Swedish PM says integration of immigrants has failed, fueled gang crime

Not exactly sure if you're trying to be ironic and consider my comment as fascist of some sort or if you actually agree.

>No, there is no moral justification in modern western civilization for religious or sectarian violence. We are nations of laws, the moral path is to work in the system to change the law

The issue is, you don't have a goddamned chance to change the law if you are a Muslim, unless you're gay or pretty much an ex-Muslim atheist pretending to be a Muslim, otherwise you fall under the "fundamentalist" definition and not a chance in hell you will have ANY important enough political position to be able to change the law. Sorry, doesn't work like that if you're a Muslim, it only works if you are a woman / gay / black or anything your alternative governments decide to make the norm in the future, but it's definitely not going to be Islam or the Muslims so it's pretty futile to even attempt doing that.

>Again, this is cost of admission to western civilization.

No thanks, people are starting to get aware of this supposed cost and hopefully the majority will leave and the ones who will stay will probably be either the ones who accepted these costs or probably people who are there out of necessity and will shut up or just leave. I'd vote for mass deportation, cutting ties and also mass deporting anyone who supports the west in any shape or form to the west and closing this deal.

That said, I'm not pro globohomo and the exportation by the west of degeneracy and sexual perversion needs to be countered. This conflict is not against Swedish police or really even governments, but an unelected cabal that infiltrate and influence civil society through capture of societal institutions.

By making this minute fraction the elites, the highly educated, the role models and putting them under the spotlight, the same way they abuse children and females misery to shape a perspective that's filled of hate and mistrust of males in the west, then you have sexual fluidity and gays rights, wanna guess what happens next?

That's how selective sympathy and indirect dictatorships work as far as I have seen. Is Islam democratic? it's not, but it makes far sense to me than the pathetic attempts the west does to make Islam look bad. why? long story short, Islam doesn't make total sense to me still, but I have yet to see a semi-intelligent argument about why Islam is bad beyond fearmongering people from the punishments or taking verses out of context etc. if you have any, please do offer them and I am willing to change my mind but as far as I have seen, neither lgbtq+ nor nazism makes any sense to sustain a healthy society, nor does lessening the severity of the punishment for the crimes committed by people who sometimes don't even deserve to live.

>The key word here is voluntarily. I have noticed one thing, that is a lot of people, in a lot of seemingly different cultures where so into the western culture, and that was the moment when I said to myself: well, that is quite weird now. and long story short, the western culture is massively imported in the Islamic-majority countries it turns out, and it's idealized and romanticised as sort of the "elites traditions / club", why? because the governments there are merely proxy governments, if you have any better reason for this, I would love to hear it.

>What you’re seeing, the watering-down of Islam, also happens to Christianity and all other religions in Western countries.

Yes, that's the problem. people won't accept that, not me, not the rest of the Muslims, nobody. Not even me as an agnostic, just a big flat NO.

I would love to be able to mock the western culture and their base beliefs without being taken to jail or called with derogatory slogans such as "fundamentalist", "terrorist", "extremist" etc.

If you don't respect others' core beliefs and values I can't think of any reason for them to respect yours, do you have any good reason for them to do so? riots where wrong if they started that wildly out of the blue but I wasn't able to find details about how it evolved into rioting last time I checked.

>In my opinion, refugee intake in Sweden has been more about Swedish white guilt (for whatever reason) and thus self-destruction.

Not really, if anything at all it's the white burden imo, not exactly the white guilt. and I would be very much concerned more about the Swedish political system than the refugees issue if they just act on their whims and sympathy. Not sure what's with romanticizing the fact that they accepted a lot of refugees, but I guess well each gotta be biased to his own eventually. I don't see it as a good thing, I don't really support screaming at / hitting your children whatsoever, but do I think it's proper to take one's children and throw them away with a gay family that will abuse and change them eventually and not even allow their parent to have contact with them? to threaten the children and their family if any of them contact each other? to use these cases to gain money? for the government to ignore these issues for years and then give all that support of police and whatnot for a nazi scum to burn the holy book of some people minding their own business? all because that some people might actually scream at their kids or hit them in a non-harming way or if they teach them to live by their religion? Good God if not the Swedish government is pretty good at radicalizing people then pulling the white angel card.

> Peaceful coexistence in the, good fences make good neighbors, sense; that would be my wish.

exactly, same here.

> The US and UK and Germany all say they attempt to screen for ideological attitudes, it appears they've a high failure rate. Part of the problem is that often when told directly they discount what they see and hear when it fails to meet their expectation. This leads to poor outcomes.

I don't buy this tbh, it's a no brainer to ask for ideological attitudes if you want people to be of the same ideologies as yours in the future.

You can just spend some money on posters and local new media to inform the locals who are trying to immigrate that anyone who rejects the western morals ( including the freedom to insult all religions including Islam ) isn't welcome, and that would split people into ones ready to exchange their religion for access to western societies and all the liberties / freedoms associated, and ones who would rather keep their religion and not immigrate.

making immigration about saving human lives etc, is just delusional if one cannot be left at peace without someone disrespecting his most basic beliefs.

But such statements would actually invalidate all of the human rights crap which they need to keep the illusion of, to still be able to pass their atheism as some sort of endless unconditional love for every human being regardless of any other factors including religion. putting a hard line would take that privilege of grooming and luring people into atheism off them and would make more homogeneous / stronger societies, which is something they'd never allow to happens as far as I can see. they could have just pulled out their proxy governments and left people alone in their home countries really, but nowadays even in SA you can see night clubs / kpop etc has spread.

If one Islamic nation would form and rule with the sharia ps. Islamic law without the influence of the west you would probably see almost all Muslims moving there - at least I hope - not sure if it would be economically viable etc, but I do hope if such a thing actually exists someday people will be willing to flood it.

> I suspect you and I would find many areas of agreement. I'm likely a traditionalist.

I think so as well.