Migrant riots like this have become a regular even in once peaceful Sweden (Picture: drrichswire.com )
Last weekend (9 September,) Sweden because to vote against the seemingly relentless advance of globalism and multiculturalism when in its General Election Swedish voters in large numbers chose the Eurosceptic, nationalist party the Sweden Democrats over the legacy parties that have dominated Swedish politics throughout the modern era.
The Sweden Democrats did not garner enough votes to win a majority in the national assembly, in fact the Social Democrats remain the largest party, but with huge gains for the conservative moderates. As things stand, with probably months of political haggling ahead before a ruling coalition can be formed, the left coalition comprising the Social Democrats and the loony lefties of the Green and communist parties have 144 seats in the assembly with the centre right, The Moderates, Centre Party, Christian Democrats and Liberals on 143. And then there are the 70 Sweden Democrats who promise to drive a hard bargain with anyone asking for their support and to block legislation if they are shut out of government.
This will create a situation similar to that in Germany since the inconclusive election of 2017, when as a result of Angela Merkel’s open doors immigration policy and the social unrest caused by the influx of illiterate, uneducated immigrants, Merkel clings to power but is held to ransom on controversial issues by a coalition party on whose support her fragile government depends. Sweden and Germany reflect a trend that can be observed around the world.
What the Swedish result does tell us, although it’s hardly news, is that globalism and the cults of multiculturalism and diversity are in trouble. The Brexit vote and then Trump’s shock victory in the US election, both in 2016, were the first indicators that something big was happening. Then in 2017 the aforementioned election in Germany, the strong showing of nationalist party Front National in France, where only an unholy alliance of socialist and conservatives and a massive smear campaign dishonestly making nationalism synonymous with Naziism kept them out of power, added to the evidence that a big change in social attitudes was under way.
How can anyone defend nationalism when Hitler was a nationalist? you might well ask. Many people have asked me that before. Well yes, Hitler was a nationalist but also a globalist, he planned that Naziism would dominate the world. Chairman Mao, whose purges murdered far more people than Hitler’s Holocaust was a nationalist, so was Pol Pot and a lot more nasty tyrants. But while being aware of that we must remember another famous nationalist was Mohandas K Gandhi, (his name wasn’t Mahatma, that’s an honorific meaning great soul,) and Guiseppi Garibaldi, who united Italy’s city states, prinicipalities and duchies into a modern nation state in the second half of the nineteenth century. Eammon de Valera, Michael Collins and other leaders of the Irish independence movement were nationalists, as was Charles de Gaulle who led the French Resistance in World War 2. Lech Walensa is another notable nationalist, who as leader of the Solidarnosc (Solidarity,) movement in Poland led to that nation throwing off Soviet Union dominance and regaining full independence, and was a major factor in the break up of The Soviet Union.
Nationalism is not a political position of left or right, it is simply a belief in the sovereignty of independent nations and their right to manage political and economic affairs within their borders.
The resurgence of nationalism continues, and ever the arrogrant, reality denying bureaucrats of the EU are starting to take notice. Poland, Austria, Hungary, The Czech Republic and Slovakia have already voted to challenge the supremacy of the EU over national sovereignty, when Italy did it earlier this year the push by the ruling bureaucrats to politically unify Europe in a federal superstate was all but dead. Sweden’s rejection of globalist utopianism is, however, in a different league. This is the country that has for a century held out as an exemplar of everything that is right with social democracy and globalization. Swedes are obsessively politically correct, tolerant, so liberal that even allow leftist nutters to openly campaign for the legalisation of paedophilia and necrophilia; young Swedish women are told if they haven’t had sex with a male member of the dark skinned races it is because they are racist. How is it possible that in the most indoctrinated country in the world another “far right” party gain so much support?
(It is of course the practice of mainstream media everywhere to dub any political group which supports controlled immigration and opposes globalism as ‘far right, although it is in reality a smear tactic to instil compliance with leftist ideology into people condition to believe being called ‘racist’ is the worst of crimes.
These election results from Sweden and elsewhere are, obviously, confusing for the mainstream. UK’s leftist Guardian newspaper declared, Real Story of Sweden’s Election Is Not About March of the Far Right, but the continuing decline of the major parties of government, the fragmentation of national votes and the rise of a number of smaller parties (which is at least partly true. Meanwhile, Politico Europe tells us, Why Sweden’s Election Was All About the Rise of the Far Right. The only thing any of them really know is that they despise the “far right,” although they have all lost sight of the definitions of left and right. In fact none of these new nationalist parties are ‘far right’ in the accepted sense, most are more democratic than their leftist opponents and are committed to retaining socialised health care, welfare for the needy and low paid, adequate state pensions and good quality care (where needed,) for the elderly and taxpayer subsidised services such as transport.
Even in the more traditional sense, left usually relates to individual liberty, tolerance and values such as free speech and democratic rule, while right refer to authoritarianism. Yet, as I’m sure many readers will have observed, it is now those who style themselves ‘left’ who show intolerance of differing opinions, try to ban certain political views for being represented in public debate and shout down speakers who oppose their views.
Such politics, from either right or left, are completely unhelpful and only serve to harden entrenched opinions. The mainstream in media and politics has walled off all discourse into neat little boxes, progressive and ‘far right.’ The reason a far simpler explanation can’t be put forward, one that encompasses all these entrenching passions, is the corrupt, steaming pile of intellectual excrement called Economics.
Sweden is a Socialist Utopia of liberal values and a paradise of collectivist economic prosperity, we are told, an industrial powerhouse with a social conscience. Right now, we are asked to believe, The European Union’s economy is booming thanks to Central bank policies based on printing Euros and encouraging national governments to hand them out in welfare benefits. The whole thing is a economic miracle.
Except, it’s not. Not really. Over the past decade, since the financial crisis of 2008, EU population has been growing rapidly due to immigration, while the overall EU economy has been stagnant. The statistical illusion of growth has been created by there being more Euros in circulation in an economy with no more real wealth. Thus each Euro is in real terms worth less. Europe’s so called economic boom has been powered by the devaluation of citizens’ assets, savings and pension funds.
This same pattern all over the world. Economists would have you believe macro history in Europe began with the ECB’s Negative Interest Rate Program (NIRP) in 2014, when savers and investors in ECB funds had to PAY THE BANK for gambling with their money; its reckless Quantitative Easing (QE) in 2015 when the ECB loaned money to banks at zero interest to ‘encourage capital investment’, but the public were not told the banks effectively loaned it staight back to governments (at 3 per cent or higher) by buying the bonds debtor nations must sell to fund their deficit. Economic news since then has been presented as positive, and in 2017 they was positive than usual. This gives a false picture of economic progress because it omits the wider context of income and expenditure accounts that instead declare how each economy, save a few like Germany, has actually shrunk in real terms.
News like this is not patatable to most people, the majority see themselves neither as left nor right. They are somewhere in between, having little interest in ideology, and being mainly concerned with being reasonably affluent and living in a convivial environment (i.e. they are not keen on immigrant ghettos and no go zones springing up in their home towns. It’s only when the establishment doesn’t, or can’t, offer plausible, sensible solutions to the mundane concerns of the mass of people in the middle that extremes however distasteful can flourish. Americans, Swedes, Italians, Germans, Brits or Brazilians, know that meaningful change is needed, the elites are totally out of touch with the realities of life for those in the centre of politics and are either unable or unwilling (or more probably both,) to implement changes that would enable those disenchanted voters to engage once again with the political system. The necessary change must be forced on the idologically driven political establishments of “both” sides.
If the status quo won’t even admit there is a problem, the problem is insurmountable by usual means.
Below is Sweden’s actual economic performance, by a more accurate measure than GDP: it appears the paragon of global manufacturing stability is not faring any better than Europe’s other stagnating industrial nations:
Time and again we see this same pattern all over the world. Economists will have you believe macro history in Europe began with the ECB’s NIRP in 2014, or its QE in 2015. Things are mostly positive since, and in 2017 they were more positive than usual. This is a false sense of economic progress because it omits the wider context that instead declares how each economy, except for a few like Germany, has actually shrunk.
Sweden Dystopia Omnibus