Are you an undecided voter?

[Minstrel]

I used "evolution" where I should have used "progression". Super duper; you're the big winner.

Then you shouldn't have talked about gene pools and pretended to have a scientific basis for deeming Swedes "inferior." This has turned out to be you agreeing that Swedes aren't inferior, you simply prefer the US system. Via some contrived attempt at psuedo-science.

 

[maxiep]

I'm quite certain this is a complete lie. If you have a link, I'd be happy to apologize.

You don't have to apologize for not believing me, but I know it to be true. If you believe I'm lying, I'll just have to live with your disappointment. The series of articles was written in 1999.

But Swedish papers are uniformly pro-immigration and heavily so. Sweden, as a nation, is heavily pro-immigration. Sweden ranks number 3 in the world in allowing new citizenships to immigrants, per capita. The US is #8.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/imm_new_cit_percap-immigration-new-citizenships-per-capita

The idea that Sweden is racist is a pure lie.

Sweden is 9MM people. The US is 320MM. I could care less about per-capita. Oh, and where do they settle all those refugees they allow in their country? Kiruna, Lulea and Umea are the urban hotspots. Mostly they're settlements in rural areas around and above the Arctic circle.

My point is that it is easy to say you're not racist when you have no diversity. It's why Portland is less racist than a town like Chicago. That being said, I've seen some really hateful things said about Turks and Somalis by Swedes and there is a real problem in the country with hooligans beating up minorities. Generally it happens when they get drunk; Swedes have a tendency to become agressive and violent when they drink too much.

Norway was invaded by sea.

Partially true. The Swedes were threatened with invasion if they didn't open their rail lines to the Nazis and they complied. Troops were shipped from Malmo. Read your history. I'm not surprised you wouldn't have heard about it much living in Sweden; their national shame isn't taught in their schools.

 

[Minstrel]

You don't have to apologize for not believing me, but I know it to be true. If you believe I'm lying, I'll just have to live with your disappointment. The series of articles was written in 1999.

Well, I know Swedish papers and they are explicitly pro-immigration. My only thought at reconciling this is that you read this in a Danish paper, not a Swedish paper. Denmark is notoriously anti-immigration. Sweden is the opposite.It is world-reknown for welcoming immigration, offering residency and citizenship and full rights

Sweden is 9MM people. The US is 320MM. I could care less about per-capita.

Which makes no sense at all. Sweden is the size of California. Unless they allow in as many immigrants as the entire US, a far more vast land mass, they are racist and anti-immigration? Absurd. For their size, they are one of the best nations for allowing immigration and for extending citizenship and rights to those immigrants.

That being said, I've seen some really hateful things said about Turks and Somalis by Swedes

Anecdotes are easy to compile in any nation. The national attitude towards diversity is very positive.

Partially true. The Swedes were threatened with invasion if they didn't open their rail lines to the Nazis and they complied. Troops were shipped from Malmo. Read your history. I'm not surprised you wouldn't have heard about it much living in Sweden; their national shame isn't taught in their schools.

Actually, they do teach that. And, in fact, it is a well-known thing and it is a national shame. Much as slavery is a national shame to the US (for many, anyway...others, not so much). But you said Sweden opened railways to the Nazis to facilitate the invasion of Norway. That's wrong. Sweden only opened its railways to the Nazis after the occuption of Norway. This is not something Swedes hide in their public education and it is something that they are embarrassed about. What it's not is something that makes Sweden inferior as a people. The US can offer up the extermination of the Native Americans or slavery. The US can offer up US companies doing business with the Nazis.

 

[maxiep]

Then you shouldn't have talked about gene pools and pretended to have a scientific basis for deeming Swedes "inferior." This has turned out to be you agreeing that Swedes aren't inferior, you simply prefer the US system. Via some contrived attempt at psuedo-science.

Sweet. You're the man.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

Maxiep, I'm going to let you clarify before I jump to an extreme conclusion. I'm used to conservatives railing against different cultures. So, it's the culture you're railing against; right? You're not saying that people born in Sweden are automatically (by evolution... somehow) inferior than people born in America; right?

 

[el_Diablo]

First, we're not nearly as racist as the Swedes. It's easy to pretend you're not racist when you're as homogenous as the Swedes. I remember a week-long expose in Dagens Nyheter talking about the "Death of Sweden" because Stockholm had passed 10% non-Swedes. Mind you, 70% of that figure was comprised of Norse, Danes, Ikes and Finns.

that 10% number was probably already passed in the 60s/70s when all the unemployed finns moved to sweden to enjoy systembolaget's services instead of alko's. well they did probably work a bit too.. (are the ikes icelanders?)

historically all the nordic countries are extremely homogenic, but these days sweden takes in a lot of refugees. which obviously results in some cultural/racial clashes. prejudices exist more easily in homogenic societies - it's just not possible that there is no racism in a country where everyone has looked similar for thousands of years before the last few decades.

according to migrationinformation.org , there are 1 million people in sweden that were born in a different country. that's a huge number. of which 300K are from northern europe. which leaves 700K immigrants from countries that have a differing gene pool..

I'd say sweden is pretty diverse these days considering the circumstances.

Second, we believe in making the world freer.

is this about making the other nations do what the american government wants or something else?

The Swedes believe in making their lives better. How did the Nazis invade Norway? They took the train across Sweden. Who sold the Nazis war materiel? The real Aryans.

yeah, and finland was allied with the nazis. because soviet union wanted to invade the country. with whom USA was allied. when the world powers fight, smaller countries do what they must.

Third, we act. Swedes observe and complain.

that's only because the finns have always fought their fights. when russia annexed finland swedes quit trying to be a world power.. and later finland acted as a buffer (against you know whom) for those softies..

though why should they "act"? what exactly would you have them do? oust dictators around the world? help the oppressed? who did prop up that pinochet guy again, by the way?

Sweden is 9MM people. The US is 320MM. I could care less about per-capita. Oh, and where do they settle all those refugees they allow in their country? Kiruna, Lulea and Umea are the urban hotspots. Mostly they're settlements in rural areas around and above the Arctic circle.

the spots where the refugees are settled are only for the time being until they are granted asylum and not turned away for being bogus refugees. after they have settled in, are we to understand they aren't allowed to move within the country?

why is it that 27% of the population of the city of malmö (the 3rd biggest and probably the best situated city geographically) is from abroad? and they are not all danes, finns or germans (12k out of 75k).

My point is that it is easy to say you're not racist when you have no diversity. It's why Portland is less racist than a town like Chicago. That being said, I've seen some really hateful things said about Turks and Somalis by Swedes and there is a real problem in the country with hooligans beating up minorities. Generally it happens when they get drunk; Swedes have a tendency to become agressive and violent when they drink too much.

no american has ever said anything hateful race-related stuff. and no representatives of minorities have been ever been beaten in the us.

And as for being racist, I can't speak for Sweden directly, but I lived in Norrebro "The Bronx" section of Copenhagen which almost entirely consists of immigrants (The Hells Angels HQ was across the street). As long as you speak English or a Scandinavian (except the Finns, those fuckers can go to Russia) language, they're okay with you.

finland is not a part of scandinavia though and finnish is not a germanic language like the scandinavian ones. and without the russians finland probably wouldn't even be independent today. I like to be called a fucker though. that's better than the alternative at least..

Well, I know Swedish papers and they are explicitly pro-immigration. My only thought at reconciling this is that you read this in a Danish paper, not a Swedish paper. Denmark is notoriously anti-immigration. Sweden is the opposite.It is world-reknown for welcoming immigration, offering residency and citizenship and full rights

dagens nyheter definitely is a swedish paper. I'm interested in the article but can't find any links..

 

[Minstrel]

dagens nyheter definitely is a swedish paper. I'm interested in the article but can't find any links..

I know it is. I meant, perhaps he read it in a Danish paper and misremembered the source. Because that doesn't sound remotely like something Dagens Nyheter would write.

 

[maxiep]

Maxiep, I'm going to let you clarify before I jump to an extreme conclusion. I'm used to conservatives railing against different cultures. So, it's the culture you're railing against; right? You're not saying that people born in Sweden are automatically (by evolution... somehow) inferior than people born in America; right?

First, I'm not a conservative. Second, I lived in Sweden and understand the culture well. If you don't like my opinion, you don't have to share it.

However, my point is that I believe striving to live a life of lagom knowing that you'll never leave the womb--when you leave your parents house the government takes their place--is ultimately destructive. There's something to be said for having to achieve something on your own. My point about evolution has to do more with a limited, homogenous gene pool vs. a growing, dynamic one.

 

[maxiep]

I know it is. I meant, perhaps he read it in a Danish paper and misremembered the source. Because that doesn't sound remotely like something Dagens Nyheter would write.

Ah the old "argument from authority" tactic. One of my faves.

 

[Minstrel]

Ah the old "argument from authority" tactic. One of my faves.

That wasn't an argument from authority. I wasn't making an argument there at all; I was simply offering a possibility since my perception is that you also lived in Denmark (I thought you mentioned that once, though I could of course be mistaken on that).

I am quite sure Dagens Nyheter didn't write such a thing, because they are strongly pro-immigration, just like basically every other paper in Sweden. That's not an argument, that's a belief of mine.

The one Swedish political party that is anti-immigration (Sverigedemokraterna) has never received the 4% of votes needed for a single seat in parliament. So yes, I am very confident in my belief that Sweden is very pro-immigration.

 

[maxiep]

That wasn't an argument from authority. I wasn't making an argument there at all; I was simply offering a possibility since my perception is that you also lived in Denmark (I thought you mentioned that once, though I could of course be mistaken on that).

I am quite sure Dagens Nyheter didn't write such a thing, because they are strongly pro-immigration, just like basically every other paper in Sweden. That's not an argument, that's a belief of mine.

The one Swedish political party that is anti-immigration (Sverigedemokraterna) has never received the 4% of votes needed for a single seat in parliament. So yes, I am very confident in my belief that Sweden is very pro-immigration.

Then you have no idea what the "argument from authority" tactic is. You don't believe it, but that doesn't make your opinion true. I held the paper in my hands on the T-bana. I remember discussing it with my friends, because it wasn't just one article--it was a series of articles. But of course, you being "quite sure" trumps all.

Ridiculous.

 

[Minstrel]

Then you have no idea what the "argument from authority" tactic is. You don't believe it, but that doesn't make your opinion true.

Now you're just embarrassing yourself. An appeal to/argument from authority means inferring a truth value because someone who is an expert (or impressive in some way) believes it.

I didn't appeal to any authority. Nor did I claim a truth value. I simply said that I don't believe you. That doesn't make it true, it just means I don't accept your claim, because it is completely at odds with all my experiences with that specific newspaper. Other people can choose whether they accept your claim as they wish.

 

[maxiep]

Now you're just embarrassing yourself. An appeal to/argument from authority means inferring a truth value because someone who is an expert (or impressive in some way) believes it.

I didn't appeal to any authority. Nor did I claim a truth value. I simply said that I don't believe you. That doesn't make it true, it just means I don't accept your claim, because it is completely at odds with all my experiences with that specific newspaper. Other people can choose whether they accept your claim as they wish.

Oh, dear. Once again, trying to claim the high ground by saying "now you're just embarrassing yourself". I could say plenty of things about your tactics, but I'll leave the personal attacks to you. You called me a liar. I told you I held the paper in my hands. You claim to have some sort of higher understanding about Dagens Nyheter, but offer no proof. If you don't believe me, leave it at that. Instead, you seek to speak for others.

We can disagree on opinion, we cannot disagree on the facts. You should stop pretending you represent some kind of arbitor and realize it's just your opinion.

Like I said, ridiculous.

 

[Minstrel]

Oh, dear. Once again, trying to claim the high ground by saying "now you're just embarrassing yourself".

Sort of like you did here:

Then you have no idea what the "argument from authority" tactic is.

You know, maxiep, for someone who's perfectly willing to be condescending, you're awfully unhappy about people being condescending to you. What was that phrase you used with someone else..."If you can't stand the heat..."?

You claim to have some sort of higher understanding about Dagens Nyheter

No, I didn't. I simply said that it doesn't sound to me remotely like something Dagens Nyheter would say.

If you don't believe me, leave it at that.

If you bothered to read my last post, I pointed out that that is precisely what I did. I said I didn't believe you, nothing more.

Instead, you seek to speak for others.

Where?

You should stop pretending you represent some kind of arbitor and realize it's just your opinion.

You should stop pretending that I said my opinion was anything but my opinion.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

First, I'm not a conservative. Second, I lived in Sweden and understand the culture well. If you don't like my opinion, you don't have to share it.

However, my point is that I believe striving to live a life of lagom knowing that you'll never leave the womb--when you leave your parents house the government takes their place--is ultimately destructive. There's something to be said for having to achieve something on your own. My point about evolution has to do more with a limited, homogenous gene pool vs. a growing, dynamic one.

I never said you didn't understand the culture, I said you were railing against it. Which you quite obviously are. All I'm seeking to do is to figure out if it's just the culture you're railing against.

So let's cut the bullshit.

So what if the Swedes are homogenous? Does that make us better than them? If a Swede were born in Sweden but not a day later then unwittingly thrust into the Great and Superior American Culture, would it not be equal to you or I?

 

[MickZagger]

I'm not joking. I used to live in Sweden. Since you believe me not to be intelligent on this subject, I would ask you tell me why I'm wrong.

Is there a place you haven't lived?

 

[MARIS61]

I'm quite certain this is a complete lie. If you have a link, I'd be happy to apologize. But Swedish papers are uniformly pro-immigration and heavily so. Sweden, as a nation, is heavily pro-immigration. Sweden ranks number 3 in the world in allowing new citizenships to immigrants, per capita. The US is #8.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/imm_new_cit_percap-immigration-new-citizenships-per-capita

In reality, since the US gives nearly all the rights and benefits of citizenship to anyone who sneaks across our borders illegally and actually elevates them to the status of "Super-Citizens" by refusing to hold them accountable for their crimes to the same degree as Real Citizens are held accountable, the US is actually #1 on that list.

 

[MARIS61]

How did the Nazis invade Norway? They took the train across Sweden. Who sold the Nazis war materiel? The real Aryans.

Prescott Bush, the grandfather of our "President", that's who.

You really don't want to go down that train track. It's a disgusting chapter in our country's history.

 

[maxiep]

I never said you didn't understand the culture, I said you were railing against it. Which you quite obviously are. All I'm seeking to do is to figure out if it's just the culture you're railing against.

So let's cut the bullshit.

So what if the Swedes are homogenous? Does that make us better than them? If a Swede were born in Sweden but not a day later then unwittingly thrust into the Great and Superior American Culture, would it not be equal to you or I?

Yes, it's the entitlement culture of Sweden that bothers me.

 

[maxiep]

Prescott Bush, the grandfather of our "President", that's who.

You really don't want to go down that train track. It's a disgusting chapter in our country's history.

What does Prescott Bush have to do with this argument? Did I say the Swedes were the only ones who sold to the Nazis? Let's not forget that Joe Kennedy and Charles Lindbergh. Outweighing the "America First" crowd, however, was the sacrifice made by our nation and our populace.

During WWII, the Swedes were worse than the Quislings.

 

[maxiep]

Is there a place you haven't lived?

Yes. I've never lived in Spokane.

 

[maxiep]

You know, maxiep, for someone who's perfectly willing to be condescending, you're awfully unhappy about people being condescending to you. What was that phrase you used with someone else..."If you can't stand the heat..."?

I don't mind condesention. I mind it when you put yourself in the position of speaking for others. "Now you're embarrassing yourself" isn't a statement one makes when providing an opinion meant for oneself--it was a perception as to what the group at large believes.

No, I didn't. I simply said that it doesn't sound to me remotely like something Dagens Nyheter would say.

If you bothered to read my last post, I pointed out that that is precisely what I did. I said I didn't believe you, nothing more.

Here's your quote:

I'm quite certain this is a complete lie.

That's a far shade different than your above statement. For someone who enjoys a semantic argument, you should be nuanced enough to understand the difference.

There's a difference between you believing me to be a liar and stating that you're quite certain that I lied.

You should stop pretending that I said my opinion was anything but my opinion.

Again, for someone who believes themself to be careful with their language, you're awfully reckless when it suits your needs. I'll refer you again to your "Now you're embarrassing yourself" comment or your comments on your certitude with my lack of veracity. Those are comments that are not personal, they portend to speak for the larger group.

 

[Minstrel]

I don't mind condesention. I mind it when you put yourself in the position of speaking for others. "Now you're embarrassing yourself" isn't a statement one makes when providing an opinion meant for oneself--it was a perception as to what the group at large believes.

That is simply your interpretation, not an objective fact. The way I meant it was that, in my opinion, your attempts to critcize me showed an embarrassing lack of understanding of the logical fallacy you invoked. I didn't mean it as everyone else thinks you're embarrassing.

I never try to speak for others. I'm sorry if you took it that way, but it wasn't what I meant.

Here's your quote: That's a far shade different than your above statement. For someone who enjoys a semantic argument, you should be nuanced enough to understand the difference.

There's a difference between you believing me to be a liar and stating that you're quite certain that I lied.

The difference is in tone, in my opinion, not in meaning. "I am quite certain you're lying" is the same thing, in meaning, as "I don't believe you." Both are opinion. My being certain isn't a statement of objective Truth. It is simply a statement of how sure I am in my opinion.

I'll admit "I am quite certain you are lying" is significantly more confrontational. I regret that, but we are both confrontational from time to time.

Again, for someone who believes themself to be careful with their language

Odd comment. I don't think I've ever spoken to what I think about my own use of language.

I'll refer you again to your "Now you're embarrassing yourself" comment or your comments on your certitude with my lack of veracity. Those are comments that are not personal, they portend to speak for the larger group.

Well, as I've explained above, both comments were meant to be statements of entirely personal opinion. You are free to believe me or not, about my intentions with those comments.