The Sweden Democrats—Alone Against Establishment Extremists

September 20, 2010

[Previously by Rafael Koski:
Immigration Debate Opens Up (Maybe) In Europe

For the first
time, in Sweden`s September 19th elections, the
patriotic immigration reform Sweden Democrat party

won entry
to the

Swedish Parliament,
Riksdag. There
is a 4% threshold to gain seats, but the Sweden
, giving them a healthy 20 seats out of total of

The election was
a fight between two coalitions, one supposedly
right-wing and the other

Sweden, which for most of the last
century was ruled only by the Social Democrat party, has
now definitively moved to the two-party system more
common in the Anglo-Saxon countries.

And, as in
Anglo-Saxon countries, it`s a

two-party system
in which there`s

little real difference
between the coalitions. Both

in their opposition to
Red-Greens just more

. Leading Swedish newspapers allied with
all parties had as their lead story on Election Day an
admonition not to vote for the Sweden Democrats, lest
the sky fall. A vote on the Sweden Democrats was called
(?) by the other parties.

But considering
that Sweden has had perhaps the world`s most open and
non-discriminatory immigration policy in the last 20
years, which increased the number of immigrants from
outside Europe to one million or 10 % of a

historically homogenous population
, it would be more
accurate to describe the rest of Swedish parties as

extremists—and the Sweden
Democrats as the moderates.

The Sweden
Democrats now hold the balance of power in the Riksdag.
The center-right Alliance has 172 seats and the
Red-Greens have 157 seats to the Sweden Democrats 20.
Alliance Prime minister
is considered the winner of the elections
and will continue ruling. But his Alliance holds a
minority in the parliament.

Reinfeldt should co-operate with the Sweden Democrats,
who are the closest ideologically. But he has said he
will only talk to the Greens—apparently accepting a

version of the

Belgian “cordon
by which all other parties have been

into not co-operating with the

Vlaams Belang.
Of course, this only benefits the
Left and is a measure of its continuing ideological
hegemony. Nevertheless, the precarious parliamentary
situation might well mean that the other parties and the
media will eventually have to take the Sweden Democrats

What is also
significant is that the Social Democrats, for the first
time officially running within a Red-Green coalition,
have had their worst result since 1914. The Social
Democrats have lost their status as the working class
party and are now just the party of social workers and

Real workers
are moving over to other parties, among
them the Sweden Democrats.

The Sweden
Democrats gained some international media attention
before the elections by publishing their own
on rape
in Sweden (it found that about half were
committed by immigrants), and by

attempting to air a TV ad
showing the threat that
immigrants, personified by burqa-clad women, pose to
Swedes` pensions. A commercial television channel
refused to show the ad. This led Danish nationalist
in both of the governing coalition parties to call for
election observers to
ensure that democracy is upheld

Swedish media
elites and the Establishment parties made fools of
themselves by calling the Sweden Democrats a Nazi party
trying to get away with

Goebbels-style propaganda
. In the end, the TV
commercial was allowed to play in somewhat modified
version. The party got a publicity victory by showing
that it is being treated unfairly by the Establishment
parties and their media supporters. The reaction against
the Sweden Democrats overshadowed all other election
themes and ensured that protest votes would end up to
the Sweden Democrats.

But note that
the number of Swedes who dared to protest the most
extreme immigration policy in the world was still under
6 per cent. Swedes learned during the long Social
Democrat hegemony in the 20th century to be
very docile. The Sweden Democrats have been officially

marked taboo
. Unfortunately, that counts—it has very
effectively kept it from reaching the parliament—until

There was a
period in Swedish history that is especially telling of
the political elites` approach to immigration. In the
years 1991–1994 Sweden, for decades dominated by the
Social Democratic party, had a serious recession.
Unemployment reached the highest levels ever. A party

New Democracy
had hit the headlines in 1991 by with
populist rhetoric against the elite, and a harder
approach towards asylum seekers.

New Democracy
got 6.7% of the vote in 1991, out of the blue. The
Social Democrats had to accept they lost power. But the
new government, what is now called the

center-right Alliance, did
absolutely nothing to meet grievances that had led to
the rise of New Democracy. In the year 1992, a total of
82 000 refugees (mostly from


were accepted into Sweden, amounting to one percent of
Sweden`s population. This was a world record on a per
capita basis. The government rather accepted just about
any refugee into the country rather than face the charge
of “racism”.

New Democracy
voters learned the lesson that they could not change
anything by their votes, and their party was destroyed
in internal fights. This was a bitter loss for Swedish

The Sweden
Democrats have a history of its own. It`s a party
founded by outspoken nationalists, which has had
internal coups and purges of its

right wing
during its 20 years. The party has gained
electoral success with a very moderate patriotism that
defends the ideal of

, a

national welfare state
. Its key election theme has
been securing Swedish pensions and care for the elderly
the onslaught of immigrant welfare recipients

The party leader
of Sweden Democrats,

distinguished himself by criticizing Islam
oppressing women and propagating violence. Of course,
from a Politically Correct viewpoint, it is more
acceptable to attack a religion that is incompatible
with liberalism than openly to discuss what the presence
of Third World immigrants will mean to the Swedish
people. But the resulting problems—crime, poverty—are
not due to Muslim immigrants exclusively.

The Sweden
Democrats profess not to object immigrants because of
their skin color—just that they want

immigrants to accept the Swedish
“way of life”,

learn the language and integrate. They also accept
homosexuality, arguing that Muslim immigrants

pose a physical threat
to Swedish homosexuals and
create a dilemma for Swedish liberal values.

None of this
PC-talk has helped the Sweden Democrats much. They are
still called Nazis, extremists,
“haters”, etc. etc. Perhaps this intransigence from the real
extremists, who hold 90 % of the seats in the Riksdag,
may backfire and drive the Sweden Democrats to accept
that they are a nationalist party, that they don`t just
defend a “way of
or a set of values, but the Swedish nation—as
opposed to the multicultural, managed society that the

political Establishment wants to make of
the Swedish state.

Until quite
recently, the Swedish system had been such a success at
creating some wealth to distribute equally and at
convincing its inhabitants that they were living in the
best country of the world that the ruling elite had a
stranglehold on public opinion. But now,

criminality has risen
to such heights that it is no
longer possible for the ordinary Swede to ignore the
issue. Sweden has experienced a terrible crime wave in
the last 30 years. Foreigners are over-represented as
criminals. Some

, even
in Sweden are

lost to criminal gangs.
And the government is
suppressing this information because of ethnic

Swedish leftist
intellectuals have had fun in mocking the Danes for
racism when Denmark`s right-wing populist party, the
Danish People`s Party,

actually managed to alter the government`s policy
refugees. There has been much hand-wringing over the
possibility that Denmark`s former image in the world has
been changed to a picture of ugly racism. [`Denmark
Is Not a Racist Country
“, Der Spiegel,
5, 2007]

But the victory
for the Sweden Democrats means that Sweden is, against
the wishes of its media elite, becoming more like its
neighbours, with at least some debate on the necessity
of mass immigration.

Needless to say,
this doesn`t yet mean that anything effective will be
done to prevent the

looming displacement of Europeans
from their

historic homelands.
But at least some in Sweden are
questioning if multiculturalism is worth it.

Rafael Koski
(email him) is a
Ph.D student living in Northern Europe. He will be

Thilo Sarrazin`s
new book,

Germany Abolishes Itself
for soon.