by Bay Area Guy
Ah, Sweden. I’ve written about this humble Scandinavian nation on a couple of occasions. Whether I was discussing the chaos in Stockholm that was fomented by ungrateful immigrants or Sweden’s insane enthusiasm for accepting Israel’s unwanted African immigrants, the once proud land of the Vikings never ceases to amaze me with their suicidal liberalism.
But apparently, the insatiable desire of Swedes to undermine their traditional homeland and become more “vibrant” isn’t enough for one Sam Piranty of Al Jazeera. Sam Piranty begins his screed by denouncing the unbearable whiteness of Sweden:
But apparently, the insatiable desire of Swedes to undermine their traditional homeland and become more “vibrant” isn’t enough for one Sam Piranty of Al Jazeera. Sam Piranty begins his screed by denouncing the unbearable whiteness of Sweden:
“Last month, I went to Stockholm on a reporting trip. The city seemed idyllic: bicycles aplenty standing unlocked outside at night, Volvos with their doors open and engines running, and not a cigarette butt in sight. In trendy Hornstull, bearded bros high-fived each other over Brooklyn craft beers. But everyone, it seemed, was white.”
Good god, what is this oppressively racist and white supremacist world coming to? How dare white people predominate in a Scandinavian country! I wouldn’t be surprised if these multiculturalists began to demand that Thor and other figures in Scandinavian mythology be reinvented as brown in order to cater to growing diversity. Then, after providing us with harrowing tales about Swedish bigotry and hate crimes, Pirandy invokes colonialism like any good leftist would:
“Sweden’s rising inequality plays a role in these social tensions, but racism is not a new phenomenon in this society. Regularly overlooked in Sweden’s history is its role in the slave trade and colonialism. Under King Gustav III, Sweden held colonies such as Saint Barthélemy in the Caribbean and profited directly from the slaves who were imported onto the island and then sold to French colonies and elsewhere in the Caribbean. Sweden actively participated and embraced the agreements in the dividing up of the African continent in the Berlin conference of 1884–85.”
So, because Sweden held a tiny colony or two in the Caribbean, Sweden is “colonial” just like Britain or France, and must endure similar moral reproach. Likewise, even though Sweden didn’t hold any colonies in Africa, merely participating in the Berlin conference is enough to lump them in with the real imperialists. Of course, this argument from leftists is nothing new. Pirandy, in so many words, is arguing that Sweden must now willingly accept multiculturalism and open borders to atone for its past.
For the sake of argument, I’ll grant that part of that leftist argument is correct. In the case of Pakistanis in Britain or Algerians in France, their presence in many ways is directly linked to the respective colonial pasts of those countries. Therefore, if small numbers of people in Sweden’s former Caribbean holdings wanted to move to Sweden, then I can somewhat understand. However, what does that have to do with allowing feckless Somalis and Middle Easterners to live in Sweden today? Did Sweden ever colonize Somalia or Syria?
Also, I cannot help but laugh at his absurd denunciation of Swedish inequality, even as he laments the plight of immigrants:
“Ever since, Sweden’s immigrant population has largely reflected wherever there has been conflict or unrest in the world.”
So, in other words, poor, unskilled and racially alien immigrants produce inequality and tension in societies throughout the world. Man, the things you learn when reading up on current events! Of course, rather than reaching the logical conclusion that mass immigration and multiculturalism amount to sheer folly, he blames the Swedes for not being accommodating enough:
“For one, Swedish cities are segregated by design. The well-meaning Million Program of the 1960s and ’70s, which set out to build affordable housing developments across the country, was ambitious and well intentioned. However, it concentrated low-income rental properties in faraway and inconvenient suburbs, which began the fragmentation of Swedish society. Those arriving from abroad in the ’70s could afford only to move into these distinctive Million Program rentals, while the white middle and upper classes moved into cooperative housing or bought houses outright in the 'Swedish-looking' accommodation mainly situated in the centers. This resulted in what Irene Molina, professor of social and economic geography at Uppsala University, has called “the racialization of the city.”
Yet again, I must express my shock at the idea that poor, radically different immigrants occupy different areas of living compared to the native middle and upper classes.
At times, I believe that it’s unnecessary for those of us on the right to denounce multiculturalism, because leftists unwittingly aid us in that regard. This entire editorial is a tacit admission that multiculturalism is a failed experiment. To create a truly harmonious society devoid of racial tension and inequality sounds like a tremendous amount of exhausting work for little reward. Given that Pirandy in so many words admits that multiculturalism causes such headaches the world over, wouldn’t a wiser course of action involve closing the borders and insisting on assimilation?
Your guess is as good as mine.
