Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stockholm riots leave Sweden's dreams of perfect society up in smoke

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stockholm riots leave Sweden's dreams of perfect society up in smoke

    A week of disturbances in Sweden's capital has tested the Scandinavian nation's reputation for tolerance.

    Like the millions of other ordinary Swedes whom he now sees himself as one of, Mohammed Abbas fears his dream society is now under threat. When he first arrived in Stockholm as refugee from Iran in 1994, the vast Husby council estate where he settled was a mixture of locals and foreigners, a melting pot for what was supposed to be a harmonious, multi-racial paradise.

    Two decades on, though, "white flight" has left only one in five of Husby's flats occupied by ethnic Swedes, and many of their immigrant replacements do not seem to share his view that a new life in Sweden is a dream come true. Last week, the neighbourhood erupted into rioting, sparking some of the fiercest urban unrest that Sweden has seen in decades, and a new debate about the success of racial integration.

    "In the old days, the neighbourhood was more Swedish and life felt like a dream, but now there are just too many foreigners, and a new generation that has grown up here with just their own culture," he said, gesturing towards the hooded youths milling around in Husby's pedestrianised shopping precinct.

    "Also, in Sweden you cannot hit your children to discipline them, and this is a problem for foreign parents. The kids can feel they can cause whatever trouble they want, and the police don't even arrest any of them most of the time."

    This weekend, after six consecutive nights of rioting, Mr Mohammed was not the only one questioning the Swedish social model's preference for the carrot over the stick. Many Swedes were left asking why a country that prides itself on a generous welfare state, liberal social attitudes and a welcoming attitude towards immigrants should ever have race riots in the first place.

    The disturbances erupted in Husby last weekend, after police shot dead an elderly man brandishing a machete inside his house. Angered at what they saw as police heavyhandedness, youths torched cars and buildings and stoned police and firefighters. Police were then forced to draft in extra manpower from outside Stockholm as the trouble spread to other immigrant-dominated suburbs of the capital and towns such as Orebro in central Sweden, where 25 masked youths set fire to a school on Friday night.

    Up too in smoke has gone the notion that egalitarian Sweden, which has largely avoided the global recession, might be immune from the social problems blighting less affluent parts of Europe.

    Sweden's centre-right prime minister, Frederik Reinfeldt, blamed "hooligans" but also talked sympathatically of the difficult "transition period between different cultures". Meanwhile politicians from the Swedish Left, which ruled the country for most of the post-war period, blamed the trouble on social spending cuts introduced by Mr Reinfeldt, whose Moderate Party vowed to trim - though not slash - the welfare budget when he took office in 2006.

    But amid the soulsearching last week, perhaps the most telling comment was the one from Kjell Lindgren, the spokesman for Stockholm Police. "We don't know why they are doing this," he said, when asked for a cause for the riots. "There is no answer to it."

    Certainly, wandering around Husby last week, it was hard at first glance to see quite what the problem was. Built in the 1970s as part of the "Million Programme" that aimed to give affordable housing for all Swedes, the estate is one of dozens on Stockholm's outskirts that now house mainly immigrant populations, including large numbers from Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Iraq.

    However, comparisons to the Paris "banlieus", or indeed riot-hit Tottenham or Salford, are limited. Between the rows of clean-looking housing blocks are well-tended flowerbeds and neatly- kept public gardens, and in the shopping precinct, where an ornamental fountain still bubbles away, there are bars, shops, and a smart cafe-bakery that would not look too out of place in an IKEA catalogue. At eight per cent, Husby's joblessness rate is three times the Swedish average, but only slightly higher than that in the UK.

    Likewise, although the rioting has been large scale by Swedish standards, seen up close it has less of the ferocity of the 2011 disturbances in Britain. When The Sunday Telegraph visited Husby late on Wednesday night, the highlight was a hit-and-run arson attack on two parked cars. Police were hardly to be seen, and when they did arrive, it was purely to protect the firefighters dealing with the car blaze rather than make arrests.

    Instead, teams of well-intentioned volunteers from local community groups and Islamic associations mingled with the crowds of excited onlookers, politely suggesting that they expressed their grievances peacefully.

    Among a large group gathered on an overhead walkway was Mohammed Abdu, 27, whose family came to Sweden from Eritrea when he was aged three, and who now works as a security guard. While he condemned the violence as "hooliganism", he claimed that many Husby residents still suffered from discrimination from the police and employers. Besides, he added, living in such a prosperous, advanced country offered no real satisfaction for those so conspicuously at the bottom of the heap.

    "It's true that the welfare system here is an example to the rest of the world, so if you fall here you do not fall all the way to the bottom," he said. "But people don't like being dependent on social welfare, and there is hidden racism."
    Not so, argued Yusuf Carlos, 32, a construction worker from Palestine. "It is just kids causing this trouble, that is why the police are not doing much about it," he said. "Sweden is fair towards immigrants and it isn't hard to find work, or not before these riots anyway. The problem is that the Swedish people are angry now. They don't know why people here in Husby are doing this, only that they come from this neighbourhood."

    Certainly, claims of racism upset many Swedes, who have little colonial history, and whose decision to admit large numbers of Third World migrants from the 1980s onwards was born of no particular political obligation, more just a very Swedish sense of humanitarian duty to the wider world. From the very start, the government also sought to avoid creating a German-style "guest worker" class by promoting immigrants' rights and introducing a plethora of programmes to promote racial integratkion.

    Yet despite Swedish language education being offered free to all long-term immigrants, ghettos of foreigners have flourished in recent years. So too have Far Right parties challinging the political class's long-standing pro-immigration consensus, who now command up to 10 per cent of the vote and may increase their share in next year's elections.

    "We have tried harder than any other European country to integrate, spending billions on a welfare system that is designed to help jobless immigrants and guarantee them a good quality of life," said Marc Abramsson, leader of the National Democrats Party. "Yet we have areas where there are ethnic groups that just don't identify with Swedish society. They see the police and even the fire brigade as part of the state, and they attack them. We have tried everything, anything, to improve things, but it hasn't worked. It's not about racism, it's just that multi-culturalism doesn't recognise how humans actually function."

    Aje Carlbom, a Swedish academic and author of a critical study into Swedish immigration policy, added that despite the increasing appeal of Far Right parties, mainstream Swedish politicians were still reluctant to even ask the kind of questions that the likes of Mr Abramsson was already offering answers to.

    "Anyone who wants to regulate immigration is immediately classified as a nationalist, which also implies a racist as well," he said. "It is still almost impossible to debate this question."

    Still, some of Husby's younger generation argue that it is unreasonable of Swedes to expect them to be perennially "grateful" for taking them in, even from the dire circumstances in their homelands.

    Among them is local youth worker Rami al Khamisi, 25, whose family escaped to Sweden from Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 1994, smuggling themselves first through Turkey and Russia and then across the Baltic in a fishing boat commandeered by a people smuggler. "I was six years old and the boat was packed with about 60 people," he said. "An old man died, and they threw him in the water because his body was smelling a lot."

    That, though, he says, is his only real memory of the hardships of his early life, and as such, he finds it hard to be as thankful as his parents still are to his adopted homeland. "They compare it to Baghdad or Somalia," he said. "But we younger immigrants only really know Sweden, and we just compare our situation to the one around us."

    With Stockholm still burning this weekend, though, that may be asking for just a little too much understanding - even in compassionate, generous Sweden.

    Stockholm riots leave Sweden's dreams of perfect society up in smoke - Telegraph

    - - - - - - -
    Sixth night of violence in Sweden, but police say capital calmer | Reuters


    Anyone else been following this?

    At first I have thought it is because of the widening gap between rich and poor, and social measures failures. Now it is racial? Mix of both?
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
    At first I have thought it is because of the widening gap between rich and poor, and social measures failures. Now it is racial? Mix of both?
    But amid the soulsearching last week, perhaps the most telling comment was the one from Kjell Lindgren, the spokesman for Stockholm Police. "We don't know why they are doing this," he said, when asked for a cause for the riots. "There is no answer to it."
    which leads to...

    That, though, he says, is his only real memory of the hardships of his early life, and as such, he finds it hard to be as thankful as his parents still are to his adopted homeland. "They compare it to Baghdad or Somalia," he said. "But we younger immigrants only really know Sweden, and we just compare our situation to the one around us."
    What does he mean by that ? A lack of integration.

    This is different to England & France. You'd have thought Sweden would have it better.

    A week of riots indicates there is quite a bit of pent up energy.

    Comment


    • #3
      When you have a situation where everything is perfect, people will go out of their way to make trouble just for the sake of variety
      Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

      Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.

      Comment


      • #4
        Different cultures don't mix well together.I notice when a person of one culture(especially if from a less developed country) move into a community with a different culture and he/she don't try to let go of some part of his/her own culture in order to better intergrate into the host community's culture, discrimination will happen.This is because in the beginning, due to low mordern education, languge barrier and no connections, the person will face difficulty in getting a good job, leading to less finacial power, leading to crime comitted by said person more possible.In the long run, all this will lead to the person's race/culture be viewed negetively by the host host community's population. As this negetive view grows, the more difficult for the immigrant to do well finacially, and the cycle continues.

        But money is not the only problem.Cultural superiority is also a major problem. For example, this person finds that persons cultural practices strange, and this view is made aloud, this will lead to tensions. The person practicing will think there is nothing wrong with his practice and believe its the right way, he may try and convince the other guy its his way thats attaully strange. Now they are both right really, but its just different culture.

        The best way for an immigrant to suceed in a new community is accept the host's values and ways.If it means losing ones own culture to do this, then its a price one must pay if he/she wants to immigrate.

        Comment


        • #5
          And that is generally a problem with immigrants all over. Riots were nothing new in US during the late 1800s and early 1900s when US had boatloads of immigrants from Europe. It was not generally confined to Muslims and Asians and Africans. US had problems with Italians, Irish, and other ethnic variety of immigrants. This is Sweden's first time in dealing with immigrants. Before the 1980s or 90s Sweden had very very little immigration. It was very homogenous. Sweden is going through a growing pain and will learn to eventually overcome this problem.

          Comment


          • #6
            Given the trend in technology and the increased productivity that comes with it,I fail to see what useful purpose the migrants serve wrt prosperity and long term survival of European countries.
            Ahh,if it means voters for the lefties,I can see great utility.For their short term interests,but not for the greater good defined as above.

            Every penny that goes to such populations is one penny less in tax deductions or family support for the native populations.
            Those who know don't speak
            He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Mihais View Post
              Given the trend in technology and the increased productivity that comes with it,I fail to see what useful purpose the migrants serve wrt prosperity and long term survival of European countries.
              Who's going to build that technology ?

              You get on the phone and talk to some guy in Bangalore or you can have a local on site at your command.

              Originally posted by Mihais View Post
              Ahh,if it means voters for the lefties,I can see great utility.For their short term interests,but not for the greater good defined as above.
              Countries take in refugees because of their values. Giving them another life.

              These are the kids of refugees. As the comment above shows, they do not for some reason share the values of their parents.

              I've yet to hear about why things kicked off in London some time back. Visibly it was more locals than immigrants.

              Originally posted by Mihais View Post
              Every penny that goes to such populations is one penny less in tax deductions or family support for the native populations.
              If you can grow then you can absorb people, if you cannot or are unwilling then you start to see liabilities. People are assets, if you cannot put them to gainful use then your system has failed. Time to own up and take charge of the situation.

              The cop out is to say lock the gates. Our system is perfect. If its perfect why can't it adapt to change. If it cannot adapt to this change how will it handle other changes as yet unseen down the road.
              Last edited by Double Edge; 26 May 13,, 20:53.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                which leads to...
                Hence my confusion.

                What does he mean by that ? A lack of integration.
                But it looked nice and dandy from a distance. Heck, even Swedes are confused.

                This is different to England & France. You'd have thought Sweden would have it better.
                Why would you assume that?

                A week of riots indicates there is quite a bit of pent up energy.
                Immigrants might have heard a lot of myths how the grass was greener back at home.

                Danes are also tired of their social system. I still think it has nothing to do with immigrants, or that they are not the core problem, if at all.
                No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Tennetc View Post
                  Different cultures don't mix well together.I notice when a person of one culture(especially if from a less developed country) move into a community with a different culture and he/she don't try to let go of some part of his/her own culture in order to better intergrate into the host community's culture, discrimination will happen.This is because in the beginning, due to low mordern education, languge barrier and no connections, the person will face difficulty in getting a good job, leading to less finacial power, leading to crime comitted by said person more possible.In the long run, all this will lead to the person's race/culture be viewed negetively by the host host community's population. As this negetive view grows, the more difficult for the immigrant to do well finacially, and the cycle continues.

                  But money is not the only problem.Cultural superiority is also a major problem. For example, this person finds that persons cultural practices strange, and this view is made aloud, this will lead to tensions. The person practicing will think there is nothing wrong with his practice and believe its the right way, he may try and convince the other guy its his way thats attaully strange. Now they are both right really, but its just different culture.

                  The best way for an immigrant to suceed in a new community is accept the host's values and ways.If it means losing ones own culture to do this, then its a price one must pay if he/she wants to immigrate.
                  This story is old, its been repeated across generations & ethnicites in many countries. These people of different cultures built the new world.

                  So what makes the present generation different. Why do they turn rejectionist ?

                  Every generation is different, style, music, clothes, behaviour.

                  A riot like this is serious frustration.
                  Last edited by Double Edge; 26 May 13,, 20:43.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                    But it looked nice and dandy from a distance. Heck, even Swedes are confused.
                    Well, it still does to the first generation. They voted with their feet.

                    The second finds themselves born into this environment where they hear the only reason the parents came over was so they (second) could have a better life. But they can not find the way to this better life. They have expectations growing up in this new environment and find they cannot be met. They watch TV and see others around them and cannot join the party.

                    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                    Why would you assume that?
                    yes, i think i cannot.

                    wall st, paris, london, husby(?). Any pattern.

                    A new left taking shape. Back to the 60s again. Does the action of the weaker sections give an early warning how rest of the society will be affected in the future. Canary in the coal mine.

                    Think of north africa. A fruit seller sets himself on fire and within two years, 3 leaders went. WTH could have predicted that (!) And this is called as 'the right side of history'.

                    I also notice a lot of very vocal protests in my own country. Maybe its media effect, cellphone effect, internet effect. They rush to put a mike in front of every angry young movement. Why start shouting if you're not happy. Stomach empty or something more.

                    Cannot have better life style than the parents, maybe cannot even match the parents despite all the 'benefits' of growing up in a 'better' country.

                    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                    Immigrants might have heard a lot of myths how the grass was greener back at home.

                    Danes are also tired of their social system. I still think it has nothing to do with immigrants, or that they are not the core problem, if at all.
                    Your question makes me wonder whether immigrants is just cosmetic ie superficial. London showed your parents did not have to come from elsewhere.
                    Last edited by Double Edge; 26 May 13,, 22:01.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                      Who's going to build that technology ?

                      You get on the phone and talk to some guy in Bangalore or you can have a local on site at your command.


                      Countries take in refugees because of their values. Giving them another life.

                      These are the kids of refugees. As the comment above shows, they do not for some reason share the values of their parents.

                      I've yet to hear about why things kicked off in London some time back. Visibly it was more locals than immigrants.


                      If you can grow then you can absorb people, if you cannot or are unwilling then you start to see liabilities. People are assets, if you cannot put them to gainful use then your system has failed. Time to own up and take charge of the situation.

                      The cop out is to say lock the gates. Our system is perfect. If its perfect why can't it adapt to change. If it cannot adapt to this change how will it handle other changes as yet unseen down the road.
                      Dude,do you seriously expect me to debate this?WTH!

                      Who's going to build anything?Well,same people as before.Those with initiative and money.It used to be called free market.
                      If countries take refugees,they can also send them back.You don't understand London.Easy.The system itself is not about race(for a lack of a better term).It's about the synergy between class and race.Being a native European and NOT a red flag waving a$$hole means you are a dirty capitalist pig AND a bloody racist.Being anything else is good.You can use anything.

                      People are not assets by themselves.OUR good people are assets,regardless of society and time.Anything else is most of the time a liability.When it's not a competitor or downright enemy.Locking the gates is not a cop-out.Who said you can't move outside,to see the world for what it is.Europeans practiced this for thousands of years.In fact I'd make it mandatory part of the education to stay a week with the Sudanese peasants.
                      We are the most open because we invented fast travel and the internet(as well as the rest of the things&ideas that make the modern world),not because we let everyone nearby.And while I see that locking the gates has a metaphorical sense in this context,it can also have a very practical one.So I say you personally should open the gates of your house,make a big announcement on that and see if you can take it for 6 hours.
                      Those who know don't speak
                      He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Saw this news a few days ago and thought back to 1976. When I traveled Sweden, Norway, and Denmark I saw the beginnings of what eventually transpired above. I clearly remembered telling some Swedes they were making a mistake here. Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, Philippines and I'm sure others do not allow immigration into their countries. Yet no one howls racism at them. I personally have no problem with it since each country is a unique culture. I say keep it unique.

                        The Scandinavian countries are also unique cultures and with very small populations. None of those countries were built on immigration and that is key. Their governments may have allowed immigration but all the Swedes I know over here, a lot, none of them were for it when you nail them down. Doesn't surprise me they don't accept it.

                        When I travel to say Sweden I want to see Swedish culture, period. Norway, Norwegian culture, period. I don't want to see a mix. Some may not like my opinion but I frankly don't care. No apologies.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                          Dude,do you seriously expect me to debate this?WTH!

                          Who's going to build anything?Well,same people as before.Those with initiative and money.It used to be called free market.
                          If countries take refugees,they can also send them back.You don't understand London.Easy.The system itself is not about race(for a lack of a better term).It's about the synergy between class and race.Being a native European and NOT a red flag waving a$$hole means you are a dirty capitalist pig AND a bloody racist.Being anything else is good.You can use anything.
                          Its still a free market and am very much a dirty capitalist pig :)

                          When the state cannot provide its down to private initiative to create opportunity. If the state facilitates this then its easier.

                          Cannot live off the state and maintain your dignity & pride. Cannot hold on to dignity & pride and go hungry. Where is the middle.

                          Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                          People are not assets by themselves.OUR good people are assets,regardless of society and time.Anything else is most of the time a liability.When it's not a competitor or downright enemy.Locking the gates is not a cop-out.Who said you can't move outside,to see the world for what it is.Europeans practiced this for thousands of years.In fact I'd make it mandatory part of the education to stay a week with the Sudanese peasants.
                          I've been hearing about sending people back in France since the early 90s. Well, have they done it yet. No. Its a damn slogan. The only people that get sent back consistently are those whose status is no longer legal.

                          So how do you do that to people born in the country ? you cannot, they are your citizens. You cannot revoke their citizenship because they have no where to go. DOH! Because the problem primarily is the second & latter gen not the first.

                          The same thinking of not using your people applies to India & China as well. Once the economy started growing things changed. Keep growing is the answer.

                          Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                          We are the most open because we invented fast travel and the internet(as well as the rest of the things&ideas that make the modern world),not because we let everyone nearby.And while I see that locking the gates has a metaphorical sense in this context,it can also have a very practical one.So I say you personally should open the gates of your house,make a big announcement on that and see if you can take it for 6 hours.
                          Did not say let everyone in. Am saying make use of those that are already in.

                          Whether you continue to let people in the future is up to you. Since these were refugees, you've got a moral argument on your hands.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Bro,take your time to look at this.Actually,everybody should take an hour or so to do so.Migrants are obsolete.It's just that engineers are always 2 generations ahead of the politicians and pundits.And one of the features of the world is that generations today have very short lifespan,compared to generations of the past.

                            Let me put it this way.Money that's wasted in one year to support one of this cretures on welfare,could be invested on technology.As for repatriation,that is a matter of will.Laws obey the will of men,not the reverse.When enough people will want it,laws will be made.
                            There is even a stronger moral case to do so.These folks will raise the social and economic level of their native countries.It will be for the good of mankind.
                            Can a piece of paper,aka citizenship,be stronger than both the good of Europe and the good of the world as well?
                            Those who know don't speak
                            He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                              Bro,take your time to look at this.Actually,everybody should take an hour or so to do so.Migrants are obsolete.It's just that engineers are always 2 generations ahead of the politicians and pundits.And one of the features of the world is that generations today have very short lifespan,compared to generations of the past.
                              Nice video, gives an idea of things to come. Brooks says he does not intend Baxter to replace people, to do tasks that require lots of repetition and to think of Baxter as the C64 of Robots. He also says, crucially, that when they get customers they do seminars so that its clear what cannot be done so as to reduce disappointment. Can see the potential. Wish we could see what his customers were actually doing with it but he said there was too much secrecy involved. Its early days, have to see how this develops.

                              I think you've committed an inverse (?) Luddite mistake here :)

                              If computers were supposed to replace people how is it they resulted in creating so much employment for people that can make them do what others want and why is it managers are always complaining they cannot find people with the right skills to do what they want.

                              Construction workers, couriers, delivery guys, hospitality sector, taxi drivers, maids, care givers, security guards. You really see a way to automate these kinds of jobs. Are these the jobs locals really want to do. Because in my city alone they are increasingly done by people that do not come from my state. And this is the low end, there are many levels above this as an economy creates lots of different requirements and skill sets. This is a similar pattern every where. Same complaint again, hard to find people that do the job satisfactorily. Harder still to hold onto them.

                              Migrants won't be obsolete, so long as the demand exists. It won't go away, more capital creates more demand for such people because the turnover rate is high.

                              Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                              Let me put it this way.Money that's wasted in one year to support one of this cretures on welfare,could be invested on technology.As for repatriation,that is a matter of will.Laws obey the will of men,not the reverse.When enough people will want it,laws will be made.
                              There is even a stronger moral case to do so.These folks will raise the social and economic level of their native countries.It will be for the good of mankind.
                              Can a piece of paper,aka citizenship,be stronger than both the good of Europe and the good of the world as well?
                              - How to seperate these creatures from other creatures that may need welfare.
                              - How do you justify repatriation. What you're saying amounts to cancelling citizens if they do not meet certain criteria. Who decides this.
                              - What stronger moral case. People vote with their feet. If they sense better opportunities in their own countries, they will leave on their own. This is not an unusual phenomenon.
                              - That piece of paper defines your country and provides you with certain inalienable rights You want to get on a slippery slope here.

                              Wishful thinking, quick-fix thinking. Repatriation is a slogan. It ain't going to happen.

                              Unless you yearn for a new gulag era which would be ironic.
                              Last edited by Double Edge; 28 May 13,, 00:17.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X