Spot the odd one out:
> Some of its key issues include lowered wages for politicians, ending the tax payer funding of various sculptures, monuments and art, large scale remigration, a stricter immigration policy, and free dental care.
Spot the odd one out:
> Some of its key issues include lowered wages for politicians, ending the tax payer funding of various sculptures, monuments and art, large scale remigration, a stricter immigration policy, and free dental care.
To understand why there might be a desire to limit spending on art;
There was a recent case where city of Malmo was building a hospital; during the building of the hospital it was decided that a splice of the oldest tree in the world would be installed.
A very expensive life-support system was developed and an enormous amount of money paid for the splice. (not including the life support system, which was also an inordinate amount).
The tree didn't take, and needs to be replaced.
It's called "Spruce Time": https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/skane/region-skane-har-lag...
For context, from wiki:
> Remigration is a far-right concept referring to ethnic cleansing via mass deportation of non-white minority populations [...] to their place of racial ancestry
[flagged]
> The majority of people to be remigrated if the party succeeds are not even citizens.
And what of the ones who are citizens?
[flagged]
Trivia: there is a country in America where people can be stripped of their nationality for "treason", which amounts to go agaisnt the government. This means people can be left without civil rights, and can't enter the country if they were abroad.
All born inside the country, born from both national parents or naturalized are elegible. This year they declared acquiring the nationality of another country also made you elegible to be barren from their native country.
Nicaragua is really something weird, but all humans are capable of dehumanizing other people.
Why only the naturalized ones?
Stripping of naturalization in the US is usually associated with immigration fraud.
Terrorist/Nazi Concentration Camp Guard lies on immigration forms, decades later is found out and gets the boot
> The majority of people to be remigrated if the party succeeds are not even citizens
The fact that people can say this without immediately noticing the problem is absolutely mind-blowing.
They know the problem. Never believe, even for a minute, that right wingers are unaware of the depravity of the things they say. They just want to pretend that it’s not a problem. And indeed you can see in their reply - they love the idea of a two tiered society where some people can be stripped of citizenship and rights arbitrarily.
Because those people never should have received citizenship to begin with. The asylum system have been abused to no end. To get to Sweden you have to pass trough many many stable countries in which there is no war. Beggars can't be choosers, so if they are choosers and want the good stuff - they are not real beggars.
Look how the Gulf states deal with citizenship and they manage to control much bigger immigrant relative to the native populations.
The only real refugees in Europe are Ukrainians.
> Look how the Gulf states deal with citizenship and they manage to control much bigger immigrant relative to the native populations.
The gulf states, really? Why am I not surprised that you point to one of the largest modern day slave states as an example. I will not grant you the assumption of ignorance. For anyone else following this conversation, ReptileMan here is pointing to this system - https://www.humanrightsresearch.org/post/modern-day-slavery-... - one widely recognized as slavery - as an example of a good way to control large immigrant populations.
If the gulf states are your north star, then you are straightforwardly advocating for a return of systemic wage theft, indentured servitude and slavery, all under threat of execution.
Which of those do you most prefer?
Would you also like an ethnic caste system, or should it be based solely on national origin, or a combination?
Or perhaps the original European model, where only non-christians may be enslaved?
[dead]
[flagged]
The immigrants they are specifically looking to remove are middle eastern and african. they certainly dont have canadians in mind when coming up with these policies.
the west is incredibly extractive of the rest of the world and the “mass migration” from the rest of the world is a result of that. want people to go back home? stop bombing their countries. stop stealing their resources. stop abducting and assassinating their leaders. stop propping up governments that sell out the country for a bag of cash with dollar signs on the side.
I'm open to this argument. How much bombing and assassinating is Sweden actually doing?
i dont think it’s that useful to think about it in terms of individual countries. like its a nice rhetorical trick to go “look at how innocent sweden is”, ignoring the fact they are indeed a nato member, but they are part of the greater western capitalist bloc aka “global north” that benefits from these actions. we suppress wages in the rest of the world to keep manufacturing cheap (and then wonder why there are no factory jobs anymore…), we install leaders who sell our companies natural resources for pennies on the dollar, we control the flow of global trade by mandating that goods need to trade in our currencies.
like let me put it to you this way - you buy a shirt made in vietnam. how much would that cost if it was made in sweden? well why shouldnt that money go to vietnam if it was rightly made there?
It's not trick. We weren't before invoking collective responsibility. But if now we are, fine. (Leave it alone that Sweden has been in NATO for, what, 18 months? ) Two follow-up questions, then:
1. Does the "east" have the same responsibility, or should the "west" bear it all?
2. Are Middle Eastern and African countries that much more peaceful than western countries? If so, then I suppose you are right. If not, should we at least consider that as sort of an offset to the responsibility?
As far as the shirt made in Vietnam goes: I think that the manufacturer in Vietnam is getting paid for it. Am I wrong?
Does Sweden have a single Canadian there under 'asylum' policies?
Yeah, sure, people probably wouldn't care if they were Canadian, because they wouldn't be committing crimes at far higher rates, wouldn't be pushing for more religious rule, and the majority wouldn't be on welfare. That's not what's happening though.
As for your second paragraph - do you really think the governments of the countries these people are coming from are any better? Should every US citizen that wants be able to immigrate to Afghanistan and take a good portion of their GDP as welfare? What about Japan? Should US and Chinese citizens be able to move there if they want and relatively quickly become the majority, right? They need the population, no?
I certainly don't agree with a lot of our Middle East policies, but that doesn't mean European governments should throw open their doors to mass migration. Governments are supposed to exist to help their own citizens. Sometimes that means bombing someone. Sometimes that's the right thing to do, sometimes it's not, but it's pretty damned clear mass migration from third world countries isn't helping their citizens.
half or more of the governments are there because we put them there or they are the result of some mess we made.
Amazing comment.
Accepting for a minute that the comment on economic extraction is true (it isn’t), you are admitting that mass migration from low-trust/dysfunctional societies is in fact a deserved punishment for “the West”. I wish more people spoke with this clarity when it comes to immigration debates, because it cuts through all the noise about needing lots of different cuisine options.
[flagged]
To be fair arguably there is no other country in the world which benefited as much economically from its interactions with Nazi Germany and face so little consequences for it.
Ah grokipedia, the fountain of unbiased knowledge.
It’s pretty radicle to remove people who have lived in your country for generations.
[flagged]
> Which one is less biased?
Wikipedia > Slopipedia.
xAI's Grokipedia is 100% more biased, given who controls it and its known tendency to manipulate results. Finally, there are lots of cases where it completely fails. And I didn't even get to the "porn" stuff. Hell, even it's creator says it's trash.
Following your lead, I haven’t researched Örebro’s proposed policies. But I would find it surprising if “large scale remigration” really was scoped to an everyman’s definition of “few years”. I would expect that their targets for “large scale” exceed three or four years’ worth of immigration.
Even if you scope it out to "everyone that's not a citizen or has the equivalent of a green card," is that so evil? If a country accepts immigrants they should be able to send them back at will unless they become citizens. That shouldn't be controversial. You can argue if it's a good or bad policy, of course, but it's not ethically wrong to do so. Yes, they'll be in more danger and have worse lives when they go back to wherever they came from, but again - a country should exist to serve its citizens, not the entire world. It's not sustainable.
> large scale remigration
which is literally kicking out people who don't look or sounds like me, out of the country.
Whenever that has happened it has been rather bad for most parties.
What about kicking people out who don’t believe in equal rights for women?
Because, that is pretty core to the Swedish cultural identity.
[flagged]
Immigration sounds good for Sweden then, because they have a fertility rate of 1.42, well below replacement.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/25/sweden-pm-ivf-...
Define "good." The people immigrating aren't suddenly going to behave like Swedes - we've seen that. Will the geographic entity that is Sweden maintain or grow the population? Sure. Will it still be Sweden? No. If the majority of people are from, say, the middle east, it'll be run like a country there. I don't think that'll be good for the existing Swedes.
If you could somehow pick the best and brightest from those regions to immigrate - sure, great, probably good for your country. Existing countries are the way they are because of their people. When you shift your demographics to such a degree, your country will also become that. I don't know why this is such a hard concept for people to grasp. It's the same base concept that explains why the US policy in the middle east has failed so badly over decades. The people there largely don't want US-style democracy. Some do, sure, but the majority either don't care or like the system they have.
> The people immigrating aren't suddenly going to behave like Swedes
As somebody from a country near Sweden, I sure as hell hope not.
What will the country become?
Immigration is not a solution to low fertility. It might be a solution to labor being expensive, particularly if you’re a capitalist, but it doesn’t solve the problem of low fertility among a native population.
Robots are also advancing fast. They have all the upsides and none of the downsides of mass migration.
[flagged]
> "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."
- Markus Allard
Yes they are
We want everyone here to be exactly like us, but we do recognize we have bad teeth.
[flagged]
Split from: Left Party
So basically the left but with a stricter view on immigration?
I think mass deportation of people with wrong skin color goes beyond "stricter view on immigration"
>large scale remigration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remigration
It's not based on skin color though, its migration status.
Even people of the same complexion can be a net negative to the country as they feel the majority of recent immigrants are.
they probably forget all those other promises once they get to power
Source that every single left wing party in the 90s wanted to get rid of every single person of a non-white background?
[flagged]
Cool, what about the ethnic cleansing part? Is your family in favor of getting rid of every non-white person as well? That's what this party supports.
[flagged]
>In a podcast segment about immigration and deportations Allard stated his opinion and said that "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." [54]
from the wikipedia page
What? That's what the party is in favor of, and the thing you said every single left wing party from the 90s supported. Why can't you back up what you say? Is it because the Democratic Party did not support ethnic cleansing in the 90s?
[flagged]
[flagged]
Your anecdote is not data and your family's views are not representative of left wing political positions.
That's fine, I was offering my opinion. For some reason people on HN want a double blind study that's been re-run 300 times since the 60s and stamped by the president for proof of anything these days.