Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Donation Controversy

mullvad.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 63 posts

Re: Donation Controversy

#31

Post by bsoup »

dijit wrote: post #23
bsoup wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party#Immigration_... : 'In 2026 Örebro Party leader Markus Allard sparked controversy on several occasions. In a debate hosted by Studio3 with Liberal member of parliament Martin Melin, Allard asked: "why won't the Liberals push for deporting 100 000 social welfare-Somalis?" and in the same debate said that "Sweden belongs to the Swedes. We have to make sure that we tak…

It's nice to cherry pick inflammatory things that have been stated without their full context. The context in this case is that he was directly asked: "What about the people born in Sweden who commit so many crimes and do not integrate at all, live their whole lives on welfare, as we are seeing in the statistics it is mostly the second-generation who are most represented" (I am adlibbing and translating, but this is…

Constitutions and laws are no protection for scapegoats once extremists gain power. Anyone who knows 20th century history knows where "we must deport these damn parasites" ends.

If they are called "social welfare-Somalis" (where do social welfare-Swedes get deported to?), if they are not included in "the Swedes" and "our own damn people", if "even if they are born in Sweden, [...] they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish", then integration is not what he wants.

Re: Donation Controversy

#32

Post by letmevoteplease »

teravor wrote: post #9

it was a mistake to respond, over 90% of the controversy is performative as it nearly always is. the ideologues will posture and claim that they are dropping mullvad while being unlikely to follow through. most people wouldn't even know the controversy happened nor care. with the response, you now trigger various human instincts that draw attention, promote further gossiping and wondering where the fire is with all t…

A mistake from a public relations perspective, but I think taking an explicit stance against deplatforming and self-censorship is consistent with Mullvad's stated mission.

Re: Donation Controversy

#33

Post by dijit »

bsoup wrote: post #31
dijit wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's nice to cherry pick inflammatory things that have been stated without their full context. The context in this case is that he was directly asked: "What about the people born in Sweden who commit so many crimes and do not integrate at all, live their whole lives on welfare, as we are seeing in the statistics it is mostly the second-generation who are most represented" (I am adlibbing and translating, but this is…

Constitutions and laws are no protection for scapegoats once extremists gain power. Anyone who knows 20th century history knows where "we must deport these damn parasites" ends. If they are called "social welfare-Somalis" (where do social welfare-Swedes get deported to?), if they are not included in "the Swedes" and "our own damn people", if "even if they are born in Sweden, [...] they have no natural connection to S…

Ok, but then you're saying Sweden is on the hook, in perpetuity, for an entire family tree of a stream of people that seems to never end unless racists take control of migration (which is what has happened now in Sweden).

Honestly, I really understand what you mean, but offering no solution and then talking down anyone who dares talk about it is exactly how extremists got support here in the first place.

If you're not living in sweden please keep in mind: this kind of demographic change is totally unprecedented in all of Europe and in all of history. In less than a 1/3rd of a generation, a decade, 10% of the population of a country was artificially added.

Such a thing has not happened historically unless a country was conquered. -- even then, it took 500 years for Skåne to be Swedish (in fact, many Swedes joke that they're still Danish). Just to say that a cultural shift of such magnitude is going to cause some tension no matter what, nobody has done it at this scale.

To then have those same people and their children, then, cause a disproportionate amount of violent and sexual crime while also being a disproportionate financial cost to the country: absolutely needs some kind of answer.

I'm not saying that Örebro Partiet or SD have that answer, but I sympathise with people who are tired of seeing this happening plainly with their own eyes, and being branded as racists, fascists or nationalists for clumsily trying to talk about it without the right verbiage because they've never had to exercise these kind of thoughts before.

Re: Donation Controversy

#34

Post by OkayPhysicist »

ai_critic wrote: post #25
EA-3167 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like the usual far right bottom line dressed up with a bunch of “Free Pizza” promises to cover it with a veneer. Personally I wish people like his had the balls to stop hiding behind that kind of thing, we all know what someone is about when “immigration is the main problem” in their viewpoint. Own it. Or if it’s something to be ashamed of… accept the shame.

Failure to recognize immigration as a problem for a sizeable chunk of the population--rightly or wrongly--ensures that they will fall pray to demagogues and will never again trust those who repeatedly blew them off. Progressives fuck this up continually across the policy spectrum, by having no answer other than "no you're wrong/immoral/stupid" to people who express concerns in categories that have strong orthodoxy re…

That's because they are wrong, immoral, and stupid. They're grovelling in the crumbs left over by the rich, and then getting pissed that there are other people groveling for the same crumbs.

Blaming immigrants is easy because you get an immediate base amongst racists (the immoral). They'll perk up at the sound of your dog whistles, and immediately start barking shit like "finally someone had the bravery to say what we're all thinking". That amplification of your message then reaches the reactionaries, who accurately look around at the world that is hell bent on destroying them, but are a little too dense to understand the web of systems that make up that world, and thus are eager for a simple explanation (the stupid). And once your message gets embedded in the zeitgeist from that lot, normal, relatively detached from politics people start hearing all this talk about immigration being a problem, and believe it (the wrong).

The same way you can't be frugal to make up for making poverty wages, you can't shrink the pool of disadvantaged workers to make them advantaged.

Re: Donation Controversy

#35

Post by OkayPhysicist »

viccis wrote: post #22
EA-3167 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like the usual far right bottom line dressed up with a bunch of “Free Pizza” promises to cover it with a veneer. Personally I wish people like his had the balls to stop hiding behind that kind of thing, we all know what someone is about when “immigration is the main problem” in their viewpoint. Own it. Or if it’s something to be ashamed of… accept the shame.

Not really, this looks more like pre-1990s leftism that you see from people like Caesar Chavez. Broadly redistributive policies towards the working class and a strict curbing of immigration as a source of exploited labor underclass for corporations to fatten their margins. There's a reason Bernie called open borders a "Koch brothers proposal".

There is a very, very, very large gap between "open borders" and "keep all those disgusting foreigners out". I guarantee if you ask the average "immigration control activist" in most countries what the acceptable number of brown people to let into their country is, the answer is zero. Because the most active members of these movements are motivated by racism.

Re: Donation Controversy

#36

Post by OkayPhysicist »

slopinthebag wrote: post #14
0xy wrote: post #11

Only in Europe could a party with socialist-leaning values on every single issue except immigration be branded 'far right'. This is the case in every single European country for some reason. Marine Le Pen's party in France leans socialist on econ but is painted as 'far right' for the same reason.

[flagged]

Congrats on falling for hundred year old propaganda. Fascism loves dancing around in the flayed skin of the socialism it violently represses. Go look into what they did to trade unions if you think the Nazis were some Worker's Party.

Re: Donation Controversy

#37

Post by OkayPhysicist »

dijit wrote: post #33
bsoup wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Constitutions and laws are no protection for scapegoats once extremists gain power. Anyone who knows 20th century history knows where "we must deport these damn parasites" ends. If they are called "social welfare-Somalis" (where do social welfare-Swedes get deported to?), if they are not included in "the Swedes" and "our own damn people", if "even if they are born in Sweden, [...] they have no natural connection to S…

Ok, but then you're saying Sweden is on the hook, in perpetuity, for an entire family tree of a stream of people that seems to never end unless racists take control of migration (which is what has happened now in Sweden). Honestly, I really understand what you mean, but offering no solution and then talking down anyone who dares talk about it is exactly how extremists got support here in the first place. If you're no…

The key observation missing from the conversation here is that you're being judged by Americans, where damn near everybody (save ~1% Native Americans) belongs to "an entire family tree" of immigrants. Race relations are one of those things that the US catches a lot of shit for because we've had to deal with it for the entirety of our nation's history, which lets us look at the attitudes alarmingly prevalent in Europe and go, "hey, that's like when my granddaddy was burning crosses in his neighbor's lawn. That's fucked up".

Re: Donation Controversy

#38

Post by dijit »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #34
ai_critic wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Failure to recognize immigration as a problem for a sizeable chunk of the population--rightly or wrongly--ensures that they will fall pray to demagogues and will never again trust those who repeatedly blew them off. Progressives fuck this up continually across the policy spectrum, by having no answer other than "no you're wrong/immoral/stupid" to people who express concerns in categories that have strong orthodoxy re…

That's because they are wrong, immoral, and stupid. They're grovelling in the crumbs left over by the rich, and then getting pissed that there are other people groveling for the same crumbs. Blaming immigrants is easy because you get an immediate base amongst racists (the immoral). They'll perk up at the sound of your dog whistles, and immediately start barking shit like "finally someone had the bravery to say what w…

Sorry, you speak about this as though you are an American (not sure if you are) but you can't hope to understand the realities of living in a country that just injected 1/10th of its population in a decade.

The demographic of the largest cities in Sweden has changed from 17% foreign born in 1986 to over 55% today- in a single generation. (Malmö, were I live as a migrant myself).

At the same time, the healthcare service is struggling, the police can't cope with the crime situation and there are gangs shooting people and grenades blowing up apartments everywhere.

AND: At the same time, the Geni coefficient remains remarkably low, and income inequality much lower than the US, so this "blame the rich" makes sense in the UK and US, but it's not the problem that Sweden has.

Sweden has mismanaged a lot of its public services (training, then underpaying doctors - leading to them going private, then there being a shortage of doctors which leads to the government paying huge contractor rates for those doctors - which is hugely expensive, so nurses try to avoid you seeing a doctor - which leads to less preventative healthcare, and more serious issues, which is more strain on the healthcare service).

It's not uniquely immigrants fault, they have a role to play in the welfare system and being hugely overrepresented in crime, but it's really not rich peoples fault.

Not in Sweden.

Re: Donation Controversy

#39

Post by dijit »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #37
dijit wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, but then you're saying Sweden is on the hook, in perpetuity, for an entire family tree of a stream of people that seems to never end unless racists take control of migration (which is what has happened now in Sweden). Honestly, I really understand what you mean, but offering no solution and then talking down anyone who dares talk about it is exactly how extremists got support here in the first place. If you're no…

The key observation missing from the conversation here is that you're being judged by Americans, where damn near everybody (save ~1% Native Americans) belongs to "an entire family tree" of immigrants. Race relations are one of those things that the US catches a lot of shit for because we've had to deal with it for the entirety of our nation's history, which lets us look at the attitudes alarmingly prevalent in Europe…

I think the other lesson we could draw from America is that we shouldn't let everyone in, they'll kill us, take our place and feel bad about it a few hundred years later... maybe.

Re: Donation Controversy

#40

Post by rixed »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #35
viccis wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, this looks more like pre-1990s leftism that you see from people like Caesar Chavez. Broadly redistributive policies towards the working class and a strict curbing of immigration as a source of exploited labor underclass for corporations to fatten their margins. There's a reason Bernie called open borders a "Koch brothers proposal".

There is a very, very, very large gap between "open borders" and "keep all those disgusting foreigners out". I guarantee if you ask the average "immigration control activist" in most countries what the acceptable number of brown people to let into their country is, the answer is zero. Because the most active members of these movements are motivated by racism.

It must feel great to feel so vastly superior...

But everyone being crass and stupid was not even the question. The question was: how many more battles are going to be lost on that hill?

Post reply on HN