If alternatives exist some of us are willing to make changes to not support the worst of the worst when their behavior is revealed.
I used to like Musk, now I see Tesla and am disgusted. Maybe he was always like this but the personal line for me was the salutes. I’m sure many others have lines as well.
How do you know the political party of the story is "the worst of the worst"? You don't.
Have you considered that people are capable of reading and learning what the party supports? I assume most people here are capable of reading and can google things. Just spamming "you don't know what the party's policies are!" doesn't actually make it true, nor is it a defense for the party.
I don't need to consider their capacity for it. Of course they are capable of it, they just can't be bothered. Their echoing of "far-right", "worst of the worst" etc. sentiment of the original article shows it. Also, I don't vote for the party, nor do I give my money to Mullvad. I don't comment in order to defend them, I comment because I feel a need to call out the moralistic knee-jerk BS I see.
Please stop insisting that other people didn't do any research into the party based on absolutely no evidence. It doesn't take long to look into the party.
You're right, it doesn't take long. That's the sad part. The evidence is in them echoing just one single cherry-picked policy, in a misrepresented way, while conveniently ignoring all their other far more numerous left-leaning policies.
The good policies don't make up for the really bad one. In this context it doesn't matter if it's ""cherry-picked"".
Other than fuss about how to define left and right I haven't seen anything that qualifies as misrepresentation.
"Echoing" looks the same as "agreeeing" so that's hardly evidence of people failing to do enough research.
The "really bad one" is a policy calling for what in the Swedish debate is now termed "re-migration" of families who sustain themselves and their children, in their entirety, solely on crime and fraudulent extractions from the welfare system, while actively rejecting integration, education and employment. The misrepresentation is that the policy is strictly about non-white residents, all of them, on the sole merit of race and ethnicity.
[flagged]
There isn't any ethnic cleansing in their policies, neither direct nor indirect, and your veiled accusations are just disingenuous. You're not arguing in good faith at all.
Getting rid of everyone who is not white is in fact ethnic cleansing, whether you like it or not. This is what their "remigration" policy is, and what the party leader has said. This is all out in the open, and only takes a few minutes at most to read up on. It's very ironic that you keep insisting others haven't read up on the party when you clearly haven't.
You're willfully and in a most dishonest way misrepresenting their "re-migration" policy.
The party leader himself disagrees with you. Frantically spamming the thread with "you're a liar!!" doesn't actually change the facts.
> "They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish."