run out of money.
"Their chief spokesman is young Matthew Yglesias"
The key word, of course, is "young."
Immigrant Rape Wave in Sweden
http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/12/immigrant-rape-wave-in-sweden.html
wonder if he'll mention this
Fjordman at Gates of Vienna, or Brussels Journal is your go-to guy for the collapse of the Swedish Welfare state and immigrant crime wave dystopia.
Short version: the elites wish to elect a new people by bringing in Muslim immigrants who are destroying the social welfare system, along with radical feminists, feminized men, and so on. Among other things, the socialists are running out of money far more rapidly than they thought -- the population is older, young Muslims create expenses with no money (they don't become engineers at Ericsson, who would have thought it?) and so on.
The interesting thing is that the Swedes who first set up the socialist system in the 1930's were actually quite open about the fact that what they were doing would not work for most other societies. The founders stated quite often that it was the unique nature of the Swedes in being both collective and hard working that made their intended socialist state work. They also stated that what they were trying to do should not be replicated anywhere else.
" Everybody that I know who came from Sweden is a drunk. Really rude, obnoxious drunks! I really don't know how Ireland got the reputation when the Swedes are like they are! I can't imagine 300 million of them! "
The Swedes have a very strict policy on alchohol availability, they are not brought up with it like the Latins. My Grandfather who was a Swede, preferred a day trip to Denmark for a better sense of humour and alchohol tolerance.
Farmer Fumitory
Anonymous said: "i hope he wanders into an algerian or somoli neigborhood - there are large swathes of all major cities in sweden that are no go zones for whites...."
Yeah. He should take a day-trip to Malmö -- see how life is there these days.
It wasn't made in SWEDEN policies. It was made for SWEDISH polices. There's the rub. Something American sociologists never understood. To expect blacks, whether African-Americans in the U.S., or Somalis in Malmo to act and behave like Swedes is ludicrous.
I have never understood why being neutral in WW2 was seen as "bad" or "evil". What was so great about being allied with Josef Stalin, probably the bloodiest ruler in history, and participating in the enslavement of eastern Europe?
Just over the past couple years, it seems that the whole topic of alphas, betas, modern day sexual dynamics, etc., has kind of come to the forefront (at least online) on blogs like Roissy's and the HBD blogosphere including iSteve's.
And it occurred to me that Jim Bowery was talking about this kind of stuff almost 20 years ago and even had a few hypotheses and broad theoretical conceptions as possible explanations for it.
See Bowery's "Race, Gender, and the Frontier" Part 1 and Part 2. The essay is pretty fascinating and presages much of what the "Game" bloggers regurgitate today. The essay also forms the foundation for Bowery's later theory "Genetic Omni-Dominance."
Spitzbergen is part of Norway. You know,
Ten thousand Swedes
Ran through the weeds
Pursued by one Norwegian.
Spitzbergen is a chain of Arctic islands crawling with dangerous polar bears. As a result gun possession there is actually mandatory for groups wandering around outside. I once read a story about eco-tourists from western Europe arriving on a small plane. As soon as the passengers descended, a polar bear appeared and killed and ate one of the tourists. If I can find a reference to this incident, I'll post it.
Of course there are a lot of drunks in Sweden. There are also a lot of drunks in Norway and Finland. That's why Scandinavian countries have such draconian laws against drinking and driving. They know they need them. Steve and other HBD sites have covered this before. Detox centers and institutions housing those who have been brain-damaged from heavy drinking always seem to have a disproportionate amount of people whose ancestors came from the northern and northwestern fringes of Europe. Conversely, they seem to have fewer Italians, Greeks, Jews and other people whose Mediterranean ancestors were exposed to alcohol drinking for thousands of years more than the Irish, Scots, Swedes et cetera were.
OT: Will the PC-spin ever end, doyathink?
'We are all immigrants': Swedish researchers
"Swedish researchers have concluded from DNA samples that Scandinavians are descended from immigrants that landed in the region 4,000 to 6,000 years ago."
/rolleyes
1/ I recall Steve saying in the past that Finland was better than Sweden because it had more stringent immigration policies.
Glad to see Steve is becoming warmer to unlimited immigration.
2/ I suspect that between 1941-45 it was important to know which side a country was on during WW II. Don't know why.
Sweden is not MORE socialist than other countries, it has just had Social Democracy for longer, proving that once government has got its claws in, it doesn't stop until it has taxed its citizens to death. Ironically, even 60 years ago, Sweden was a poster-boy for hard work, against-the-odds success, ingenuity and initiative, right up until they gave it all up for social democracy.
This has been one of the factors pushing me away from the left; the ethnic/HBD factors preventing a successful replication of Scandinavian-style social democracy in America.
Acutally, apparently there are more Germans, Norwegians, and Irish than Swedes in Minnesota. :) The Nordic character is, of course, obvious. It is kind of funny that Hitler's chosen people are such huge liberals.
I'm not sure what to believe in, though; I'm not a big fan of unrestrained free markets (witness our recent collapse), and I'm not sure you can force conservative Christianity down the whole country's throat; the blue states won't have it, and that's where a lot of our wealth comes from...
PS If which side your were on during WWII is so important, why isn't democratic Finland a pariah state?
"Also, increasingly after 1967 in American intellectual life, whose side were you on in WWII became the touchstone of all morality, and, while few quite came out and spoke openly about Swedish neutrality"
Really? When I think of Sweden and World War II the Holocaust, the first thing that comes to mind isn't Sweden's neutrality, but how many Jewish lives were saved by the Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg. He wasn't the only Swede who went out of his way to save Jews from the Nazis. Growing up with a father who survived the Holocaust, he would never buy German products. But he had no problem buying an Electrolux vacuum cleaner for my mother.
"I'm not a big fan of unrestrained free markets (witness our recent collapse)"
Unrestrained free markets? What are you smoking? We have crony capitalism and state planning my boy, not free markets.
While being officially neutral in ww2, sweeden traded extensivly with the nazis. Sweedish iron ore for making tungsten which was used in artillary shells was so important to the nazi war effort that the germans invaded norway to keep the allies from taking the iron mines in north sweeden. Around 1944 the sweeds got religion when they realized that the nazis were cooked. The last division in berlin to die was the ss viking division made up of scandinavians. They would rather forget all that.
SFG:
Three paragraphs, three non sequiturs . . .
It's a matter of national character than social system. In other words, Sweden would do just as well or even better if it ditched social-democracy for libertarian capitalism. Sweden succeeded as much as it has because its people have Germanic roots, with values and qualities such as orderliness, tidiness, discipline, work ethic, efficiency, thoroughneess, etc. Though a good number of Swedes have become lazier over the decades due to social programs, their roots go deep into the Lutheran past. In the modern era, Swedes became free and liberated, but they were able to use their freedom constructively because their core national character was shaped during long centuries of spiritual sobriety, social hierarchy, and communal cooperation. Coal that is packed hardest burns longest. Steel that is beaten most is hardest.
Notice that Singapore is social-fascist(mildly)-capitalist whereas Hong Kong is free-wheeling libertarian capitalist, but both are equally successful. Why? Because they are both run by the talented Chinese. Notice that both liberal and conservative Jews succeed at equal level whereas many 'liberal' blacks and many conservative 'white trash' fall behind.
Of course, some ideologies like communism is worthless no matter whom it serves(or oppresses); even so, some groups did better with communism than others. East German and Czech communism was more successful than Bulgarian or Albanian communism. And, Jews did much better under Soviet communism than other ethnic groups--despite all the stuff about the EQUALITY of man.
So, the question, "suppose there were 300,000,000 Swedes in America" is a good one--though perhaps unwitting on the part of the writer. Sweden's success owes less to political ideology than to the people and their 'national character'.
Likewise, libertarianism has worked well for many Dutch people, but that doesn't mean it will work well in Peru or Zimbabwe. Indeed, it hasn't worked well with certain immigrant groups. For many Germanic peoples, 'socialism' means both working hard & paying into the system AND benefitting from the system. For less advanced peoples, socialism just means getting something for nothing. Also, a homogeneous society is more likely to be communaly conscientious. Rich Swedes want to help poorer Swedes, and poorer Swedes are grateful to the richer Swedes. But, rich whites are less likely to want their hard earned wealth leeched by non-whites, and non-whites are likely to feel less gratitude and simply demand more and more.
Social Democracy with Germanic people will work better than capitalism with Africans. Capitalism with Germanic people will work better than social democracy with Africans.
One of the reasons why kibbutz worked better than most forms of socialism is that Jews know how to work well and hard. Why is it that leftist anti-capitalist Jews in the US make more money--and are better at business--than 'white trash' conservatives who are always yelling 'free market'!!!???
"Child poverty in the United States is 18%, and 5% among Americans with Swedish ancestry."
Can you link? Not questioning just wondering where you can get the data.
Notice that both liberal and conservative Jews succeed at equal level whereas many 'liberal' blacks and many conservative 'white trash' fall behind.
This is true, Jews have been generally successful, but this has largely been as outsiders in host countries. Israel is by most measures a successful, economically developed nation, but I don't know if it's the best "experiment" so to speak. It'd be interesting to see how well a homogeneous, settled, Ashkenazi state would do over a few generations compared to the diaspora Ashkenazim.
kelley sez:
Israel is by most measures a successful, economically developed nation, but I don't know if it's the best "experiment" so to speak.
I'm sure Israelis have worked hard, but I'd hate to know what the place would look like without all that money from the US, the diaspora and Germany. I guess in reality it's almost impossible to make a buck out of the place becuase it does not have any natural resources, not even much water.
"Over time, though, you heard less about Sweden, in part because, outside of places like Minnesota, Swedish-style welfare policies had unexpected consequences in America
I wonder what it is about Minnesota that makes Swedish-style welfare work? Must be the cold weather."
As the twin cities are gradually colonized by blacks from Africa and Chicago, I'm sure those policies will keep on working better and better.
That's what people like Steve writing down by Mexico don't understand; a lot of us up here don't give a crap about Mexican immigration because we're experiencing our own, internal wave of immigrants much less tractable than Mexicans.
I suspect that between 1941-45 it was important to know which side a country was on during WW II. Don't know why.
Thanks anony-mous for that piece of UScentric thinking which wins America such affection abroad.
For some people the dates were 1939-45.
Can I take it that Beavis Andrea Butthead is the artist formerly known as Andrea Freiboden?
I guess in reality it's almost impossible to make a buck out of the place becuase it does not have any natural resources, not even much water.
Like Singapore or Japan you mean?
And as for water, Israel is right next to the sea, if they need water they can get it, one way or another.
Minnesota's public school system is now only 77% white:
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/states/
A 1965 quote from Tage Erlander, veteran Swedish socialist Prime Minister: "We Swedes are in an infinitely better situation [than America]. Our population is homogenous, not just regarding race, but in many other aspects too."
This was why - as was publicly admitted only in 1997 - Sweden had such a ferocious eugenics policy (much more ferocious than anywhere in America, and much more recent) from the 1930s until the 1970s. What's the use (successive Swedish governments reasoned) of having a wonderful welfare state if its benefits are going to be wasted on the physically or mentally "unfit"?
Norway and Denmark had similar, though less severe, policies.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dieteman/dieteman33.html
Just finished Brian Girvin's excellent book on Ireland during the war, 'The Emergency'.
It is the Irish who have got away with being 'neutral' during the war.
Fifty odd thousand Irish fought with Britain but De Valera actually thought that Ireland was morally superior to the Brits!!
However, De Valera was an Irishman who believed, quite rightly, that Ireland was an independent state.
The current Irish Government wants to turn Ireland into a EU sub-state with a majority non-Irish population.
Richard...London
Well, my wife and I have just come back from a weekend in Stockholm, and it is a *really* good place for an autumn holiday. Fine weather (this time, but I don't think it's atypical) and a wonderful city to explore, with green semi-rural suburbs close by, like Lidingö, where we stayed (and I competed in the Lidingölopp, which, despite being the world's biggest cross-country race, with 38,000 runners, was organised brilliantly, in typical Swedish fashion).
"Barcelona, or some other brown-eyed dystopia?"
Ironically, Spain is recently following Sweden in some of its social policies. Maybe Yglesias really was in Barcelona, and just thought it was Stockholm. (Of course, the dark hair and warmmer weather would probably have cued him in.)
I spent most of this year in Sweden. A few comments on this probably now dead thread.
Don't rely on Fjordman for his opinion on Sweden. He is Norwegian and irrational in a little brother sort of way. I would not rely on a Norwegian for an accurate opinion on Sweden anymore than I would rely on New Zealander for an opinion on Australia, or a Canadian for an opinion on the USA.
Fjordman has been saying Sweden is doomed for at least 5 years. Every time I go back to Sweden it is better and I like it better. I lived 40 minutes from Malmo and went there about 3 times per week. It remains a very nice place. If you notice Muslims in Malmo rather than the still abundant pretty girls, your obsessions have taken you over. I lived near Ystad. It is a world away from a muslim dystopia. It is a near perfect town.
Swedes work surprisingly hard. They are very even tempered. They are sometimes boring and stiff. They find it hard to drink in moderation. Free dental care till age of 20 helps improve the looks of the average Joe.
Sweden and Swedes. Two words. Beautiful and neat.
What was so great about being allied with Josef Stalin, probably the bloodiest ruler in history, and participating in the enslavement of eastern Europe?
is it good for jews?
Sweden is a problem for neo-conservative thinkers, so you won't see it mentioned much in National Review or the Wall Street Journal. They have been telling us for years that the northern European "welfare states" are economically stagnant because of their supposedly burdensome regulations and social benefits. But Sweden has private enterprises that span the globe, like Ericsson and Volvo (trucks). Worse yet, it has such a high level of engineering and design capability that it builds its own combat aircraft and fuel-cell submarines.
The immigration angle is even more troubling for the neocons. Northern European immigration to the New World in general, and Swedish immigration in particular, has been an unqualified success: there is simply no downside. But because we can't talk about quality differences between prospective immigrant groups, we all have to subscribe to the "magic border" theory of America: that everyone from everywhere will be able to do anything here, just like anyone who came before, just because it's America, and for no other reason. The neocons subscribe to this, and shout down anyone who says otherwise. But the Somalian-American community, to take one example of many, will not bring forth the next Kelly Johnson.
Then there is Israel, loyalty to which is the One True Thing for neo-conservative opinion in the U.S.A. Sweden is beyond the pale, so to speak, for it has criticized Israel, therefore Sweden or anything Swedish cannot serve as a positive talking point for any purpose.
Very few states entered the Second World War purely on their own decision -- Germany, the British Commonwealth, France, Italy, & Japan. Every other nation that got involved was more-or-less forced into it -- either by being attacked or through diplomatic pressure. A country could not be a founding member of the UN unless it had declared war on Germany by a certain date.
"Child poverty in the United States is 18%, and 5% among Americans with Swedish ancestry."
Sorry can't link, it's based on own calculations from census data.
"I'm not sure what to believe in, though; I'm not a big fan of unrestrained free markets (witness our recent collapse), and I'm not sure you can force conservative Christianity down the whole country's throat; the blue states won't have it, and that's where a lot of our wealth comes from..."
Are you high?
That is not where our wealth comes from. It is where our wealth ends up. Every working bastard in American buys financial/investment products and the profits end up in New York. Every farmer sells commodities and the profits end up in Chicago. Every prole buys movies and the profits end up in Hollywood. At least Hollywood actually produces something.
Sorry, bankers, traders and actors don't produce more wealth than farmers, engineers, and miners.
"I agree with Yglesias, we should copy Sweden:
- No inheritance tax
They don't need an inheritance tax because lifetime taxes are so high it's damn near impossible to accumulate money.
Sweden is a strange place, you see cultured interesting people during the day, and at night after the bars close in Stockholm you see that same people fist fighting puking in gutters and women knocking each other over to fuck the first thing that moves. I was only there once though maybe my opinion is skewered.
"SFG said...
the blue states won't have it, and that's where a lot of our wealth comes from..."
Not really, the blue states are where a lot of MONEY comes from - not the same thing as wealth. New York City generates a log of money, but how much real wealth? (i.e., food, clothing, building materials, machinery, resources, or power?)
Sweedish iron ore for making tungsten which was used in artillary shells...
Damn clever those Swedes (or is it Sweeds?). They could make tungsten from iron ore.
Actually tungsten was in short supply on both sides. Not so much for general artillery (or is it artillary?) shells as for tank shells and airplane turbochargers.
The Sherman tank could punch through even the frontal armor of a Panther with the tungsten tipped ammunition for their 76 mm gun - but they had very few such shells. The Panther of course could defeat all of a Sherman's armour even without tungsten rounds. That was fortunate for the Germans because they had even fewer tungsten shells.
The P-38 was the only one of the Allison engined fighters to have the designed turbochargers installed. The other Allison figters like the P-40 and the orginal P-51 were never much good at high altitude because the needed tungsten for the GE turbos was allocated to the strategically more important bombers.
The very word Tungsten is a Swedish word but the effort to deprive the Nazis of tungsten actually centered on Portugal.
well i would guess that american high society types talk about sweden a lot less today than they did 40 years ago, probably because times and ideas change.
they were talking about sweden during the same time they were talking about great, massive waves of people overpopulating the earth and of the great need for humans to stop having so many kids.
they mainly preached this to white people, of course. stop having so many kids, white people! you're overpopulating the earth.
fast forward 40 years and it sounds just as retarded as the sierra club having some kind of crisis because they just realized that it's mainly white people who care about the environment.
Beavis Andrea Butthead: "a homogeneous society is more likely to be communally conscientious. [1] Rich Swedes want to help poorer Swedes, and poorer Swedes are grateful to the richer Swedes. But, [2] rich whites are less likely to want their hard earned wealth leeched by non-whites, and non-whites are likely to feel less gratitude and simply demand more and more."
I certainly agree with part 2 -- heck, I'm living it.
But I cannot agree completely with part 1, especially "poorer Swedes are grateful to the richer Swedes." Living in Denmark in the 80s, I observed a surprising dichotomy: on the one hand, yes, pretty much everyone had a decent middle-class lifestyle. But there was considerable suspicion and envy of anyone who had even a bit more.
In a country where every Anders, Bjorn, & Carl has a pleasant 1,200 square foot home, woe unto Dag who has 1,300 square feet.
This dynamic is why my Scandinavian friends in professional life a few years later were so eager to come to America. If you're talented and young and ambitious, and want to enjoy the fruits of your labors without enduring disapproving glances, you had to leave, they felt.
And MY GOD, have they ever achieved success here. Scandinavia's loss is America's gain.
-Bear
"Israel is by most measures a successful, economically developed nation, but I don't know if it's the best "experiment" so to speak. It'd be interesting to see how well a homogeneous, settled, Ashkenazi state would do over a few generations compared to the diaspora Ashkenazim."
Israel gets about $500 million in economic aid from the U.S. per year (the rest of the aid is military, and is mostly spent here in the U.S.). It has a $200 billion economy, so this economic aid isn't a huge factor, and really should have been phased out a long time ago. I don't know that Israel receives much if any direct aid from Germany these days, though it did receive a lot of Mercedes cars in the early days. Every cab in Israel used to be a Mercedes. As for the diaspora, it probably lowers Israel's borrowing costs somewhat, as diaspora Jews are willing to buy Israel bonds paying modest returns, and diaspora Jews may buy more Israeli products than they might otherwise, but I don't know how big a factor this is either.
Israel's economy has progressed a lot in the last decade or so, particularly after Netanyahu's economic reforms, but the country would be a lot richer if it liberalized its economy more, and reduced welfare for ultra religious Jews.
“Assume we have 300,000,000 Swedes …”
Oh geez, I'd rather not, but maybe that's the Norwegian in me.
Northern European immigration to the New World in general, and Swedish immigration in particular, has been an unqualified success: there is simply no downside.
Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, Paul Wellstone, Al Franken?!?
Chaim,
I mean something more *fundamental* as far as a comparison is concerned.
Ashkenazi success and achievement was for the most part in the context of being a niche group in a host society.
What would be interesting to see is a homogeneous, settled, Ashkenazi state, where the Ashkenazim wouldn't be a kind of middleman minority group dealing with a majority host and other non-Ashkenazi groups. The Ashkenazi in this state wouldn't be a distinct group specializing in certain niche fields and occupations operating between and among native workers, laborers, aristocrats, merchants, etc. The blue collar workers, upper classes, farmers, etc., would be Ashkenazi as well.
Israel obviously isn't the best example for this because it has other non-Ashkenazi groups.
Also, the foreign aid bill for Israel is $3 Billion. If you add everything else up it comes to around $15 Billion a year to Israel.
“If you notice Muslims in Malmo rather than the still abundant pretty girls, your obsessions have taken you over.”
This may be true for a tourist, but not for someone who cares about policy, or about the future of Sweden. Immigration has destroyed Malmö, the birthplace of the Social Democratic movement. (Malmö has benefited from the bridge, and Danish people living there for lower costs of living, and still declined).
For people who think the welfare state works despite of demography:
Less than 50% of ALL non-western immigrants in Sweden have jobs, compared to 80% of Swedes. Today the non-western foreign born, second and first generation, are 10% of Sweden’s population. Do you think a welfare state would be sustainable if, just taking a random number here, 31% of the country was foreign born?
Let’s compare reported crime 1978 with 2008 (population increased 12%. I use 2004 for rapes since they changed the law that year to expand the definition of rapes).
Rapes 1978: 851
Rapes 2004: 2.631
Robberies 1978: 3.461
Robberies 2008: 8.909
Assault 1978: 22.866
Assault 2008: 84.566
In 2008 Malmö had 30% more reported assaults, 20% more rapes and 173% more robberies per capita than the Swedish average. Malmö is still only 16% non-western foreign (add about one half to this as second generation immigrants).
What will happen when it is 31% foreign born? 50%? The trend is certainly going that way.
Anonymous said...
I spent most of this year in Sweden. A few comments on this probably now dead thread.
Don't rely on Fjordman for his opinion on Sweden. He is Norwegian and irrational in a little brother sort of way. I would not rely on a Norwegian for an accurate opinion on Sweden anymore than I would rely on New Zealander for an opinion on Australia, or a Canadian for an opinion on the USA.
See?
This is why Sweden is so lame. I can't think of any other country in the world so full of itself as Sweden.
BTW, comparing Canadians to Norwegians is pretty ridiculous. Canada is the Sweden of the Anglosphere.
It was Norwegians who settled Western Europe and brought their own form of representative government to Britain, Ireland and Iceland, while the Swedes went through Russia, spreading their version of a socialist utopia, which integrated well with the Golden Horde and then Stalin.
Take your pick.
"Increasingly after 1967..." Nice, Steve. I imagine that someone's been reading their Norman Finkelstein...
' This may be true for a tourist, but not for someone who cares about policy, or about the future of Sweden.'
I guess I'm more than a tourist, I have permanent residency. I also do care about the future of Sweden given my children will most likely spend most of their lives there.
But the people of Sweden, or at least their elected officials, have decided that Sweden must change. After all it would be racist to suggest that one group of people are different to another. I think Olaf Plame spoke of Sweden being a moral superpower. What better way to show the world that Sweden is a moral superpower, than to totally replace the people?
'What will happen when it is 31% foreign born? 50%?'
Sweden will be a much worse place but what a sacrifice. Foreigners will be impressed, somewhere, or maybe they wont. But how moral.
No one has pointed out the real reason for the obsession with the Swedish Example. The real reason is that people (such as Matthew Yglesias) think Swedish people are sexually attractive. The political system appears to create sexually attractive people whom one could fantasize about having (and perhaps even actually have, rather easily) sex with.
Therefore, their political system must be doing something right.
If it goes any deeper than that, I've seen no evidence of it.
Actors, traders, and lawyers are scum. I guess I was thinking of MIT.
Seriously, though: I've never heard of a great nation in history that didn't have cities. Can anyone point one out to me? Or do they tend to be boring places that run well but tend to be forgotten?
No one has pointed out the real reason for the obsession with the Swedish Example. The real reason is that people (such as Matthew Yglesias) think Swedish people are sexually attractive. The political system appears to create sexually attractive people whom one could fantasize about having (and perhaps even actually have, rather easily) sex with.
Ding ding ding ding ding - we have a winner.
I have numerous friends in Scandivia. It's true they have generous welfare states, but they also have (or had) very strong work ethics, and a peaceful, unperturable nature which made crime (crime is very expensive to society)very low.
A Danish friend explained it to me once: it's considered deeply shameful for Scandivians to "take more than their fair share." So yes, their culture says, take care of the needy from womb to tomb, but "don't take more than your fair share." "Taking more than your fair share" would be cause for ostracism in their culture.
Enter the millions of Muslims they have foolishly taken in, who see nothing wrong with gaming the system to "take more than their fair share", many of whom who actually think it is an act of piety to take things from "the infidels."
That's why you have 40 percent of welfare costs in Denmark going to support Muslim immigrants, who make up about 5 percent of the population.
"Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, Paul Wellstone, Al Franken?!?"
Ummmm....are you kidding?
Wellstone and Franken: Jewish.
Humphrey and Mondale: Norwegian.
Now what was your point you were trying to make about Swedes? That they keep voting for Jews? Or formerly, Norwegians? Or something?
Now what was your point you were trying to make about Swedes? That they keep voting for Jews? Or formerly, Norwegians? Or something?
Uhh. Yeah. Exactly.
Unless you have some exit polling data to the contrary...
Living in Denmark in the 80s, I observed a surprising dichotomy: on the one hand, yes, pretty much everyone had a decent middle-class lifestyle. But there was considerable suspicion and envy of anyone who had even a bit more.
In a country where every Anders, Bjorn, & Carl has a pleasant 1,200 square foot home, woe unto Dag who has 1,300 square feet.
This dynamic is why my Scandinavian friends in professional life a few years later were so eager to come to America.
Lutefisk and loot: Tax records open in Norway
By IAN MacDOUGALL, Associated Press Writer
Thu Oct 22, 4:21 pm ET
news.yahoo.com
OSLO - It's the moment nosy Norwegian neighbors have been waiting for - the release of official records showing the annual income and overall wealth of nearly every taxpayer in the Scandinavian country...
In neighboring Sweden, anyone can order a printed edition of the Taxation Calendar, which lists the earnings of people in mid- to upper-income brackets. The information is also available online, although Swedes whose financial information has been searched are notified by mail of who checked their details.
Christine Ingebritsen, a professor at the University of Washington, said the Norwegian tax list exemplifies a time-tested, distinctly Scandinavian custom of egalitarianism...
Post a Comment