http://www.nysun.com/article/44831
While Sweden Slept
The approach of the New Year and departure of the old inevitably brings
a flurry of "year's best" lists. This even applies to nations, which
some organizations make it their business annually to rank in order of
wealth, quality of life, and what-have-you.
Surprisingly often, the Nordic countries come out on top. This placement
is usually a reflection less of objective reality, however, than of the
list-makers' enthusiasm for the Nordic welfare-state model. The
criteria, in other words, are formulated in such a way that the Nordic
countries will inevitably end up on top. Hence Norway, for example, is
repeatedly named by the United Nations as the world's richest country —
forget that prices and taxes are so high that even business executives
lunch on dry sandwiches brought from home in aluminum foil.
Now it's Sweden's turn. The Economist Intelligence Unit, associated with
the Economist magazine, has awarded the title of world's most democratic
country to Sweden. For many observers, this is not only wrong — it's
staggeringly, outrageously misinformed.
Sweden is, after all, a country in which the people are fed by their
political, press, and intellectual establishment an unvarying diet of
propaganda promoting the socialist welfare state, demonizing Israel, and
whitewashing Islam. As for America, the official view was neatly
captured in a post-September 11 editorial in the nation's largest
newspaper, Aftonbladet, which assured readers that the terrorists who
attacked New York and Washington weren't Sweden's enemies but simply
hated " U.S. imperialism," a reasonable position given that "the U.S. is
the greatest mass murderer of our time." Such views, taught in Sweden's
classrooms and enshrined in Sweden's state-approved schoolbooks, are
reiterated daily by Sweden's mainstream press organizations, all of
which are either government-owned or government-subsidized.
Dissent is powerfully discouraged. In Sweden, whose murder rate is
currently twice that of America and where Muslims now constitute over
10% of the population and are disproportionately unemployed and prone to
violence, the Swedish press routinely depicts America as crime-ridden.
Polls show that the majority of Swedes are deeply disturbed by their
country's dramatic social changes and highly critical of the policies
that brought them about. Yet the crime and violence generally go
unreported, so only rarely does any of the criticism seep into the
press. Though two-thirds of Swedes question whether Islam is compatible
with Western society, this issue is simply not open for public
discussion.
To quote Jonathan Friedman, a New Yorker who teaches social anthropology
at the University of Lund, "no debate about immigration policies is
possible" because Sweden's "political class," which controls public
debate, simply avoids the topic. Recently, the city of Stockholm carried
out a survey of ninth-grade boys in the predominantly Muslim suburb of
Rinkeby. The survey showed that in the last year, 17% of the boys had
forced someone to have sex, 31% had hurt someone so badly that the
victim required medical care, and 24% had committed burglary or broken
into a car. Sensational statistics — but in all of Sweden, they appear
to have been published only in a daily newssheet that is distributed
free on the subways.
Instead of reporting on such worrisome findings, politicians and the
press alike focus on the evils of America and Israel. Last year, for
instance, Sweden's state-owned TV network ran a series of
"documentaries" about America that included Michael Moore's "Bowling for
Columbine." Viewers were protected from the fact that it had been shown
to contain lies and fabrications. The series also included a sympathetic
account of Stalin's atomic spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, whom
Swedish TV described as having been executed not for history's most
colossal act of treason but "for their Communist sympathies," and
something called "Why We Fight," which explained America's military
actions as motivated by the avarice of military contractors.
Swedish book publishing is similarly unbalanced. Recently Michael
Moynihan, an American writer based in Stockholm, toted up the
English-language political books that had been translated into Swedish
since September 11. His long list included several works apiece by Noam
Chomsky and Michael Moore, plus volumes by the communist historian Eric
Hobsbawm, the anti-American journalist John Pilger, and the "Holocaust
industry" critic Norman Finkelstein. On the entire list, only one author
was not a leftist.
When voices of dissent do break through in Sweden, they're often
punished. During the runup to the Iraq war, the Swedish government
censured the independent TV channel TV4 for running an "Oprah" episode
that presented both pro- and anti-war arguments. TV4 was charged with
violating press-balance guidelines when in fact its offense was being
too balanced — it had exposed Swedish viewers to ideas from which
journalists had otherwise shielded them.
Only one sizable party in the country, the Sweden Democrats, articulates
most Swedes' concerns about their country's immigration and integration
policies. Again and again, it has been the object of breathtakingly
undemocratic treatment by the political establishment. Earlier this
year, for example, the government closed down the Sweden Democrats' Web
site because it had published a cartoon of Muhammad. Stig Fredriksson,
head of the free-speech organization Publicistklubben, complained
bitterly. But the incident was hardly reported in Sweden — and, of
course, barely caused a ripple abroad. If the Bush administration had
closed down a Democratic Party Web site¸ there would be scare headlines
and editorials thundering about dictatorship — and rightly so. But when
Sweden's rulers did it, it was apparently acceptable — because they did
it in the name of political correctness.
Sweden Democrats have been the targets of events that recall China's
Cultural Revolution. Staged "people's protests" by members of the "youth
divisions" of other parties have led to the firing of Sweden Democrats
from their jobs. A few weeks ago, a junior diplomat was dismissed when
it became known that he was a member of the party and had criticized his
country's immigration policy. On several occasions, thugs loyal to the
ruling parties have broken up Sweden Democratic meetings and beaten up
party leaders. And this is a nation in which a party led by an admitted
communist was, in recent memory, part of the ruling coalition.
The Sweden Democrats enjoy considerable public sympathy. But given
Sweden's oppressively conformist political climate, that sympathy is of
necessity largely sub rosa. Mr. Friedman has suggested that one reason
why the party has no seats in Parliament is that Swedish elections
aren't really secret — other people at the polling place can look at
your ballot and see which party you support. The stigma attached to
voting for the Sweden Democrats is just that strong. Another reason is
that the major parties have worked together vigorously to keep the
Sweden Democrats out of the public square. The success of this
collaborative effort is reflected in the fact that Sweden is the only
major Western European country whose legislature contains not a single
representative of a party critical of its immigration policies.
In 1972, the British historian Roland Huntford titled his book about
Sweden "The New Totalitarians." He is echoed by a number of observers
today who describe Sweden as an example of "soft totalitarianism." Are
they right? That's a matter for debate — though it's a debate that won't
take place in Sweden.
Link to this post | Report to moderator
--
regards , Peter B. P. -
http://titancity.com/blog
http://markedspartiet.dk, http://macplanet.dk
http://siad.dk