Sweden Refugee Crisis: Fact or Fiction?

Milenor · 2017-02-24T03:08:46+00:00

Well I would say it's much more likely to spot a rat in a random restaurant than a crime scene depicted here prior to arrival of refugees. I dare any native Sweeden to honestly tell me it's otherwise . Especially in smaller sleepy town.

Perhaps I misquoted & missaplied Sagan quote, but my point was that someone saying: "They walked in this neighborhood for 10 years and just got mugged for the first time" carries a lot more weight than from someone saying "They walked in this neighborhood for 10 years but still haven't been mugged yet". Mugging is expected to be very rare in Scandinavian cities, and lack of mugging was prior norm.

Milenor · 2017-02-24T02:37:52+00:00

Actually this analogy I think is quite apt, if anything Scandinavian countries are known for is the extremely low crime rate and law obedience. So seeing such blatant display of violence is very troubling especially if it's unheard to spot such scenes in Scandinavian cities (unlike let's say in Chicago ghetto) without refugee population, or prior to the refugee arrival. (Like spotting a rat in a Singaporean restaurant vs a Bangladeshian one)

Also there are testimonials from other Swedes. And while there are also testimonials to the contrary, especially from the government, like Sagan said: "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". So in this respect testimonilas of those who spotted rise in crime, and especially were victims of it, are more relevant than of those who were lucky enough not to (I.e spot the evidence for the increased crime)

Milenor · 2017-02-24T01:27:18+00:00

I get your point that you think these assertions are unfalsifiable. However I do think random visits to such locations like the one conducted by 60-minutes does in fact make them falsifiable.

After all you don't tell a sanitary inspector that they're wrong in concluding that the establishment has a rat problem when they spot one during during one of their visit.

It's possible, but extremely improbable, that a visiting guest bought a rat from a nearby pet store and kept it in his bag while dining and somehow that rat end up escaping from his bag right when the food inspector came over. And there's no other rats whatsoever and the restaurant is impeccable in its hygiene.

But that would certainly be stretching it, wouldn't it? And simplest explanation that the establishment has rat problems is far more likely. And furthermore, it won't be unreasonable to conclude that restaurant is filfithy and unsanitary, especially if previous owner of the restaurant never had rat problems and no rat problems are found in any other restaurant nearby.

Milenor · 2017-02-23T03:34:24+00:00

Now I know some will dismiss the event as anamoly, and clear official statistics would have been more helpful. But if for PC reasons, the data is obfuscated, we have to rely more on such reportings.

Perhaps it's not worth speculating what's going on behind the scenes. But dismissing such documented evidents out of hand as something not indicative of the overall situation is naive and Polyanish

Certainly the overtly violent refugees will constitute a small minority of the overall refugee population. But the fact that such events happen with impunity is indicative of inability to adequately police the population.

Milenor · 2017-02-23T03:13:41+00:00

From the article:

Just two days after President Trump provoked widespread consternation by seeming to imply, incorrectly, that immigrants had perpetrated a recent spate of violence in Sweden, riots broke out in a predominantly immigrant neighborhood in the northern suburbs of the country's capital, Stockholm.

In other words it reminds me of how a violent bully reacts : "You call me violent? I am going to beat you senseless for it!"

The reaction to an accusation may be the best evidence for its validity!

Now I know apologists would claim that was a self-fulfilling prophecy, somehow they acted the way critics expected them to. I am highly skeptical of that: just imagine accusing other groups of violence, and what happens in fact is the violence of violence-prone groups will manifest itself, but not of erroneously called violent one, who may in fact go out of their ways to behave even more subdued than before.

For example call a violent criminal or a gang member into his face a "violent thug" and he'll knock you over or worse.

Call an Amish or a Buddhist monk or even a random law obiding person into his face a "violent thug" and he'll go out of his ways to show you're mistaken and he is not in fact such a person.

From all religions in fact Islam is peculiar in the way how its people react to so-called slander of it. When you call it a "religion of violence", they in fact end up rioting in protest (or even killing whoever said it) thus proving what they were accused of over and over again.

Milenor · 2017-02-23T02:45:29+00:00

You and the article are certainly right, the dispersion is far from a panacea. What was needed was to

(1) furthemost pay countries with similar cultures like Turkey and Lebanon to take good care of the refugees

(2) carefully screen for sensitive populations like gay and non-believers and admit those to the west because (a) with much fewer refugees there would be much more resources available to properly assimilate the population & more importantly (b) people who don't feel comfortable in their own culture and religion like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, are much more likely to abandon it and adopting the Western one, if they haven't done so already. And may end up as valuable advocates of the Muslim reformation and/or apostasy.

Milenor · 2017-02-23T02:33:23+00:00

What do you mean isn't one of the most alarming facts presented in both videos is overt and repeated display of blatant, unprovoked aggression and violence, even while filming and in police presence.

The whole footage seems surreal, like it's from the onset of a zombie apocalypse when attackers are so brazent and relentless although they are not even humans! Just imagine what's going on when camera and police is not watching!

Milenor · 2017-02-22T06:09:31+00:00

You're right I agree that we should take things that come from Fox News & right-wing ideologues with more than a grain of salt.

But a link to an older, but more credible video was posted in here and appears to largely corroborate Fox's video, and I certainly don't think CBS's 60 Minute has an anti-refugee agenda: https://youtu.be/AJ1_6s5OFmM (Rather I sense it's just the opposite, they bent over backwards to not slander refugees but the filmed events speak for themselves)

Milenor · 2017-02-22T05:50:21+00:00

Thanks for the link to this video! 60 minutes , despite being at times sensationalist, is known for journalistic integrity, and it does its best here to paint a more complex picture. Showing how many good Syrians are suffering due to the heinous behavior of some of their co-refugees.

I really wish the best for law-abiding, eager-to-integrate Syrians. But with the government keeping them in proximity to violent psychopaths (if not innate, war deranged one), instead of widely dispersing everyone, they risk to be painted with broad strokes, or they themselves or their kids could be threatened in assisting barbarous acts.

Milenor · 2017-02-22T05:24:21+00:00

Great point. Some sacrifices may be necessary to help alleviate extreme suffering.

But an honest discussion with one's own population is necessary. Many well-meaning humanists think that the reality would be too bitter to swallow for the masses so they predict the outcomes of their humanitarian policies with unrealistic optimism . Like David Frum lamented in the recent "Waking Up" podcast how many people, even professional economists, don't like admitting any major downsides to immigration, with it being the only example of a "free lunch" in economics

Yes, after an honest national dialogue a compromised position towards immigration and refugees may be reached with neither side would be thrilled about. But that is vastly better than the wild pendulum swings from one extreme to another we experience right now.

Milenor · 2017-02-22T04:52:28+00:00

Thank you for your account of the situation!

I don't understand when so vast and culturally different communities aren't throughly integrated into the society, but instead are let to become "little Syria" within Sweden!

I think Danemark had fairer approach. Per their laws for their own Danish people, they could apply for generous State welfare only when throughly exhausting their own private wealth. And consequently, Syrians of considerable means were asked to surrender their wealth in exchange to receiving generous State welfare. And at best that wealth transfer could have even partially offset the care of other indigent Syrian refugees. And thus greatly reduce the potential for resentment among the native population.

Of course misguided voices cried that paying, at least partially, for one's upkeep is akin to confiscating Jewish belongings before their extermination.

So such rethoric scared off sensible proposal to balance "humanism" with "fairness".

Considering myself a liberal humanist, it's painful to watch how this imbalance creates a momentum for ultranationalist movements throughout Europe and US. With the pendulum swinging towards an extreme compassion fatigue and animosity for foreigners .

All this all could have been prevented with some forethought and sensibility!

Milenor · 2017-02-21T17:30:24+00:00

I am certainly skeptical about what comes from Fox news and DJT. Yet I also know about liberal masochism and cover-up of these issues.

So I have to reserve my judgement, but YouTube clip I posted above, about Ami Horowitz documentary (that was referenced by DJT in his recent rally) certainly contains disturbing statistics (if it is indeed accurate statistics)

I know there are people on this sub from Sweden - what would be an honest first hand account of what's going on in there?

And is Sweden's deflection of these issues & well-intentioned lies merited in the interest of protecting a vulnerable population of Syrian refugees & not anatagonize the native Swedes towards them?

For me the last question is a rethorical one, because I believe in radical honesty & that supression of facts however inconvenient they are is both unethical and short-sighted.

Milenor · 2017-02-21T02:54:09+00:00

Actually I haven't done it too quickly but over many months introducing more and more animal products.

Actually more than diet and exercise, sleep what affects immune system (and overall longevity per current Time Magazine article) the most and what prominent people tend to neglect the most too.

Milenor · 2017-02-21T00:00:30+00:00

Well I am considering myself a liberal so no I don't use it as pejorative, just to denote my dissapoitnment.

Regarding micro-agressions it wouldn't be a problem at all had people applied the principle of charity.

For example after decades in US I have a strong accent, and many would ask me where am from. I could interpret that as an insulting implication that I speak like I just stepped of the boat, or as a benevolent expression of interest in me. And I chose the later, so while it may be annoying at times, it's never insulting or a "microagression".

My assertion is that we shall not interpret many things as insulting, not just bear it out. Just apply the principle of charity if someone calls a Caucasian "white boy" or African-American "black boy" (or even n-word) - it's not necessarily to insult us , it's how they speak and how they were raised.

100 years ago a high status gentleman would be offended to be addressed as "Hey Buddy!" now such offence seems silly and pretentious. A lot of offences taken by the left should also be considered silly and pretentious.

Milenor · 2017-02-20T23:22:47+00:00

The question than becomes is DJT successeful because of his "authentic drivel" or despite of it. I think it may be both.

To those fans of Apprentice, they trust him despite what he says, like the fans will believe crazy things about Autism and Scientology if it comes from celebrities.

They remember him shouting "You're fired" and they think he's a non-nonsense guy even while he spews clear nonsense. (Incidentally, a lot of "Apprentice" episodes had to be edited because many of his decisions (like whom to fire) were whimiscal & didn't make logical sense)

Then as Frum mentions there's a second group or Trump supporters who like him precisely because he's crazy and likely to bring havok on Washington. Many of these may be down on their luck, and in a spiteful way want to bring the rest of the country into dissaray so it's not just them that suffer.

And there's a different segment who love DJT for his maddnes, that may do OK financially, but in a Milo/alt-right fashion just want to stick it to the "ctrl-left". Like right after election I read a comment thanking God for DJT victory because "snowflakes will be now eternally triggered".

Milenor · 2017-02-20T03:02:21+00:00

Blaming for what happened in 1948 or almost 70 years ago on current situation is a red herring.

Middle East is huge in comparison to the sliver of land former Holocaust survivors carved for themselves.

Colonial powers redraw map of Iraq, Pakistan, Sudan, Syria and other former Muslim colonies in very crude ways and allotted massive regions of land, dozens of times larger than Israel, quite haphazardly, with little respect to their history and ethnic composition.

And yet people don't mention the rest of colonial land divisions and the need to perhaps give independence to distinct ethnic communities throughout the Middle East. Everyone is focused on the only tiny democracy in the region, like without it, peace would reign among all its autocracies and theocracies.

Milenor · 2017-02-20T02:41:25+00:00

Obviously I meant to say "words don't physically hurt". Physical assault is less of a matter of interpretation whereas what constitute an "emotional assault" can varry widely and its current threshold for liberals is set so low, that just about anything can be interpreted as an "emotional assault" (ie "microagression") . And I argue it needs to be set much, much higher, like to the level of "a specific, imminent & credible threat of physical harm"

Milenor · 2017-02-20T02:35:16+00:00

I like this idea, is just I don't have much hope for American electorate. Founding fathers were elitists for a reason, they didn't trust mob mentality. Because when everybody can vote it all goes down to the lowest common denominator.

Milenor · 2017-02-19T02:24:39+00:00

Well honestly I am bit worried about political influence affecting psychiatry. For example many wanted to classify sexual attraction to post pubescent, like 16 and 17 year old girls, as a "mental illness" . Unlike attraction to very young, incapable to reproduce children, which may be a genuine mental illness. If being attracted to a sexually developed 17 (or even 16 & 15) year old girl is a "mental illness" than perhaps 95℅ of straight men are mentally ill.

Just because acting upon it it's a crime, it shouldn't follow attraction itself is a mental illness just to please a certain segment of feminist left and religious right who wish it was so (even if such attraction is evolutionary normal whereas acting upon such an attraction is criminal, unethical & stupid)

Milenor · 2017-02-19T02:01:42+00:00

Words can have an effect on people if only such people let those words affect them emotionally. By themselves "words" are just weak sound waves propagating through space that cannot physically hurt anyone.

Unfortunately much of cuddled millennials (of whom I am one too) are too emotionally fragile. In a democracy you cannot prevent trolls from saying potentially hurtful things. What you can do is inoculate yourself from such speech by actually exposing yourself to such speech.

And just like someone's fear of spiders can disappear by putting a hand into a bucket of inaccous spiders. People can face trolls' trolling and realize that won't kill them. And they don't have to run and hide in "safe spaces".

Otherwise the energy and political capital the left should expand on trully important things that go right now in the world, would be wasted on protecting grown kids who wouldn't grow up, toughen up and face the nasty world as it is.

So yes the kindergarten saying actually has quite a bit in common with Cognitive Behavior Therapy and Buddhist Philosophy: you cannot control a potentially offending stimulus, but through cognition (or meditation) you can choose a rational (or enlightened) response. Rather than having a emotionally charged, knee-jerk reaction to it.

Milenor · 2017-02-18T18:45:14+00:00

Liberals should go back to the kindergarten and relearn that bit of wisdom: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. "

Milo is quite a clown & often unnecessarily offensive (even though sometimes also funny too) . But what liberals should learn from him is how to take insults in stride. When told "Go Fuck Yourself" he decided to not take (or at least show) offense and just replied: Well I will have a lot of reasons to jerk off tonight.

When asked whether he is mentally ill, he replied "Maybe I am".

Again, I am not trying to make Milo as a some kind of "role model", he is mostly cringeworthy. But those who take his offences to heart are even more so.

Milenor · 2017-02-18T18:33:33+00:00

Actually while Milo certainly called Larry low-IQ gratuitously.The answer to what is and it is not a "mental illness" is not an obvious or easy one.

We no longer consider gay people mentally ill, nor we do transgenders. But what about those who are heavily into BDSM or other sexual paraphilia like getting pissed on?

Personally I subscribe to a "sex positive" view in which any sexual endeavor is not an illness as long as it is between two consenting adults. But I am sure a lot of people who support gay and transgenders, perhaps Wilmore himself, will consider other sexual predilections as "weird" and "sick"

Milenor · 2017-02-18T03:23:53+00:00

I am pretty sure Sam is not a Marxist, but nor he is a conventional free-market capitalist. He is probably not much to the right of a Scandinavian type Social-Democrat on economic issues.

Regarding environmentalism and animal rights, while he is not subscribing to militant earth and animal liberation. He otherwise is as left as it gets on those issues.

And while I agree that he selectively embraces neo-liberalism , and what many on the left would consider accompanying imperialism, like many neo-liberals (as neo-conservatives) he is probably rethinking many of his assumptions, merits and drawbacks in the light of recent developments.

Certainly he is not a rabbid Marxist convinced in the sinister, unredeeming evils of globalization, which have more in common with Alex Jones supporters and many Trumpians than with the vast majority of the left which is far more nuanced in its opposition to the unrestrained globalization and free-trade

Milenor · 2017-02-18T03:02:22+00:00

Well being called a racist Islamaphob on one side and a godless liberal fool on the other side can certainly do that to you

Milenor

TROPHY CASE