And stupid.
Nope, that is why i’m waiting to see how RaleighRally thinks they are related.
Though I’ve seen conservative pieces before, like this one, which suggest that cultural theory (from a marxist tradition) is responsible for underminding/questioning our shared christian values, resulting in multiculturalism, which has led to the currect “clash of civilizations” (which we can only win by strenghtening our traditional values)
Your Swedish hometown? Are you Swedish and/or are you still living in Sweden at the moment?
Having a fairly good and fairly updated knowledge of contemporary swedish society I can vouch for the following:
-
Marxism - cultural or economic - is nothing more than an invisible fringe in contemporary sweden. There are no marxist political parties in the parliament and there are no marxist policies in place. Marxism is no more a factor in Swedish public life than it is in U.S. public life. You should be a bit more concerned really about confusing people by disseminating bad information on the internet.
-
I suspect that most Swedes would consider that FoxNews piece extremely misleading (yeah big surprise, I know). From my (limited) knowledge there are some problems in Rosengard in Malmo - which is from what I understand indeed (in a swedish context) an extremely poor neighbourhood with lots of immigrants. But Malmo in general is a nice enough city. The videos linked here are basically a “best-of” of the worst things that ever went down in arguably the poorest & worst neighborhood in the whole of Sweden.
What Sweden does have, though, is a small - but vocal - extreme right / racist movement that - while being pretty much marginalised and invisible in mainstream swedish society - are extremely active and visible on the internet.
Maybe that’s how you got slightly confused there RaleighRally?
[hijack]
You know, going by Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” theory – see this map – a world state, with an elected parliament, could actually work, at least in the sense that no one civilization would be numerous enough to predominate over the others – the world government would not be a Western Empire, nor a Chinese Empire, nor a Muslim Empire, etc.; and getting anything done in parliament would require cross-civilizational alliances. See James Madison, in The Federalist No. 10, about the concept of a big republic as a solution to the problem of a republic being dominated by a “faction” (make the republic big and diverse enough, and no faction can be big enough to take over the whole).
[/hijack]
Actually, open borders and the generous welfare state are incompatible. Milton Friedman pointed this out. In practice it isn’t working for Sweden either.
You need to ensure the migrants are skilled and won’t be welfare dependent otherwise the system will collapse.
Thank you for pointing this out. Now I would really like the American liberals (who adore Sweden) to make a comment about open borders and generous welfare state. Will your political correctness (ie cultural marxism) which you imposed on Sweden in the sixties ruin the Nordic model forever?
So cultural marxism is the new term for political correctness? When did this happen?
:dubious: What, American liberals conquered Sweden in the 60s and imposed their rules on it?
And I’d think we’d all like it if you explained what you meant by “cultural Marxism” in your own words. Not by posting Youtube links.
-
Sweden does not have “open” borders and AFAIK never has.
-
In general, an ageing population is a more credible threat to the welfare state than immigration. In fact, increasing immigration is a plausible solution to the problem of an increasing dependency ratio.
The blog post you linked to is highly suspect. I don’t particularly enjoy doing your homework for you, so I’ll just show you the first case of inaccuracy so we’ve established it as an unreliable source:
[QUOTE=Super-Economy Blog]
The article exaggerates the problems by focusing on Rosengård, the worst (major) ghetto in Sweden. Yes, in Rosengård 80% of adult don’t work, but for Sweden as a whole the figure for non-western immigrants is about 50%.
[/QUOTE]
- The NYTimes article - while being itself on it’s face being pretty sloppy reporting - claims that unemployment in some apartment blocks in Rosengard is at 80 percent, not in the neighborhood as a whole.
That’s bad for your blogger, that he can’t be bothered to read for comprehension. Worse though:
- “[F]or Sweden as a whole the figure for non-western immigrants is about 50%”.
Says who? Him?
In fact, going by this OECD report (Table 4), we had unemployment rates (percent) for immigrants in Sweden in 2003 at:
North Africa & Middle East 22.2
Latin America 10.5
Sub-Saharan Africa 22.6
East/South/Southeast Asia 13.1
Central and Eastern Europe 12.9
North America/Oceania/Japan 8.0
European Economic Area and
Switzerland 5.9
Native-born 4.8
That’s not even close to 50%.
Our dear blogger has thus been shown to be talking out of his candy -ss. Your willingness to vouch for his credibility should be a bit of an embarrassment for you really Chen019.
-
Are you a Swedish citizen?
-
Political Correctness is originally an american concept, and it has nothing to do with marxism (of any form).
-
Are you willing to retract and apologize for your fraudulent statements about “cultural marxism” being an influence on Swedish immigration policy now that they have been pointed out as inaccurate? If not, will you supply cites supporting your claims? Hint: your cite should contain the words “cultural” and “marxism” in close proximity to each other.
The only one in this thread who seems to actually know anything about “cultural Marxism” is Saitou, and his description of it (post #17) bears no resemblance to “political correctness.”
Who imposed what on whom now?
Come to think of it, “political correctness” doesn’t have much to do with immigration policy either, whether Swedish or American.
I would love to hear your own arguments, and not just a link to a video.
There are valid arguments against the theory of the frankfurt school and cultural theory but that video doesn’t contain any. (the Martin Jay interview is decent enough)
The description in that video of the Jewish scholars fleeing Nazi Germany as: “They shifted focus from destroying german society and culture to attacking the society and culture of their new place of refuge” made me raise an eyebrow.
And to dismiss their theories as: “Unremitting destructive criticism of every institution of western society wishing to bring that system down” Is just woefully ignorant.
However I did enjoy the scorn with which the host says “black studies, women studies and gay studies.”
Personally, I’m willing to blame Roland Barthes for anything and everything, including sunspots.
Made by the “Free Congress Foundation” –
SourceWatch is your friend.
Some more factoids re Swedish immigration policy:
-
The outlines of current Swedish policy of granting asylum to refugees was put in place in 1950. The historical context was WWII and specifically the adoption of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the UN General Assembly in 1948. Article 14 of the Declaration grants the right to seek and enjoy asylum from persecution.
-
The Declaration was drafted by canadian John Peters Humphrey, prepared by the Commission on Human Rights which was chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt and adopted by 48 votes against 0. The United States, the United Kingdom and in fact all capitalist democracies voted in favor. All Soviet Bloc (that is, marxist-leninist) nations abstained from voting.
In other words, it should be painfully clear to anyone but the terminally confused that present day Swedish immigration policy sprung from western/liberal tradition and had nothing to do with marxism whatsoever.
- In 2010 humanitarian immigration to sweden (in accordance with the Declaration on Human Rights) made up 32% of total immigration (refugees 12% and family reunification 20%), the rest being labor immigration and intra EU immigration. Those latter two of course both being neoliberal (or from an american POW “libertarian”) economic policies, accounting for 68% of present day Swedish immigration.
in short, the answer is yes. As many posters in this here thread clearly attest, cultural Marxism not just messes up the economy but it literally turns people into moonbat lunatics, hence causing a deep division in the nation between the normal people and the brainwashed moonbats. Which is a division of much greater long term significance than any Swede vs “refugee” division. Maybe lots of those “refugees” will get deported tomorrow or else leave by themselves, but the moonbats will still be “here”, all over the Western world.
That’s just lovely, Shirley. What are the rules about voicing suspicions of trolling in Great Debates again?
code_grey, I’m giving you a warning for personal insults. If you want to call other posters silly names like “moonbat,” do it in the Pit.