American politics have always baffled me. Politicians, voters and analysts may use the same terms (libertarian, welfare-state, right-wing etc) as we do in Europe but the words seem to not only have different connotations but wholly different meanings. How fortunate then, that there are some familiar elements to which one can cling. The assertion that the media together with the political and intellectual establishment is firmly committed to transforming the country into a multi-ethnic mess leaving white people marginalised and powerless is as true in Sweden as it is in the US. Thus, reactions to efforts dedicated to stopping or impeding such a transformation will be broadly similar.

My aim is to try and deduce what lessons, if any, the Swedish elections can impart to white advocates. The video below provides some useful background information.

The election which took place on the 19th of September in Sweden was historic for many reasons, though one of them stands out amongst the others: for the first time, a party branded as ‘racist’ by the media had entered parliament (gaining 5.7% of the vote, slightly more than the Swedish ‘Left Party’) and caused political chaos as the right-wing (largest bloc) does not have a majority in parliament. The name of the party is the Sweden Democrats and their main issues are reducing immigration to Danish levels (a reduction of about 90%) and doing away with the policy of the multicultural society and instead favouring assimilation, insisting that immigrants “adopt Swedish values.” I need hardly mention that attempting to apply this to the vast numbers of non-Europeans in Sweden is dangerous lunacy.

Sweden has thus joined a host of other European nations (Norway, Italy, Finland, Hungary, Denmark etc.) in having a party openly critical of immigration represented in parliament.

The media and the establishment fought them every step of the way, using the standard methods which will be familiar to readers in most White countries. Although being discredited by the media and other establishment institutions is to be expected, the awesome scale and incredible viciousness of the campaign against the Sweden Democrats aroused criticism from within the ranks of the faithful. The left-wing author Henning Mankell criticizes the media for their poor tactics in the Guardian.

After all, even the politically correct can be forgiven for becoming squeamish when their political opponents are being knifed in the street on account of their beliefs. Nevertheless, Mankell writes that the "anti-human" Sweden Democrat representatives should not be allowed into the government. Indeed, "all the parties have spent most of the post-election debate guaranteeing that they won't in any way co-operate with the SD."

The criticism tends to be that the tactics that the media are using give the party an underdog status which arouses sympathy in the electorate. The view that biased and inaccurate reporting is wrong on principle is rarely voiced. And of course, the idea that opposition to immigration is entirely rational and even moral is completely beyond the fringe of polite discourse.

This tells us something important: the media have realised that they have next to no credibility for 5.7% of the population. After all, if you believed what the papers and news programmes were saying, you would have voted for a different party. This suggests that even the awesome brain-washing power of the media conglomerates can be thwarted to some extent. If all you ever read is about the evils of White people while the crimes of other ethnic groups are carefully hidden, yet in your daily life all you see is West Africans selling heroin, Arabs and Albanians torching cars, robbing Swedes and rioting, then sooner or later you face a choice between believing your own eyes or the biased reporting of a self-righteous journalist living in a safe upper-class neighborhood. A lot of Swedes have made the "wrong" choice.

This is reflected in the rise of alternative media. One of the biggest, Politically Incorrect, started out in 2008 as a blog reporting on crime (an area where immigrants excel) with about 5000 visitors a month. It is now a news site with updates every day and 180,000 visitors. I have a feeling that the American media is also rapidly exhausting what credibility it has left that this in turn generates a need for alternative media outlets.

The unrelenting campaign from every part of the political spectrum reveals something else: political correctness has ceased to be a leftist idea. It is now the over-arching framework within which all acceptable forms of political discourse take place.

It doesn’t whether you identify as conservative, socialist or a liberal; if you take a stand against immigration and diversity, you’re doomed to beyond the fringes of acceptable political discourse.

But I digress. Are the Sweden Democrats everything the media make them out to be? For better and worse, they are not. The allegations that they are a bunch of Nazis in disguise is worth noting. What is one then to make of the Jewish/Zionist twin brothers Ekeroth who are active and visible members of the party and the fact that the Sweden Democrats are staunchly pro-Israeli (by Swedish standards?

I don’t know, but I get the feeling they’re thinking in the same way that David Horowitz and Mark Steyn are thinking.

Steyn takes the Swedish city of Malmö as an example of ‘Islamization.’ His problem is that Jews are being victimized and feel the need to flee the city because of the large Muslim population. That Swedes have been forced to do so to a much greater extent does not seem to bother him.

White discontent with multiculturalism can only be expected to increase. This might well engender a backlash against the people and institutions who engineered the transformation in the first place, which might be bad for the Jews, as mentioned by Barbara Lerner Spectre which Kevin Macdonald discussed in a previous TOO blogpost. 

In addition, the presence of large numbers of Arabs and other Muslims is a threat to Jews in Europe. One anonymous member of the Jewish community alludes to this problem in Haaretz:

The Jewish community in Sweden ...  has long been a liberal one, and so there is indeed disgust with the SD’s xenophobia and precious few voted for them. But on the other hand, he admitted, there are Jews also concerned with the rising number of Muslims in the country and some of the more extremist views expressed by some of them, and are thus conflicted.

So, abandoning multiculturalism and riding on the wave of popular discontent and pursuing a strongly anti-Muslim policy of assimilation might be better for the Jews. I suspect this is the way Steyn and the Ekeroth brothers reason. There is a danger that the party will become a vehicle for their ethnocentric ambitions. The Sweden Democrats are not challenging political correctness as an ideology. They are cultural nationalists who believe that anyone can become Swedish as long as they embrace the correct values and behaviour. But that will have to be sufficient for the time being. And one must remember that people vote for them primarily because of what they're perceived to be (against immigration) rather than what they are (for assimilation).

As for the voter demographics of the Sweden Democrats, they look promising. Support is very strong among young people, young men in particular. In the school elections (kids who aren’t old enough to vote in the election have school elections instead) the Sweden Democrats received almost 13% of the vote, more than twice as much as in the general election. In some schools they received over 50%.

Support for the party was also strongest in working-class Swedish neighbourhoods in close proximity to immigrant neighbourhoods, much less so in well-to-do suburbs. How strange!

Another tactic which the establishment use when they have failed to convince people of the benefits of multiculturalism is the threat of social isolation. By morally condemning the ‘haters’ they hope to scare dissidents to silence. For my own part I can only say that I have friends of all political persuasions and most of them know what I voted for and where I stand on immigration and multiculturalism. There have been heated discussions, and I am sure many of my acquaintances think less of me now but so what? Many more have said that while they do not share my opinions, they think I have a point. Many who are silent are also relieved that someone is voicing the opinions that they do not have the courage to express.

If Sweden’s neighbours are anything to go by, the presence of the Sweden Democrats in parliament will have a ‘normalizing’ effect on nationalism and similar opinions and sentiments. It is simply not that easy to maintain that a party with representation in a political body and hundreds of thousands of voters is composed of a bunch genocidal maniacs. The election has shown that many White people reject multiculturalism. It has shown that the power of the media has limits. It has shown that if an alternative message, however flawed (the Sweden Democrats are very flawed), is widely disseminated, people will choose it. I congratulate the A3P on providing such an alternative for White Americans. 

Magnus Unger is a Swedish law student. Email him.

Permanent link: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Unger-Sweden-Democrats.html