Archive for the ‘Sweden’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Left/Green sanctimony is causing a debacle for Swedish foreign policy

March 19, 2015

The 2005 defence cooperation agreement between Sweden and Saudi Arabia was renewed in 2010 and was coming up for a natural termination or a mutual renewal again this year. Currently there is very little being done under this agreement. It could have been allowed to die quietly. But that was not loud enough and self-righteous enough for the Greens and the left of the ruling Social Democrats.

The Greens are new to government (and it shows in many areas) but they are implacably opposed to Sweden having any defense industry of any kind. The Greens and the left are utterly opposed to the “anti-feminist and anti-democratic” nature of Saudi Arabia. But the Greens and the left of the Social Democrats forgot that they were actually in government and were not just an irresponsible lobby group like Greenpeace or the WWF indulging in publicity pranks.  They were so mesmerised by the idea of showing off their moral credentials that the intention to terminate the defense agreement was announced in a great blaze of self-righteous publicity.  The Prime Minister Stefan Löfven (an old trade unionist with a good understanding of the importance of jobs) actually wanted to extend the agreement. But he was over-ruled by his far left and the Greens. His Foreign Minister, Margot Wallström (who, unlike the Greens, is old enough to know better), was more obsessed with demonstrating how Swedish foreign policy was feminist and green and occupied the moral high ground than in promoting Swedish interests and values. And so she forgot about her duties as a Foreign Minister and sharply criticised Saudi Arabia in most undiplomatic language. It verges on incompetence that the consequences of her statements were not analysed. She received a swift diplomatic “punch on the nose” when she was barred from speaking to the Arab League.

But the Greens and the left (and the Swedish media – who are all very politically correct and morally upstanding) basked in the warmth of their own sanctimonious self-indulgence. If they thought they were promoting Swedish values, they seem to have failed spectacularly. Instead they have fuelled the opposing views from the region about Swedish moral degeneracy and decadence.

But now the whole affair is becoming a foreign policy debacle. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have called their ambassadors home. Fifty seven other nations have backed Saudi Arabia in criticising Margot Wallström for “denigrating Saudi Arabia’s social norms, judicial institutions and political institutions”. Swedes are not being issued visas for Saudi Arabia any longer.

Sweden is left floundering with a foreign policy being made by children and governed by childishness. A policy built on trying to demonstrate a self-proclaimed moral superiority and which talks down to others smacks of the playground. It diminishes Sweden. Business will suffer and jobs will suffer. And it will take a long time to repair the damage. Right now almost the entire Islamic world has taken umbrage and Sweden’s voice has never been as irrelevant in the region.

(Soon after the left/green government took over they had recognised Palestine as a State – also to demonstrate their moral superiority. Needless to say Israel was not amused and they are not the flavour of the month with Netanyahu. And he is going to be around for a long time yet).

But the Greens and far left are still basking in their moral superiority and don’t even realise that they have done something very silly. That they have managed to earn the contempt of both Israel and the Arab World  – simultaneously – seems to be of little consequence.

Swedish Radio:

Saudi Arabia has informed the Foreign Ministry that they will not issue any new business visas to Swedes. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has confirmed that they received notice about this and say they will continue trying to resolve the issue bilaterally.

Companies that are in procurement or planning projects will not be able to send employees to the country. 

The Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven had just received the information and said, “We do not want this situation with Saudi Arabia. We have been clear all the time that we want a good relationship with Saudi Arabia and we work seriously and systematically with it”.

Swedish Industry Minister Mikael Damberg also believe that the news is negative. “It is clear that this not good and we are working both to normalize relations with Saudi Arabia and to make sure that it does not spread to more countries. We are very careful to emphasize that what the government did was not to extend a military Terms of Collaboration with Saudi Arabia. And there was a very strong political majority in parliament not to extend”, says Mikael Damberg.

Tonight, the Minister and the Foreign Minister, Margot Wallström will meet with executives from Swedish industry regarding Sweden’s relations with Saudi Arabia. “I will talk about what the government is doing but also to listen to those companies that are active in the region to see if they have encountered a problem and if there are misunderstandings so that we can help each other” says Mikael Damberg.

On being asked what actions the government would take, he said “We are working very hard to normalize relations with Saudi Arabia. Both through diplomatic contacts here in Stockholm but also in place in Riyadh and in countries in the region. The work is intense.. We are also working together with Swedish companies in place in these markets. We take note that this has happened but we have no interest to implement some kind of retaliation or to escalate this”, says Mikael Damberg.

Both Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have called their ambassadors home from Sweden. The reason is because of the statements made by Foreign Minister Margot Wallström about Saudi Arabia in connection with the Swedish government cancelling a controversial trade agreement.

At the same time 57 states have closed ranks behind Saudi Arabia in their criticism of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Margot Wallström. This means that almost the entire Muslim world is critical of Wallström’s statements.

“In its opinion Wallström has humiliated Saudi Arabia and its social norms, legal systems and political institutions,” says a statement on the website of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (IOC).

 

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, Saudi Arabia, Sweden | 2 Comments »

Age discrimination to be tested in Swedish court

March 16, 2015

Age discrimination is endemic in Sweden – that is discrimination on the basis of just age and not because of some attribute or lack of competence. Though it is illegal it is an everyday occurrence. To be labelled a “pensioner” in Sweden is often as an excuse for exclusion and a not so subtle form of insult.

The elderly are noticeably absent in parliament where they are grossly underrepresented. This is, in part, due to the fact that all the political parties are inherently prejudiced against age and have an obsession about youth. It shows up with the party leaders and their entourages as well, where youth – and being seen to be young – is of primary importance. Incompetence and inexperience are tolerated (even encouraged) to satisfy the youth fetish. Competence and experience do not balance the perceived disadvantages of age. The theory being, I suppose, that this attracts young, first time voters. I perceive the incidences of incompetence in government and in political life as increasing. I would go so far as to say that there has been a “dumbing-down” of politics. The proportion of the elderly among the electorate is growing sharply. But so far their electoral strength has not manifested itself in politics or in parliament.

A public transport company, Keolis, has introduced a blanket rule forbidding those over 70 years old from being bus or taxi drivers. This is a ban based entirely on age and not on competence. The Discrimination Ombudsman is taking this to court to see if such a blanket age-based ban is legal.

Swedish radio: The Discrimination Ombudsman has taken the position that the public transport company Keolis is discriminating illegally against the elderly with their ban on people aged 70 or over from driving buses and taxis. For the first time, such a general upper age limit will now be tested in the Labour Court.

Marie Nordström who is handling the case within the office of the Discrimination Ombudsman hopes that this will send a clear signal to employers. “We must become aware of that age itself actually constitutes grounds for discrimination, and that we should not discriminate against older people in employment. We must make effective use of older people’s knowledge and experience to a greater extent than we do today”.

…… Cecilia Jerneheim, Human Resources Manager at Keolis, says that the age limit is not about discrimination, but about road safety. “It is known that with increasing age, hearing, vision and response time are impaired and therefore we have chosen the age of 70. We need to put a limit somewhere and we have chosen 70” says Cecilia Jerneheim.

But whatever the labour court says the attitude of general condescension towards, and the political exclusion of, the elderly will continue in Swedish society for some time yet.

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Sweden | Comments Off on Age discrimination to be tested in Swedish court

A certain hypocrisy

March 10, 2015

Leslee Udwin’s documentary about the Delhi rapes was shown in Sweden recently and there was much coverage in the media and the talk shows about the misogynist nature of Indian society. Also in India an alleged rapist was lynched last week by a mob which was led by a gang of schoolgirls. The alleged rapist was an immigrant from Bangladesh. The girls are being hailed as heroes in some quarters even though CCTV pictures show the victim apparently willingly accompanying her rapist into and out of a hotel. The “human rights” and “women’s rights” activists are largely silent here. So was the lynching due to misandry and were the schoolgirls leading the mob misandrists?

Today it is reported in Sweden that the rapist of a 13 year old was set free by two successive courts because the girl was well developed for her age. I note also that a certain Julian Assange is sitting holed up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to avoid a Swedish arrest warrant for the investigation of an alleged rape by a woman who was willingly sharing his bed. No doubt the Swedish arrest warrant for Assange is largely political (on two counts; first to appease the US and second to appease the feminist lobby). The definition of rape in Sweden is quite wide and many so-called “rapes” would not be considered so in other countries. On the other hand Sweden must be one of a very few countries where sexual intercourse with a minor – no matter what she looked like – would not lead to a rape conviction. And when convictions are reached they often lead to little more than a slap on the wrist. Acquittals are very common. Which leads to the peculiar situation that the bar to what is considered rape is quite low when it comes to prosecution but there are very few convictions by the courts.

(With penalties for rape so low in Sweden I wonder why Assange is so scared of being questioned. Presumably he is more concerned about “rendition” to the US – where he is wanted for the leaks in the Bradley (Chelsea) Manning case – than of any consequences for the alleged rape in the Swedish courts. Sweden does have a history of assisting the CIA in cases of rendition in the past).

But whether in India or in Sweden the hypocrisy is palpable. In India there are only very few and very reluctant prosecutions, but convictions lead to very severe sentences. Once a rape is alleged, the suspect lives precariously. In Sweden, on the other hand, the definition of rape is very wide and the bar to prosecution is very low. The many prosecutions rarely lead to any consequence of substance from the courts.

Aftonbladet: The 27-year old man saw the 13-year-old girl on a bench outside his apartment, invited her in and had sex with her.
He was charged with child rape but was acquitted in two instances.
The decisive factor was the Court’s assessment – that the girl’s body was well developed for her age.
The 27-year-old man was arrested in April last year and charged first with child-rape and secondly, rape. But both Västmanland District Court and the Svea Court of Appeal acquitted the man.
The prosecutor chose not to appeal to the Supreme Court, but the girl’s counsel has taken up the case. The Supreme Court must first grant leave to appeal for the case to be reopened.
“There are very few cases that have so far been taken up”, says the girl’s lawyer Goran Landerdahl.

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, India, Sweden | Comments Off on A certain hypocrisy

“A bloody nose” as Swedish foreign policy degenerates to be just domestic policy

March 10, 2015

UPDATE! The 22 foreign ministers of the member countries of the Arab League released a statement today condemning the Swedish Foreign Minister, Margot Wallström, for her anti-Saudi comments. Her comments were considered “irresponsible and unacceptable”. The undertone is that she does not understand very much about the Arab world or about Sharia law. No matter what one may think of Sharia and Saudi Arabia, Margot Wallströms statements reveal a Swedish foreign affairs behaviour which either does not analyse the consequences of its statements – or is incompetent. The obsessions of the greens and the far-left are bringing the country’s foreign policy into disrepute.

The new left-green Swedish government seems to have become a slave of their minority green partners (and are also going out of their way to placate the far left party which supports them from outside the government). So much so that foreign policy has now become a string of sanctimonious positions. It is now more about being politically correct in a domestic context rather than actually promoting Sweden’s interests (geopolitical and commercial) in foreign lands.

The Foreign Minister – Margot Wallström – started of her term by recognising Palestine as a State. It pandered to all her domestic constituents and allies, upset Israel and the US,  and has not helped the Palestinians one jot. But it allowed those on the left to expound their beliefs and provided support for the growing anti-semitism in Sweden.

Some 10 years ago the socialist government of the time entered into a cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia regarding defence and defence production. The agreement was nurtured all through the 8 years of the subsequent moderate-led government and provided a good deal of business and many jobs in Sweden. The current socialist government of Stefan Löfven is hard pressed by its own left wing to cancel the deal. The greens absolutely hate this agreement but that is because their goal is to dismantle the Swedish defence industry. The politically correct feminist view is that all things Saudi Arabian must be condemned. For the last few weeks the Swedish media (which are predominantly left of centre and hopelessly politically correct) have been running a campaign to support the greens and the far left in condemning the Saudi agreement.

And their efforts have now resulted in Margot Wallström “receiving a bloody nose” from Saudi Arabia. She was scheduled to make a speech to the Arab League (about Human Rights) but this was cancelled at short notice by a very irritated Saudi Arabia.

TheLocal.se: Sweden’s national debate about a controversial arms deal has sparked anger in Saudi Arabia and formed the backdrop to its move to block the Swedish foreign minister’s planned speech at the Arab League, according to an expert on Saudi politics.

Thord Janson, a Saudi Arabia expert at Gothenburg University, said: “This isn’t a slap on the hand; it’s a punch in the nose,” he told news agency TT. The decision by Saudi Arabia, a regional powerhouse, to prevent Wallström from speaking in Cairo on Monday appeared designed to cause embarrassment, he said. “From a diplomatic perspective it’s incredibly harsh. One couldn’t be more clear.” Janson predicted that Saudi Arabia would now make life trickier for Swedish firms operating in the wealthy Middle Eastern oil state. “The authorities might make it more difficult for them to import goods, deliveries might get slowed down in customs, and it could become hard to get certain permits.” 

The very public discussion in Sweden on whether to extend a military cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia had sparked strong reactions in Riyadh, said Janson. Sweden’s Green Party, the junior partner in the Social Democrat-led government, wants to scrap the deal, as do several members of Prime Minister Stefan Löfven’s own party.  

Swedish criticism of the flogging of the blogger and human rights activists Raif Badawi may also have played a part in the Saudi decision.

“They thinks it’s an internal matter,” said Janson. “They don’t understand why a morally decadent country like Sweden is getting involved in the Saudi legal system.

My perception is of Swedish foreign policy now becoming quite shallow and with little substance. It is more concerned with being – and being seen to be – politically correct in the eyes of the greens, the far left and the feminist party. Foreign policy has degenerated to become a series of sanctimonious and self-righteous statements where the purpose is to look good for the domestic audience. And Margot Wallström – who is not inexperienced – has not the strength to resist the domestic lobbying.

Swedish foreign policy no longer shows any evidence of any deep thought about Swedish interests or how to promote change abroad. The end of the agreement with Saudi Arabia is now inevitable. There is little chance of Saudi Arabia (or Israel) now paying any attention to the “Swedish opinion”. Swedish business of any kind – and not just the defence business – can expect to meet more unfriendly customers. Other European countries will not be slow to step in to replace Swedish suppliers. But the far left and the greens can wallow in self-righteousness. Any chance of a place on the Security Council has disappeared.

 

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, Sweden | 1 Comment »

Swedish appeals court supports municipality in the degradation of the aged

February 26, 2015

“It is not the pain of death that frightens as much as the degradations of growing old”.

As we live longer, it seems, we also have a longer period of being useless in the eyes of surrounding society. People with diminished capabilities are provided Home Care help in Sweden. This applies also to the elderly until – say with dementia or Alzheimers – they have to be placed (hidden away) in “care” homes where their capabilities gradually deteriorate. The treatment meted out to them also deteriorates and, as we see in so many cases, the lack of care becomes institutionalised. In some cases the lack of care becomes intentional mistreatment. As the elderly become useless to society, society shows them that they are useless.

In Sweden the increase in longevity and the expenditure incurred by the welfare state leads to the care of the elderly becoming primarily a cost issue. The level of care is no longer about quality, let alone excellence, but instead of the minimum to be “acceptably” provided. Though the elderly are an increasing number of the population, politically they are grossly underrepresented in parliament. Age discrimination may be illegal but it is endemic. Privatised care givers and homes have the municipalities as their clients and paymasters. The municipalities just want to do the minimum necessary to stay within their budgets and comply with their legal obligations. So in both privatised and municipal run homes, there is an incentive to reduce costs – and the quality of care – to a minimum. And the municipalities are now using the Courts – where the elderly are hardly represented – to establish the minima they can get away with. The quality of life of the elderly is not really of concern to the municipalities. Their only concern is a minimum compliance with the law.

This is a case reported in Hallands Posten, and it shows the insidious way in which a municipality uses the courts to establish a minimum level of care – in this case how often a person needs to shower during the provision of Home Care. But what has also been established by this unfortunate judgement is that the Social Services Act does not include the “well-being” of the elderly  as being part of a “reasonable standard of living”. Clearly no care giver or care home need now help any of their charges to shower more than 3 times a week!

I wonder how many of the judges on the Appeal bench or how many members of the Home Care Board consider 3 showers a week reasonable for themselves. But of course, they are not elderly.

Hallands Posten:

An 82-year-old man who has fought to be able to shower every day lost his fight against the municipality. The Appeal Court accepted the view of the Home Care Board that three showers a week is enough.

The man has dementia and does not always manage to get to the toilet in time. He also suffers from oily skin and greasy hair and wants to feel clean and fresh every day. But the Home Care Board found that three showers a week was enough. The man appealed to the Administrative Court – which found in his favour.  The Court ruled that the 82-year-old had a quite extensive need for help and to have a shower every day was a reasonable requirement.

But the Home Care Board refused to accept that judgement and argued that it was based on a judgement of well-being. They claimed that the  Social Services Act says nothing about a daily shower to be included in a “reasonable standard of living”.

I would go so far as to say that the Courts are part of the institutionalised discrimination against, and for the degradation of, the elderly. However, they only interpret laws made by parliaments where the elderly are under-represented. But I have a measure of contempt for the Halmstad municipality which has not the courage to take a call on what is right, and instead has used the Courts to come to a minimum liability. And the well-being of their elderly citizens is clearly not of any importance.

 

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Behaviour, Ethics, Sweden | Comments Off on Swedish appeals court supports municipality in the degradation of the aged

Does Swedish emergency service have a rejection quota?

February 20, 2015

If the manner in which emergency services react to emergencies is a measure of an advanced and civilised society, then the corporatised central emergency service in Sweden (SOS Alarm tel. no 112) leaves a great deal to be desired. It is owned 50% by the State and 50% by counties and municipalities. But it is required to make a “profit”. And the most significant cost cutter it has in its arsenal is not to respond. The latest events and especially the response of their press spokesman makes me wonder if the emergency operators at SOS Alarm are judged by the number of emergency calls they reject?

It has an amazingly bureaucratic method for complaints. But complaints from the dead aren’t too many. Being a state owned institution, it and its employees have little liability and virtually no accountability for their decisions.

Right now it is facing a massive amount of criticism – not for the first time – for its arbitrary decisions on what constitutes an emergency.

The Local: A 16-year-old boy says he feared he would die when he made an emergency call to report he’d been shot, but wasn’t believed by the operator.

The teenager, who hasn’t been named by Swedish media, says he was seriously injured in the shooting and managed to crawl to a bus stop before calling Sweden’s emergency services. He dialed the emergency number 112 several times but was cut off. After then trying the general number for police in Sweden, 114 14, he says the operator did not believe his story. “I was frustrated and yelled that I was dying. Yet she did not believe me,” he said of the woman who picked up the call ……… 

The attack on the boy took place last October during a shootout in Norrahammar just outside Jönköping in southern Sweden. He was also stabbed during the incident in which his friend, 17, died. 

According to the surviving teenager, the phone operator thought he was lying, because he could not tell her his exact location. ……. 

After trying to reach friends and family members instead, he eventually got through to a different operator via 112 and an ambulance was called to the scene.  “I do not feel good. I think my friend might have been saved if the ambulance had arrived immediately,” ……
It has happened before. Emil Linell, 23, died in Stockholm after the SOS Alarm operator arbitrarily decided that his claims that he couldn’t breathe were false. Even though one of his many calls to 112 was terminated as he fainted. He was found dead by a neighbour.
The operators are trained nurses and SOS Alarm uses 3 call centres to cover all of Sweden. Of course the operators then have little local knowledge. The recording of the shot boy’s calls released recently also shows that the operator – who takes a very sharp tone in her suspicions about the boy being shot – could not comprehend the address he was giving.  But my suspicion is that the operators are under instructions to minimise costs by reducing the number of emergencies they respond to. That shows up quite clearly in the very defensive response of SOS Alarm’s Press spokesman:
Swedish Radio: Now SOS Alarm’s spokesman Anders Klarström responds to the massive criticism it has received. … 
“First I want to say that I have great sympathy for this boy’s terrible experiences and the frustration he felt, but I also want to say that this conversation is not true for all the 10 000, 112 calls that come in every day to our SOS centers, of which 4000 should not have been called.
Note that the spokesman starts with the excuse about unnecessary emergency calls. I know many who have nothing but praise for the emergency services. But what I discern here is a corporate culture which is very disturbing. It seems as if SOS Alarm start with the assumption that the call is unnecessary and the caller is required to prove the emergency. The spokesman is clearly justifying the rejection on the grounds that 40% of the calls are unnecessary (in the opinion of SOS Alarm). It would not surprise me at all if the number of rejections by each operator was logged and constituted a Key Performance Indicator (KPI). I begin to suspect that SOS Alarm gives its operators a rejection quota or a rejection target to fulfill.
To give him his due the spokesman does go on to acknowledge the mistake – 6 months after the event. But there are no real repercussions beyond an “internal investigation”. Liability is diluted and nobody needs to take responsibility.  There is no hint of a change of attitude where each call is first assumed to be genuine. If the boy had died – as his friend did – there would be no story.
I note that the tone was too hard on this well-behaved boy. Here we would have presented a smoother attitude. However, I want to emphasize that aid has not been delayed. The actual treatment received during the call is not okay.
And no responsibility was ever taken for the negligent death of Eric Linell.
And if I am ever in an accident or have a heart attack and call 112, I just hope I get a sympathetic operator who does not have a rejection quota to fulfill.

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Sweden | Comments Off on Does Swedish emergency service have a rejection quota?

Sweden’s December Agreement abandons parliament for a postmodern, back-room “party democracy”

December 30, 2014

Sweden’s December Agreement can be described simply as an agreement between six of the eight political parties in parliament to abdicate their “rights” and duties – when in opposition – to oppose a minority government made up of some of the other parties to the Agreement. The Agreement negates the representative strengths of the eight parties in parliament as established by the electorate. It is claimed that it is to ensure the continuity of government by making the opposition of the two parties not represented, impotent. The two not represented are on the far left and on the extreme, nationalistic, racist right.

Parliamentary democracy as such has been abandoned in that two particular parties – representing 20% of the electorate – are being suppressed by the others getting together in a “collusion of the cowardly”. “Truth” is simply whatever promotes my (or my group’s) will or interests. None of the party leaders who signed-up to the December Agreement gain much credit. None managed to raise their vision to anything beyond maintaining their own party positions within the pig trough. The Prime Minister, Stefan Löfven was not prepared to resign or face a new election. The new leader of the Moderate Party, Anna Kinberg Batra was too new and too scared to face a new election. The Environmental Party’s Åsa Romson was only too happy with her meagre 7% to remain at the “big table” and in government. The small party leaders from the Alliance don’t come out very well. They were running scared of being wiped out in any new election and were not prepared to come out from under the protective umbrella of the Moderates. Each party had its own fears and it was an agreement based on fear and truly a collusion of the cowardly. There is not even a pretence of trying to represent the interests of their voters. It is all about the “lowest common denominator” and no hint of aspiring to the “highest common numerator”. It is the triumph of a grey, bureaucratic pragmatism over any hint of vision or idealism.

It occurs to me that this is nothing but postmodernism applied to parliamentary democracy. It is whatever you want to make of it. It is a form of “postmodern democracy” which degrades a traditional parliamentary democracy to something else. I take postmodernism to mean a world where

our interests and desires often use “reason” to promote their fulfillment; “truth” is simply whatever promotes my (or my group’s) will or interests.  There is a “political agenda” in whatever we claim to be true. Knowledge is not neutral. (This observation utilizes the “hermeneutics of suspicion.”) In response to the unbiased certainty, postmodernism emphasizes that our ideas and judgments are embedded within a historical-cultural context; so we can never fully remove ourselves from it by pure reflection. 

The will of the electorate as represented in parliament has been over-ruled by the party leaders in the back-rooms. If this is the new world of parliamentary democracy then parliament itself is irrelevant and meaningless. It is only the back-rooms and the decisions taken there which apply. Electoral democracy manifested in a parliament is abandoned and it is only those who choose the party leaders who then meet in the back-room who matter (and to some extent this is already the basic flaw in all multi-party democracies).

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, Sweden | Comments Off on Sweden’s December Agreement abandons parliament for a postmodern, back-room “party democracy”

Sweden downgrades parliamentary democracy in favour of a back-room collusion of the cowardly

December 28, 2014

Following on from my previous post, it now becomes clear that parliamentary democracy has been downgraded – if not abandoned – in Sweden till 2022. The ruling Social Democratic /Environmental Party grouping has made a back room deal with the four parties making up the centre-right Alliance (Moderate, Christian Democratic, Centre and Peoples(Liberal) Parties) which means that an extra, snap election in March 2015 is no longer necessary.

The ‘December agreement’ will last until 2022, and commits the six major parties not to block any minority government’s budget while they are in opposition. It is an abdication of the parliamentary responsibility of opposition parties to oppose. Neither the Left Party (communists) or the nationalist, racist, anti-immigration Sweden Democrats were included in the back-room deal. The six parties argue that this is to make Sweden more governable and to avoid major budget vote losses from leading unnecessarily to new elections. Any minority, coalition government will now be able to able to get its budget passed. Effectively these six parties have created a partial, pseudo-coalition such that actual party strengths in parliament can be ignored. It is a collusion among six particular parties to suppress and oppress two specific, minority parties across the next two elections.

“Sweden has a proud tradition for solving difficult problems across party boundaries which doesn’t exist in any other country,”  Prime Minister Stefan Löfven announced as he backtracked on all he had said over the last month. Of course he never needed to have announced that he would call a snap election at all. He could have shown some political courage. He had not exhausted parliamentary procedures. He could have resigned and allowed the Speaker to look for other coalition groupings which could have commanded sufficient support in Parliament. The same result could have been achieved in parliament. But Löfven comes from a trade union background. Not surprising that this makes him the quintessential back-room operator.

Of course these 6 parties were all running scared of the Sweden Democrats coming back at any new election with an even stronger position. Their 13% support (49 seats) was likely to increase. The real “agreement” between them is to block the Sweden Democrats from having any significant influence in Parliament. It is a coalition of the cowardly. But holding them back by effectively extra-parliamentary agreements could well be counter productive. Disenfranchising 20% of the electorate (13% SD and 6% Left)  can only lead to frustration. I expect that the Sweden Democrat supporters – who have more than their fair share of hooligans – will now  also resort to extra-parliamentary action. It could lead to even more violent and racist behaviour. Other minority parties among the 6 parties who have cosied up to each other will have a disproportionately large influence. The destructive Environmental Party (7%), the visionless Centre Party (6%), the formless People’s Party (5%) and the failing Christian Democrats (5%) will all have a quite unjustified strength while hanging on to the tails of the larger Social Democrat and Moderate Parties.

I quite like the fact that the Sweden Democrats and the Left Party are rendered impotent in Parliament – but this has been achieved by a back-room, extra-parliamentary deal. Right result, wrong means. It is a clear degradation of parliamentary procedures in favour of back-room democracy. Sweden will apply democracy not by consensus or in proportion to parliamentary strength, but by collusion among a conspiracy of the cowardly. Twenty percent of Sweden’s electorate have had their parliamentary representatives rendered politically impotent. Sweden’s democracy has effectively institutionalised the suppression and the oppression of some specific minorities.

All democracies have their limitations of course. But this new pseudo-coalition is based on fear and cowardice. This deal for back-room democracy stinks.

Tags:,
Posted in Politics, Sweden | 1 Comment »

Swedish extra election to be called off as major parties do a deal to oppress the minority

December 27, 2014

The low farce continues.

UPDATE: It seems that all the political parties except the Left Party (new Communists)  and the Sweden Democrats are agreed on changing the rules to allow the “large minorities” to suppress the “small minorities” and prevent them from taking advantage of tied situations where their positions can give a majority one way or the other. It is all geared to de-fang the Sweden Democrats.

The problem for democracy is that no matter how undesirable the Sweden Democrats are – and they are fairly vile – they are the third largest party in parliament. Effectively the two largest parties are colluding to oppress the third. The Swedish Democrats will probably introduce a motion of no confidence in the government. But the right-of-centre parties in the Alliance will probably abdicate their responsibilities as an opposition and abstain. While I may welcome the neutralisation of the Sweden Democrats, it is being done by institutionalising the suppression of undesirable minorities. The 13% of the electorate who voted for the Sweden Democrats – misguided as they are – are being disenfranchised.

It’s the right result but it is – I think – the wrong way to have done it. The Prime Minister should have allowed the Speaker to ask for a new round of government formation, ditched the Left and the Greens and made a deal with the Moderate Party or the Alliance Parties, on the condition that he remained as Prime Minister.

Swedish Radio is reporting that the extra election threatened to be called by the end of the month by the Swedish Prime Minister will now not be called. The election was threatened because the ruling Red/Green coalition (a minority government) lost the parliamentary vote on their budget.

Now it seems that the major parties have done a deal to change parliamentary voting rules to allow a minority government to govern by preventing all the opposition parties to indulge in tactical voting and supporting other non-governmental minorities to vote down the minority government.

I was half expecting this but was hoping to see the formation of a new coalition where the destructive nature of the Environmental Party would have been eliminated.

It sounds to me as if things are being set up so that the large minorities can suppress and oppress the smaller minorities. There is a certain deficit of democracy that is evident in trying to protect the “establishment”.

A pity on two counts:

  1. I was looking forward to the first woman Prime Minister of Sweden, and
  2. I was looking to the incompetence of the Environmental Party (Greens) being removed from government

Swedish Radio:

There will be no extra election in March, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven is expected to announce at a press briefing at 10:30 today.

The Government has accepted the Alliance’s earlier proposal for a change of rules rules to reign in the minority, according to sources.

Stefan Löfven stays and Alliance budget will apply in 2015, but the government will be allowed to propose some adjustments.

New elections were supposed to be announced this coming Tuesday and held in late March.

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, Sweden | Comments Off on Swedish extra election to be called off as major parties do a deal to oppress the minority

Sweden Democrats try to make nationality a matter of race

December 18, 2014

There is no “Swedish” race – though the Sweden Democrats (SD) would like to think there is.

I take “race” here to be an ethnic grouping based on ancestry. “Swedish” is not a recognised or recognisable ethnic grouping which has any historical basis. There is a loose ethnic grouping of common ancestry across Scandinavia (Norway and Sweden – mainly- and Denmark and to some extent across Finland). These are not the “Vikings” of old, descended directly from the Norse Gods, as the SD would like to think. The inhabitants of Iceland are closer to the SD vision than the Scandinavians. Even this loose Scandinavian ethnic grouping (based on ancestry) has been subject to large amounts of genetic admixing from all over Northern Europe (German, Dutch, Flemish, French, the British Isles) and even much further afield. De Geer and Hamilton and Bernadotte are not Viking in origin.

But the Sweden Democrats are taking advantage of the confusion that is so easy to generate when speaking about “race”, ethnic origins, religion and nationality. But this confusion is evident even in the official record. For example Sweden officially recognises 5 national minorities – mainly defined by language and ethnicity:

Sweden’s national minorities and minority languages

The five recognized national minorities in Sweden are Jews, Roma, the Sami people (which is also an indigenous people), Swedish Finns, and the Torne Valley Descendents (Tornedalians). The historical minority languages are Yiddish, Romani chib, Sami, Finnish and Meänkieli. What is common for the minority groups is that they have populated Sweden over a long period of time and that they constitute groups with a distinct affinity. They also have their own religious, linguistic or cultural affinity and a desire to retain their identity.

These are minorities based on ethnicity (which is a matter of ancestry and is loosely referred to as “race”). The Jews here represent both a religion and a recognised minority. The Samis once practised Shamanism but that has been wiped out by the ideological forefathers of the SD. So if an Ethiopian Jew were also a Swedish citizen, he would have the religion but he would not be part of this recognised minority. But all these minority cultures – while afforded some protection – are still subordinate to the overriding culture of the country. Samis, while maintaining their own sub-culture, are still compliant with the overriding Norwegian or Finnish or Swedish cultures (and laws, rules and regulations) when they happen to be in those countries. One of the failings of all those misguided “do-gooders” who have promoted “multiculturism”, is that they have forgotten to emphasise that sub-cultures in a multi-ethnic society must still – of necessity – be subordinate to an overriding culture (which itself must evolve to incorporate the sub-cultures). There has sometimes been a tendency in most of Europe to support sub-cultures at the expense of the dominant culture, and that has provided many of the right-wing, racist parties the environment in which to prosper.

The SD are now propagating the notion that while these minorities may be Swedish citizens they are not part of their imaginary “Swedish race”. They like to confuse the picture further by referring to their concept of the “Swedish race” as also being the “Swedish nation” and as being something different to “Swedish citizenship”. They are effectively trying to connect “nationality” to ethnicity and to hijack “nationalism” as being the exclusive characteristic of the imaginary “Swedish race”. (Of course all members of SD are naturally assumed to be of this, imaginary, superior “Swedish race” and burning nationalists!).

The Somalis or Syrians or other “new Swedes” who are Swedish citizens may not yet be “recognised minorities” – and may never be. Fundamentally the SD is built on a differentiation by race (ancestry and ethnicity). The unsaid, underlying sub-text of all they say and argue is for a differentiation based on skin colour. They want to promote the concept of the citizens of Sweden being either

  1. those of the “Swedish race” (obviously acceptable though imaginary and unidentifiable)
  2. recognised minorities who are “old Swedes” (and reluctantly acceptable), or
  3. “new Swedes” (who are the bad guys)

Among the SD supporters, the level of “Swedishness” follows this classification. For them, “new Swedes” is a derogatory term which carries the sub-text of skin colour. If they could they would prefer to split the third group on the basis of skin colour with the level of “Swedishness” decreasing with the darkness of skin color. But even they balk at such a blatant differentiation as that. It is quite clear that the SD would prefer to have these 3 groups as 3 classes of citizenship. “New Swedes” (especially those of the wrong skin colour) clearly – in their eyes – are lower class citizens – if at all. I note that the House of Bernadotte only goes back to 1818. (By the SD’s standards, the Royal family should be classified as “new Swedes” and third class citizens). It serves the SD’s cause to separate and isolate the “new Swedes” from the mainstream as much as possible. They would like, for example, ethnicity to be registered for all crimes to further the divide. But the fundamental flaws in the race politics that the SD is trying to promote is that first, there is no such thing as an identifiable “Swedish race” and second, nationality is not a matter of ethnicity. They forget that nationality and citizenship are a matter of residence and behaviour and not of distant ancestry. Immediate parentage can give citizenship but requires residence. And if behaviour is the arbiter, the SD is on shaky ground since it has had more than its fair share of junkies and hooligans.

It should be obvious by now that I am a “new Swede”. But I am a little surprised that so many are taken in by the SD’s view that nationality is a matter of ethnicity. Perhaps they are all supermen who chose their own parents and their ancestry.

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, Sweden | Comments Off on Sweden Democrats try to make nationality a matter of race

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »