(Nils Petter Nilsson/Getty Images)
![](https://unherd.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/guy-2-100x100.jpg)
Sweden has long been a country known for its commitment to tolerance and its embrace of human rights: a “moral superpower” devoted to foreign aid, progressive causes and support of developing nations. All the more surprising, then, that Sweden now stands accused of being a hotbed of Islamophobia and intolerance. Repeated burnings of the Quran, most recently at the weekend, have provoked a strong response in the Muslim world and beyond. That the Organization of Islamic Cooperation has protested may seem predictable, but even the EU and the Pope have made similar declarations. “Not everything that is legal is ethical,” said Josep Borrell.
The burnings had already become a geopolitical conflagration thanks to Sweden’s Nato accession, which effectively led to Sweden’s bid becoming hostage to the whims of Turkey’s President Erdogan. However, beneath the surface of immediate security politics looms a question of the status of religion and the position of minority religious communities in Swedish political culture. The Government’s rhetorical embrace of human rights, including respect of religion, runs in conflict with Sweden’s institutional arrangement that is hostile not only to religion, but also to communitarian claims at large.
As Henrik Berggren and I have argued in our recent book, Sweden is not only one of the most secular countries in the world — its social contract is based on a radical alliance between the state and the individual. The central purpose is precisely to liberate individuals from families, religious communities, charities and other institutions of civil society that limit individual freedom in the name of communal identity. And this moral logic results in a civic universalism that is fundamentally hostile to communitarian claims, including, perhaps especially, those that are made in the name of religion.
In this regard, Sweden sticks out in studies such as the World Values Survey. Not only is the contrast to the Islamic world particularly dramatic, Sweden also stands out compared to Western countries such as the US and Germany, whose social contracts afford a far greater role to religious and ethnic communities. In Sweden, religious freedom is conceived as a right to practise religion as a private matter. Thus, the Swedish idea of religious freedom is as much, maybe more, a question of freedom from religion as it is a right to religion.
Faith in God or gods takes place inside the home, inside the individual mind, and only collectively in congregations conceived of as private, voluntary associations. Insofar as a church acts publicly, it is expected that they adhere to the values, laws, and mores of secular society. This “civil religion”, focused on individual citizenship, gender equality, and children’s rights, always trumps what is seen as outdated and conservative claims rooted in premodern notions of religious faith and moral codes expressed in various religious texts. The “holy” texts of religion should accordingly have no bearing on the primacy of the constitution and laws of the modern, secular state.
It is in this light one must understand the growing conflict between Sweden and Muslim and Islamist activists, religious leaders and political regimes. And while the burnings of the Quran are important, there is further pre-history to the recent uproar that provides a better context for understanding the heart of the current conflict. Here I refer to the recent social-media campaign in which Muslim activists claimed that Swedish social services were kidnapping the children of Muslim parents. The background is that Sweden has experienced massive immigration in recent decades, including many refugees from Muslim countries such as Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. This has resulted in cultural collisions in general, but notably over their very different understandings of the role of the family, of parental rights versus children’s rights, and the place of religion and religious faith in a secular society.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeDespite the claims of the multiculturalists that they view all cultures as equally valid and valuable, for their worldview to be successful it depends on the widespread acceptance of a monolithic metaculture, which holds as its highest value tolerance. Cultures that cannot fit within that metaculture do not play well with other cultures, but the public rhetoric of multiculturalism means that they cannot be excluded from the multicultural society. So multiculturalism, as an ideology, contains the seeds of its own destruction.
Once again, the Greeks have a myth for this of course. Achilles and his heel which was wasn’t dipped in the magic waters and couldn’t thus provide him with protection against his enemies.
A multicultural society is a chimaera and trying to achieve one has simply led to a multiplicity of mono-cultures.
There can be no multicultural society when Islam is present. There is no separation between the state and religion. Their religion is the state religion. This will be an interesting experiment in Sweden, a very large country with only 10 million people. But soon it will not matter as the West commits cultural suicide and Muslims multiply.
There can be no multicultural society when any alien culture is imported in huge numbers.
For example, Indians (especially Gujuratis and Sikhs) are hard working, successful in professions etc.
But so what?
Should West commit ethnic and cultural suicide by allowing millions of them in?
Why don’t they fix their own country instead of coming here?
We all know the answer.
India is unusual in that they are a highly educated third world country. They graduate more doctors and scientists and IT students than they have jobs for. Many of these extras with too much education move to Western countries where they can find jobs. Unfortunately many of the IT graduates become hackers and figure out ways to scam grannies out of their pension checks.
To make it even more “Tolerant” its Multiculturalism interpreted through the lens of Applied Postmodernism so the dominant culture always has to defer to the epistemological reasoning of any secondary culture or “marginalized group.”
The highest position in the Monoculture is then to become an “Expert” Arbiter of how to redistribute cultural capital.
“Multiculturalism is a tempting quick fix for groups that lag by simply pronouncing their cultures to be equal, or “equally valid,” in some vague and lofty sense. Cultural features are just different, not better or worse, according to this dogma.
“Yet the borrowing of particular features from other cultures — such as Arabic numerals that replaced Roman numerals, even in Western cultures that derived from Rome — implies that some features are not simply different but better, including numbers. Some of the most advanced cultures in history have borrowed from other cultures, because no given collection of human beings has created the best answers to all the questions of life.
“Nevertheless, since multiculturalists see all cultures as equal or “equally valid,” they see no justification for schools to insist that black children learn standard English, for example. Instead, each group is encouraged to cling to its own culture and to take pride in its own past glories, real or imaginary.
“In other words, members of minority groups that lag educationally, economically or otherwise are to continue to behave in the future as they have in the past — and, if they do not get the same outcomes as others, it is society’s fault. That is the bottom line message of multiculturalism.”
Thomas Sowell
How true.
We have this moronic idea in the West that importing intolerant, low IQ savages from rubbish countries, will somehow improve our countries?
All evidence is against it.
“ If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.”
This, possibly in my ignorance, is what the Quran burnings, in Sweden, are about (and very much NOT about burning books). Some people and organisations use bombs, bullets and terror to force debate and challenge the system. On balance, Quran burnings (or slight scuffings) seem infinitely preferable when trying to force politicians hands.
It seems to me that the book burnings are simply a device, to force the countries political class to have an open, and honest, debate about the ramifications of large scale demographic change, particularly from places that may not share Swedens ‘values’ while it is still a possibility for that debate to be had, rather than an a forced acceptance (possibly through bombs, bullets and terror).
It also, seems to me, to be cowardice of the highest moral magnitude, from the host country, that doesn’t insist that people, from desperate lands, who seek shelter and refuge in another country (rather than just passing through) are not required to accept and support the basic principles of the country in which they now live.
I agree with the entirety of your comment, but if the authors are correct in their description of the Swedish secular-liberal contract, what collective values are immigrants expected to support?
At least from what I understood, I think its tolerance. That’s the only value left in Sweden that’s universal, apparently.
Are you referring to the UK here?
Good article. Thanks! The author tends to talk about Islam as a faith group. It is a hybrid: partly a political movement, based on a blueprint for a totalitarian society, and partly a faith group.
Like their UK counterparts, Swedish Liberals are extremely arrogant. They think that their values are so obviously superior that as soon as immigrants arrive in Sweden, they will transform into progressive social democrats. The consequence of their arrogance is that the immigrants have transformed Malmö into the Mogadishu of the North.
Yes, it’s a bit like the idea that so much recent foreign policy has been based on: that you can turn mediaeval tribesmen into Islington feminists by shooting at them.
Not arrogant, since their values are demonstrably superior.
If you disagree, ask yourself one question – would you rather live and rear a family in Sweden or in a country led by mullahs with morality police on the streets?
Swedes are not arrogant, just naïve and unduly optimistic, in that some of them may have assumed that a bunch of hate-filled bigots are ever going to embrace such values.
Multi-cultural too often is used as a lazy synonym for multi-ethnic.
Multi-ethnic is fine (better restaurants, for starters), but multi-cultural does not work, and has never worked.
Your skin colour makes no difference, but people living in a shared place need some form of over-arching shared values, foremost of which is the one described well by the author:
“Faith in God or gods takes place inside the home, inside the individual mind, and only collectively in congregations conceived of as private, voluntary associations. Insofar as a church acts publicly, it is expected that they adhere to the values, laws, and mores of secular society.”
The French stand up better for this principle than any other European country, but they could do more.
Frankly, if you cannot buy into that principle, you have no business being in a Western country, and should be deported or sent to somewhere more aligned with your worldview.
“Frankly, if you cannot buy into that principle, you have no business being in a Western country, and should be deported or sent to somewhere more aligned with your worldview.”
Now that is the definition of arrogance! Thank you, Mr. McCusker.
I do not think you can send people away from the country of birth simply because their opinions differ from those generally represented in that country.
A country with a secular government that does not allow freedom of religion is showing totalitarian leanings.
I think the issue is not opinions but actions. I don’t believe that an unaccompanied Swedish women care if young, Muslim men believe it’s OK to assault them, but do care about those who act on that
Utter nonsense.
Freedom of religion is fine.
Till such religion, like Islam, claims to take precedence over values of the country they moved into.
There are many Muslim countries with 2 billions Muslims.
All sh&te. Although some, which chanced on oil are rich.
So ask yourself: why do they come to Europe?
At least we agree on something!
“would you rather live and rear a family in Sweden or in a country led by mullahs with morality police on the streets?”
You really think an ultra feminist/ liberal country like Sweden doesn’t have morality police on the streets as much as an islamic country?
Yes, the supposed morals being imposed differ. But the extent of policing is not.
You live a great life by materialistic standards in Stockholm or Dubai/ Riyadh.
But, in one case you dare not go against what the great prophet said about the status of women. In the other, you dare not go against open borders, patriarchy is the source of all evil, etc.
Ironically, if you are a white man, you are the ones responsible for the country, it’s infrastructure and systems functioning in both Sweden and Saudi Arabia.
But you would get more respect in the latter country!
truth…
If their values are superior how did they end up where they’re today? Or put another way – how does a liberal society impose intolerance to protect itself? Who decides how to do it?
Fine words, but the reality is that those who don’t buy in cannot and will not be deported. Their purpose in being in the host country is th transform it to align with their culture and values – because they believe they are superior. This is known as colonialism, but the arrogance of progressives prevents them from seeing this reality.
People do not have to go and live there. Who is colonising whom?
I’m not sure why Unherd’s writers on Sweden continue to talk around the elephant in the room. This article touches on the new immigrants being less willing to integrate – but makes no mention of the 1000 bombings in Sweden over the last 5 years (over 100 this year alone), 52098 rapes in the last 6 years, about 68000 women being genitally mutilated, the 61 no-go areas, and so forth as a result of their liberal policies..
Their tolerance has meant that have given ground to hard-line Muslims who are only too happy to impose their beliefs on the rest of Sweden.
Quite right. Cultural Suicide.
I did not realise it was that bad.
My family in Sweden (Stockholm area) are not exactly talking about it.
Still, Swedes invaded Poland in 1650 and destroyed it.
So now they know how it feels being invaded.
I must say I for one have never regarded Sweden as a “moral superpower “, but rather as a source of Volvos, Saabs, AGA cookers and somewhat ‘naff’ furniture.
Given her somewhat dubious record in WWII, and the fact she has allowed herself to be invaded by ‘barbarians’, I have little sympathy with her present position.
However, as pointed so succinctly by Richard M (above) she is also facing a demographic time bomb thanks to the catastrophic fall in the ‘Totality Fertility Rate’. Thus she faces some interesting choices over the next decade, which may act as a warning to others. For example what is the right type of immigrant? As obviously the current ones are completely incompatible with the Swedish way of life.
It may not be a moral superpower per se, but the Swedes do tend to have a stronger sense of morality compared to most other countries. I would describe it as a sense of ‘correctness’ in which there is a prescribed and preferred way of doing things (openly and transparently) and that to deviate from this can make one appear unpredictable and untrustworthy. It is very hard for non-Swedes, particularly those from an ‘honor’ culture, to acquire this which may be one of the reasons why cultural fissures may be widening.
I do agree. Some years ago I spent sometime in Stockholm and enjoyed it very much.
My group habitually used to go for an evening drink on old former clipper ship*, moored across the harbour, because it had the cheapest alcohol available! We soon learnt from the silence and stern stares that our culture of ‘usque ad mortem bibendum’ **was NOT acceptable!
(*Similar to the ‘Cutty Sark’ and also English built-Whitehaven.)
(** “We must drink until death”.)
I find this story quite interesting, as far as Swedish attitudes are concerned, but quite surprising.
In 70s Poland, there were many camp sites on the Baltic shore, where Swedes were getting drunk all day from 7am.
Which they could do cheaply, because they could drink for 2 weeks by selling pair of jeans.
OK, they were mostly workers of Volvo etc.
I guess higher orders you encountered in Stockholm were holidaying in Spain?
The Greek islands actually, but I take your point these were the affluent ones.
So really it’s just a social thing, or to use that verboten word, a class thing.
Agreed. I will be removing Sweden from my bucket list of places to visit during retirement. It puzzles me how a society justifies the practice of removing a child from a mother over an alleged “infraction” with allowing the same mother to kill her child before it’s even born.
They all suffer from SAD* I gather.
(*Seasonal affective disorder*)
But the fall in fertility rate is due to the idea that women can do all what men can do.
They can do some things men can do.
But by doing them they neglect one thing only they can do (with apologies to Kier Starmer): giving birth.
I have no idea what the solution is (although Nazis had some ideas with birthing farms)
that is a problem all over the west unfortunately. imo, the best solutions are publicizing the ramifications of what will happen (like they do the climate crisis) if they don’t start giving back to society by perpetuating it and start educating single people on how to seek out compatible partners for marriage while young. unplanned childlessness is a thing because women are leaving it too late. my gen x were told to put off all that stuff as long as possible; that message needs to be changed asap.
Definitely a lesson for the UK in Sweden’s experience. If immigrants don’t like the society they find themselves in, let them move on to somewhere more amenable. Strangely, Muslim migrants don’t seem to be flocking to get into Saudi Arabia or Iran. Why could that be?
Not to undermine your point but I did read a story that Saudi troops have routinely machined gunned African migrants trying to approach their border from the Yemen side. Which is one reason that they don’t go there.
Well, so there are some good sides to Saudis?
Indeed, along with an impressive beheading record, although the ‘technique’ has deteriorated in recent years, according to my sources.
Yes, every time I say that in London, I am called fascist by woke idiots.
Maybe Saudi and Iran don’t provide them with houses and tens of thousands of pounds in benefits?
In the United States, it is perfectly legal to burn the American flag, but an act of “hate” to do the same to the rainbow banner. Some symbolisms are more equal than others.
The elephant in the room is that Sweden’s Total Fertility Rate has fallen off a cliff this last decade. Down from 1.9 children per woman in 2012 to 1.52 in 2022. You need a TFR of 2.1 just to keep the population level stable, without net inward migration.
Like many, if not in fact most, European countries, Sweden is sitting on a demographic time bomb. Their high tax/high public spending social and economic model relies on having enough productive workers paying for the non-productive elderly, young, infirm etc.
In short, they are not producing enough people so they need to get them from somewhere else (or radically change their social and economic model) and there aren’t any culturally similar countries over-producing people. There is always some migration between the Nordic countries, of course, but inevitably large numbers of immigrants will have to come from those places whose populations are growing, almost all of which are in the developing world where people are typically more socially and religiously conservative.
Understanding this does not resolve the challenges of declining homogeneity, conflicts between liberal tolerance and religious traditions etc etc. But at least let’s be honest about what is happening and why. Though few will admit it, countries in the developed world are tacitly engaged in a population “arms race”, desperately trying to plug gaps in productivity, tax yield, welfare etc as the last of the Baby Boomers leave the workforce and expect to cash in the promises made to them of a long and comfortable retirement.
If you think this is overly-dramatic (or the stuff of conspiracy theories) then you only have to look at Italy and Spain. Catastrophically low Total Fertlity Rates (around 1.2 to 1.3), combined with the young people they do have increasingly moving to big cities, have led to literal depopulation and abandonmemt of thousands of villages and small towns in some regions. Which in itself becomes a pull-factor for migration.
Humans have always migrated from highly populated to less populated areas. Especially when there is extreme pressure on resources from environmental factors, conflict etc. It’s inconceivable this won’t keep happening.
I get your points.
But importing low IQ savages from cr&p countries is not going to solve West problems.
Most of them are incapable of functioning in high tech economy.
Most of them will be benefit scroungers.
The main problem is, that with AI and automation taking most of low or mid level jobs (Uber, clerical, legal, IT) what is the point of importing them?
The Romans had this problem centuries ago with slavery.
Many slaves were ‘household slaves’ who had to be fairly clean and tidy, subservient and almost civilised.
The main supply source was the Eastern Mediterranean and the Levant, and was often topped up by the crushing of various rebellions such as the Jewish Rebellion of 66-71AD.
Later when this source began to ‘dry up’, consummate barbarians such as the Germans had to be used. Unfortunately they were found to be so savage and uncontrollable that they were thought fit only for the Arena.Thus the price of decent household slaves remained very high!
In the 18th and 19th century our politicians had knowledge of the Bible, classics, post Roman history and had travelled and worked overseas. They read widely and discussed issues and considered the future based upon a knowledge of the past. Human nature has not changed much in 5000 years.
The last politicians with this panoramic view were those who served in WW2 and were educated just before or afterwards. The Labour Party Deputy Leader has gone from Dennis Healey to Angela Rayner. Healey, First in Greats and RE officer who was beachmaster at one of the landings in Italy.
Denis Healey – Wikipedia
Rayner ?
Exactly what is happening.
from my above comment-imo, the best solutions are publicizing the ramifications of what will happen (like they do the climate crisis) if they don’t start giving back to society by perpetuating it and start educating single people on how to seek out compatible partners for marriage while young. unplanned childlessness is a thing because women are leaving it too late. my gen x were told to put off all that stuff as long as possible; that message needs to be changed asap.
Human beings are in their DNA fundamentally tribal and have been for 99% of their existence. We spend all our time making distinctions between ourselves and others on all sorts of grounds. When we get rid of one type of ‘prejudice ‘ we just invent another system to rank people by.
That’s why a Utopian world of equity and full equality will never survive for long (see Communism) and just morphs into another pyramid with a different elite at the top and different rules to grade everybody by.
If the non-binary unicorn world ever did fully materialise (God forbid), within 20 years another whole set of ‘prejudiced behaviour ‘ would have emerged and we’d all be fighting the just fight against that.
If Quran is such a dangerous flamable material, maybe it should be banned.
Who is to decide? Hardly the act of a liberal country.
Emmanuel was making a joke Judy.
Fahrenheit 451.
Sweden won’t be winning Eurovision anymore what with all this controversy. It’ll be languishing down at the bottom of the table with the UK and Germany! Welcome to the real world, Sverige.
Where does Austria fit in may I ask?
In three of the five most recent Eurovision contests the home of Mozart has failed to even qualify to compete!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria_in_the_Eurovision_Song_Contest
Wasn’t WA Mozart born in and a subject of the Prince-Bishop of Salzburg and therefore ‘legally’ not an Austrian?
Maybe he was black then, like Bethoven?
So he can be claimed by BLM?
He was a Freemason so can’t have been that bad.
I used to like skiing in Austria.
But “Panzer Rock” music and drunks smashing their heads on lifts infrastructure in St Anton after too many schnapps is too much if you are 60+
Austria is reliably rubbish at the ESC. Except that one time Conchita Wurst won and became a national icon overnight.
When it was held in Austria the next year, I got tickets to see the semi-final and it was brilliant. I saw the eventual winner perform – Sweden’s Måns Zelmerlöw. He was very good.
I am glad to hear that!
Is Conchita Wurst similar delicacy to curry wurst of Berlin?
German classical music, cars (tanks, sorry) are great.
Food and umpha, umpha bands not really.
Sound of Music?
Austrian Nazis were the worse of the lot.
Immigration is part of the new religion of progressivism and so a plank in the turn back to Marx and Hegel in the project to realise World-Spirit irrespective of economic realities. The new elites seek to bring the migrants out of the Darkness into a single, unitary Light that everyone should experience in the shared Awokening.
I’ll have what you’re having Tyler.
What progressives seem impervious to understanding is that their welcome mat to “diverse” immigration is actually an expression of neo-colonial ethno-centrism – because of course the immigrants from benighted regions will recognise the superiority of host country values once settled in. (Clue, the don’t.)
It won’t – because it’s already too late.
“Faith in God or gods takes place inside the home, inside the individual mind, and only collectively in congregations conceived of as private, voluntary associations. Insofar as a church acts publicly, it is expected that they adhere to the values, laws, and mores of secular society.”
Since we have references to Charles Taylor in this article, I would have thought the author would be more attentive to the idea that ‘secular society’ is just another (now dominant) religion. The Swedes, no less than Muslims, Christians, Jews, etc., have their own ultimate values, their own ceremonies and liturgies, their own everything. Religion is baked into the DNA (er, soul) of humans, and there is no such thing as an irreligious society – there are only societies forging new religious identities at the expense of the old.
Ah, but here’s the rub… these various religious identities are not created equal. Every society (every person) must decide which religious identity – which ultimate values, which organizing narratives, which unprovable beliefs about man’s fate – it will live by. And the choice you make, makes all the difference. Sweden is learning the hard way that its religious identity, has a lot of holes in it.
God bless them – they’re going to need it.
great comment…but more like God have mercy upon them…
“The central purpose is precisely to liberate individuals from families…” Sounds like all good leftists who view the nuclear family with suspicion, no doubt influenced by Marx’s desire to destroy the nuclear family and replace it with the state. That’s a recipe for totalitarian disaster.
As for multiculturalism, that’s another inevitable disaster. Sweden’s social contract with it eye-watering taxation and generous welfare state can only function in a small racially and culturally homogeneous society where people are naturally more willing to give up the proceeds of their labour to their fellow Swedes. There is an abundance of evidence for the disasters of multiculturalism and diversity and little for its benefits.
“Can you cite one speck of hard evidence of the benefits of “diversity” that we have heard gushed about for years? Evidence of its harm can be seen — written in blood — from Iraq to India, from Serbia to Sudan, from Fiji to the Philippines. It is scary how easily so many people can be brainwashed by sheer repetition of a word.” – Thomas Sowell
The Swedes are cracked in their upper story. Glad I don’t have to live there.
Many populations wished they did live there during the pandemic, as Sweden demonstrated its adherence to the values and freedoms the author explains, very successfully i might add.
The whole point is that beliefs should remain private, and not be pushed upon others, including young minds. That seems to me to be entirely laudable. Believe what you will, but don’t expect others to conform to your personal proclivities; and of course, you’d be entirely free to leave, perhaps to a society where antagonism is built-in due to the inability to allow one’s fellow human beings their own right to beliefs, or none.
If parents aren’t teaching their children a coherent set of beliefs, some other agency will: schools, pop culture or peer groups. It is naive to raise children value-free and expect them to behave wisely.
Try telling that to an Islamist.
no, values do need to be pushed onto young minds. they have to have a base set of traditions and values passed down from their ancestors to be questioned and examined and compared to whatever else is out there.
In the 1960s and 1970s Sweden enthusiastically and uncritically supported ‘liberation’ movements in Africa, demonstrating their commitment to human rights and progressivism. By donating huge sums to, for example, the likes of Robert Mugabe who gun-barrelled his way to power in Zimbabwe in 1980 after 15 years of horrific terror by his ‘freedom fighters, they knowingly supported widespread terrorism of the most depraved and egregious kind, and thereby facilitated the creation of horrendous régimes in Africa, such as Mugabe’s ‘free’ Zimbabwe, which is now into its fifth decade some of the worst human rights abuses in modern times.
I guess the Swedes are now experiencing some of what they helped to deliver in their arrogant support of African liberation movements when they didn’t have to face the consequences of their actions at the time. What goes round comes around, etc …!
I was quite suprised when Sweden, the moral superpower (dixit) decided to apply for membership in NATO. Are the rest of us good enough?
A rather longwinded way of saying some cultures are completely incompatible with one another.
Sweden let all these Muslims and other less educated people into their country knowing they may not fit-in or be useful citizens that can contribute instead of sucking off the welfare lines for a generation or two. So Sweden needs to solve this growing problem before their entire country, culture, and government gets overtaken, b another culture thats not going to be friendly. Most European countries are not meant for mass migration or to take on the worlds problems either, Sweden is starting to realize they might have have made a mistake and starting to take action. They need to stop all immigration from these countries and even deport those just sucking off the benefits and not working, who is going to hire workers that cannot speak Swedish English, or even know how to do the work positions Sweden has. Thart is why other countries like Denmark, Germany UK , France are seeing now. the eastern European countries were more shrewd about letting mass immigration onto their countries without giving it a lot of thought and pause.
“…the key word among advocates of multiculturalism became diversity, sweeping claims for the benefits of demographic and cultural diversity have prevailed without a speck of evidence ….” www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=Bi1K-0q5NOg Thomas Sowell on Multiculturalism…..
“In Sweden, religious freedom is conceived as a right to practise religion as a private matter.”
Good luck with all those muslim immigrants, Sweden.
When Zen Master Ikkyu was cold he burnt a wooden statue of the Buddha to keep himself warm, and has been praised for it ever since.
Fighting for free speech and free expression is not the same thing as joining the imperialist NATO bloc. I am disappointed that this writer conflates the two.
Most Muslim Arab countries are completely intolerant of other religions and cultures. Please correct me if I am wrong. Are there any tolerant multi culture Muslim societies? None come to mind
Mass immigration has been an absolute disaster for Europe.
Sweden prided itself – many still do – on being a “moral superpower” and international champion of “human rights.” Well, now enjoy the fruits your labour.
Oh well.
Sweden sold iron ore to the Nazi war machine until the end of the war. Sweden like Argentina made a fortune out of WW2. Without Swedish iron ore and steel products, the Nazis could have produced few tanks or railway lines.Sweden tended to give more support to the Nazis up to mid 1943 than the Allies, though it claimed to be neutral .
Sweden claimed to be a “Moral Super Power “.
Perhaps some sort of Karma is at work ?
Sweden tolerates Koran burning. What’s naive about that?
i just saw a video on twitter where a man was climbing up a ladder to go attack a family living in an apartment; it wasn’t protected by the patriarch who could have easily pushed him off the ladder to crash his arse to the ground but instead let him throw a brick through the glass door and slash at them with a knife. what alpha male would allow that? we are supposed to believe that these are the people descended from vikings??
Of course we should not tolerate intolerance – but isn’t that itself technically intolerance? I read the hypersensitivity of Islamists to criticism as inherent brittleness of Islamic culture. I am obliged to read burning the Qur’an as brittleness of Swedish moral culture. If that culture is well-founded and sure of itself, it need not fear alien intrusions, nor standing up against intolerant, atavistic or misogynistic cults, and should not need to burn, or even disrespect, anyone’s books.
To protest against burning the Koran, why don’t we wear T-shirts saying ‘I heart Stockholm’ , like people wore T-shirts with ‘I heart Manchester’ after the Islamic terror attack there?
Why should “we” protest against the burning of the Koran?
Why indeed!
a radical alliance between the state and the individual. The central purpose is precisely to liberate individuals from families, religious communities, charities and other institutions of civil society that limit individual freedom in the name of communal identity.
This is a wonderful ideal; liberate people from coercive groups. People are individuals and should be treated as such, not as members of different sub-groups of race, religion, community, etc.
Sweden made a big mistake, however, by admitting so many immigrants so quickly and without making it clear world-wide that when you move to Sweden you are expected to follow Swedish norms. Burning a Koran, flag, or any book is rude and mildly dangerous; it should garner a modest fine.