Kategoriarkiv: Politik

Presentation av The Swedish story i New Delhi

20130704_170042

I mitten av juli 2013 presenterade jag min Sverigebok The Swedish story vid Centre for Civil Society i New Delhi, Indien. En liberal tankesmedja som jag själv arbetat på tidigare.

De unga åhörarna fick höra om det extrema landet i norr och hur det kan bli mer likt normala länder i World Values Survey diagram.  De ställde kloka frågor om vad detta skulle innebära t ex i välståndsförändringar vilket kan besvaras med att USA, Australien och övriga Skandinavien är minst lika rika el tom rikare men med mer normala värderingar. Här finns min PPT.

Snart kommer den svenska översättningen, prel kallad Bortom Extremsverige. Både den och den engelska upplagan kommer också finnas som eböcker.

Home schooling an American boy in Ukraine – a book review

ed

This review on Amazon of the ebook Edward came about as the author, Graham Seibert, contacted me after reviewing my book The Swedish story. My book is quoted in his and now I will try to judge his book. Amazon sure makes people publish and find new online friends. Much appreciated as I have similar international experiences..

His book is by far the most unique writing on education and society I have read. It is deeply personal yet abstract in its reasoning over his choice to leave the US for Ukraine and home school his very young child Edward. He tries to connect every detail of his own life, including two failed marriages and unsupportive adult children, with general knowledge and views about the rise and fall of Western civilisation, morals, politics and bits of science on intelligence testing and races, social development and ethnics groups. Not unlike my book about Swedish culture and history but more personal and far reaching into future demographic and economic changes.

INTRODUCTION

He starts his writing of the book Edward, which alludes to J-J Rousseau’s similar self-educational 18th century treatise Émile, from an impersonal point of view yet bold:

“This is a plan to home school Mr. Seibert’s son, Edward in his mother’s homeland, Ukraine. Character is key: if he is honest and dependable, Edward will be a success. Pride and respect for himself and his ancestors are essential inspirations to be a good husband, father, and provider. Mr. Seibert’s experience as a parent, private school trustee, teacher, and finally educational school student led to the strong conviction that, in educating a second family, he had to take full control of the process. This book describes why and how.”

By this rather megalomaniac stance the reader is caught into the author’s world of learning, views and future plans in Ukraine. Seldom has an author been as self-critical and open as this author and readers will be aware that he does not bow down to anyone.

Readers who do not appreciate his fight for starting a new family – and by God, telling the world about it in a book – will put the book down and are also urged to do so. Rousseau was also considered mad in his pedagogical fervour yet he started a whole new educational tradition, the progressive (of which neither I nor the author Graham Seibert have much care for).

I predict that very few will actually read and appreciate this new 21th century Émile but for those who do, it is a pleasure to follow Seibert’s well-written and well- reasoned ways. Yes, the book is mad to begin with but it is worth investing the price and read carefully. In the end, one may consider it a worthwhile read but still a mad endeavour to tell the world about one’s personal life and total focus on one single poor toddler in Kiev, Edward or Eddie as his writing father calls him.

I cannot refrain from thinking while reading about the fatherly cares and plans for his son, the progeny, of what Edward Seibert will think when he reads the book himself, by year 2030 or so. But that has not and should not keep Seibert Senior from publishing his thoughts.  His grownup children in USA seem to be lost to him anyway and maybe Edward will be proud to become the topic of 230 pages of partly dense academic prose of the philosophical foundations of his character development. Or not.

THE AUTHOR

Here is the family story of the author Graham SeibertEdward, essential knowledge to readers:

The author Graham Seibert grew up in California in early 1940s and had a decent career in information technology, teaching and statistics on the East coast (Maryland and Washington D.C.).  After two marriages and somewhat unsuccessful attempts to raise his children, he is now starting a second family in Ukraine.  His dissatisfaction with raising his first children seems to be their inability to appreciate traditional American values, history and culture (but in that they are like all born after 1950) and their abstinence from granting him grandchildren, not to mention decent careers, stable relationships and marriages.  He states openly that:

“I assign the bulk of the responsibility for my first family’s failure to carry on my values, to do the ‘normal’ thing and give me grandchildren, to dysfunctional cultural trends in the United States”.

Seibert set out , in 2007 to find a new mate by the time he retired at 65 years. After a stint in Costa Rica, he set off to Kiev in Ukraine to study Russian and eager to find someone more like him with traditional/conservative values and less liberal/individual bias. Mrs. Oksana Seibert appeared out of the blue, a Russian speaking Ukraine traditional woman. Seibert does not tell us how they met as that may be another book and Edward was born 2011. The book tells also of his future children, which means this adventurous American septuagenarian will procreate siblings to the much awaited Edward. Yes he is too much but I like his daring ways.

His reasons for favouring Ukraine is its freedom for children (ride on public buses to school, play and walk outside, much like Sweden), high trust in neighbourhood but distrust of government (which has supported self-reliance), homogenous population and economical living standards. His American retirement on Social Security will get him by but he plans to invest in real estate as money may be taxed or taken somehow. He trades and invests online to stretch his budget, an occupation he seems to love and recommend to toddler Eddie too.

LEARNED WRITING

His learning is deep yet he reads widely and draws conclusions which are in the order of libertarian and paleo-conservative lines. His statement  “Our message for Eddie will be that he can and should expect just about nothing from government” is of classical liberal and laissez faire governments of the 1776 constitutional kind, not found anywhere since. Furthermore, 18th century conservative philosopher Edmund Burke will guide the political philosophy of the author’s progeny dear Edward:

“Our job will be do provide Eddie with a Burkian sense of how the world really works, starting with the premise that the only person in the entire world who is entirely dedicated to his welfare will be Eddie himself.”

The author calls himself an ex-patriate which is true but in US’ political terms he would support the two presidential candidates Pauls anyday.  This is no stated but my conclusion as he does not dwell much on contemporary American politics, thankfully. He rather discuss long term changes in Western culture and civilisation, often contrasting Christian, liberal and evolutionary thoughts with one another. Evolution wins most of the time,

A thesis he argues for with some scholarly and journalistic references is that the white Americans and Europeans will become the new Jews, destined to be a successful yet unappreciated minority.  They will be scare in numbers with their higher intelligence and lower birth rates, but essential to drive an even more complicated economy relying on technology, science and information services. People will hate them for their brains like the Jews always have been and unfortunately the whites are the first to blame themselves for their privileges.  He notes that:

“As intelligent people are having fewer and fewer children, and the world is simultaneously putting a premium on intelligence, on people who can create value by automating the repetitive work now done by duller people, Eddie’s talents should be in increasing demand. Jews have been combating envy for eternity; white people have only a couple of generations’ practice. We should have become more adept at defending ourselves by the time Eddie comes of age.”

FALL OF THE WEST

The relentless self-criticism of Western civilisation is one of the main threads in this book, which echoes of Bruce Bawer, William Dalrymple and Charles Murray. Edward is thought to be safer in Ukraine when the financial chaos will start to spread in the next decades the author and father claims and hopes. Left in the US, he would be target of even more criticism from both minority groups (by then in majority) and from the whites themselves in their political correctness and self-annihilation.

Like Gibbon’s classical 18th century study of the rise and fall of Rome and the 20th century study Family and Civilization  in 1939 by Carle Zimmerman,  Siebert  views civilisations come and go but finds a pattern in the decline due to rise of nuclear family both in Athens, Rome and the West. A mis-guided sense of altruism, UN mantra of egalitarianism making all racial differences due to ill-meaning society and neglect of adherence to one’s tribe, culture and nation adds to the current crisis of the West, along with its near economic disasters. He notes that:

“You can count me among today’s doomsayers. As I write this I am predicting a worldwide depression starting fairly soon, one that will affect just about every country in the world. I anticipate a lot of good coming out of it, however. I think it will restore a work ethic and expose the multitudinous faults in the social models that have emerged from academia to dominate all of Western society over the past century. Specifically, it will show that people are indeed different, and that unbounded altruism can doom a society. I expect that it will accelerate the decline in birth rates already visible in almost every nation, which in turn will reduce population and pressure on the world’s resources. It will also put a premium on educated and capable young men – like Eddie.”

The political correctness of American academia, politics and media is surely a reason to keep Edward away from his country (his citizenship is American) but he needs to learn how the important mumbo-jumbo talk. His father relates current PC taboos without pardon:

“Should you happen to have a social death wish, you can easily exercise it on campus by offering the opinion that homosexuals subject themselves to more health risks than heterosexuals, that children do best when they are raised by two natural parents who happen to be married to each other, or by repeating Larry Summers’ gaffe of referring to intelligence research that rather conclusively shows that at the high end of the range of intelligence, men fairly handily outnumbers women. Don’t even get started talking about how low the actual incidence of rape by white men is, compared to minorities, or how many false reports of rape there happen to be. Anybody with a brain in his head knows that rationality has nothing to do with these dogmas. If you are a student, a government employee, or some cog in the wheel of a big corporation you have to spout the party line or the powers that be will make your life miserable. This is the modern limit on individual freedom: even to propose that unlimited freedom in individual behaviour might not necessarily be a good thing is not permissible.”

CHARACTER

Edward’s education will be about character formation rather than only academics. The author and father  notes that his educational role models- Aristotle, Locke and Rousseau-  devote their efforts to morals, virtues, judgement and steady development of one’s civil and familial duties. Central is Aristotle’s ethical doctrine of the Mean and in the background the classical wisdoms of Socrates, Stoics and Montaigne.  Four principles of moral virtue should define the goals of Edward; work hard, learn from experience, pray/meditate and depend on your judgment.

Edward and his future siblings  “need to appreciate restraint and modesty in an immoderate age”, the author writes with reference to sex and indulgence in drinking and drugs etc.

The father recalls these values of modesty being around when he grew up in California by 1940s, went to El Cerrito High School and attended Mrs. Stewart’s private etiquette and ballroom dance academy. Of course he is quaint and old-fashioned in his attitudes but he argues reasonably and grants that his cherished childhood and decent middle-class schooling will never appear as the world has changed. But it was not all bad and there are things to learn from his own father, Edward’s grandfather, who taught young Graham to drive nails with three strokes in mid 20th century California. His father’s hammer is still with him in Ukraine.

SELF-DEFEATING LIBERALISM

Home schooling a child, which is the rationale for writing this book on little Edward, is often thought to raise egotistic and weird anti-social children.  The author strongly declare his and his new family’s and society’s abilities to counter any such developments. The liberalism in USA is what breeds these undesirable traits he states and what is even more unintended; people have become less original in their individual freedoms, strangely enough:

“Liberating man from historical constraints and responsibilities has taken away the incentives that drive people to be creative. Nobody would argue that free time is more abundant today than ever, and there are more people than ever, yet none would argue that humanity is reaching new heights in music, fine art, theatre, literature, inventiveness or much of anything else. The liberal premise that freedom was a prerequisite to creative expression is simply not borne out. The disadvantages, however, of freeing citizens from the obligation to invest in social capital are becoming clearer by the year.”

This observation of a conformist individualism is something I also have found in Swedish value systems (see my book The Swedish story and Gina Gustavsson’s PhD thesis, Treacherous Liberties, 2011, Uppsala University).

His current scholarly references on morals, education and evolution, apart from Charles Murray, are David Gelernter’s America Lite, John Gatto’s An Underground History of American Education and books by Stephen Pinker , Alain de Benoist, Diane Ravitch among others. With these contemporary sparring partners in research and current debate, he sets out to discuss his thoughts on Christianity and liberalism vs. evolution and socio-biology. Being a science – inclined thinker, the author leans towards his teenage hero Charles Darwin but views somehow that practical Christianity rather than Enlightment liberalism is evolution has found does the job better.

But he is very clear about his unfounded support for Christianity which bothers him but in the end is useless to argue about. His wife Oksana is a Russian Orthodox Christian and himself, the retired and late father Graham Seibert, is a reluctant believer, more of an agnostic and existentialist. But he calls himself a practical Christian, in the view of Winston Churchill who cheered the British masses with “Onward, Christian Soldiers” to unite them in faith but most of all in hope.

HOME SCHOOLING

Since the book is about home schooling (which is the lesser part but does not make the book less valuable), the writer tells us some things about how Edward shall go about his studies.

The curriculum  at the Seibert family home in Kiev will contain;

Languages – English, Russian and Ukrainian

Math

Biology

Physics

Chemistry

History

Society

Business

Information tools

There will be focus on one or two subjects at a time, depth rather than skipping through. Meta cognitive skills are desired goals above all as academic content change quickly.

Much attention is given to values and social behaviour, just was set out in the preface with references to Aristotle, Locke and Rousseau. Little Edward as well as all future Seibart children will have learn to behave well before one year. We find small sections on preparations for Edward’s future relationships, flirting, courting, how to find a mate and succeed in marriage, as well as who to make small talk, dinner conversation and if needed, argue and fight.

The home schooler and father Graham Seibert hopes to find fellow homeschoolers in Kiev and globally online which is an important reason for writing his book Edward. That seems not be an easy task locally in Kiev, but online there are many opportunities to meet and share experiences and teaching matters.

The 70 year old father Graham Seibert keeps well after doing daily physical exercises for 40 years, which he wants to his son Edward to continue, as well as to train in some (individual) sport. Outings will be useful to home schooled little Edward, such as paddling down the Dnieper River by Kiev and visiting the family cottage, the traditional Russian/Ukrainian dacha, close by. Biking will be common way of transport and enjoyment including how to fix flat tyres oneself.  Music, grooming, sketching, painting is to be taught along with photography, video, computer graphics, housework (including sewing). Regular text books are to be avoided but father and son will assembling text books themselves when needed. Test will be done as time comes.

The little boy will listen to fairy tales, pre-Disney style and some Biblical tales, such as

The story of creation

Adam and Eve

Cain and Abel

Sodom and Gomorrah /Lot’s wife

Noah and the flood

Noah and Ham

Abraham and Sarah; Abraham’s readiness to sacrifice Isaac

Getting Jacob married, the story of Jacob and Laban deceiving one another

Joseph and the coat of many colours

Pharaoh and the plagues; the Exodus

The Kiev house where all this will be done will have small bedroom for the children with no electronic devices available, certainly not handheld connected machines. No television will be sounding in the living room and no children sneaking into their rooms for undesirable activities (as the author’s earlier children did watching porn and smoking pot).

CAREER

The future career of Edward is vaguely mentioned yet with some directives.  The father hopes for him to excel academically and find a future in science, business, finance or real estate. Ideally he should be his own boss, have integrity and be a master of his wealth, not enslaved by it. Further, he should marry early and abstain from sex.  Entering the workforce by 2030, when a high IQ and sought after traditional middle-class social skills are desired but rare, he should make it as well as his father or better.  They may even cooperate:

“I also plan to teach Eddie about trading and investing. I will be entering my eighties as he enters his teens. One doesn’t have to be a statistician to anticipate that I will lose a little bit of mental acuity in my ninth decade. I will depend on Eddie to help manage my IRA portfolio, when possible giving him some fraction of it to manage by himself. I hope he takes a strong interest; it is the money that will support him in college and his mother in later life.”

Life will not be all fun and play for Edward. Being kind of thrown out of two countries with an fast aging father and not siblings close by (or even desiring to meet the former family members), the father and author “anticipate a kind of existential loneliness for Eddie, as a man out of his times”. He will be like a Jew but without a Jewish tradition and tribe. If the whites of Europe will gather into new nationalist tribes, Edwards may feel connected to them but the father is sceptical, even if these groups would support his agenda of procreating more white (grand) children.  He suggests Edward to remain aloof and simply observe the cultural changes, a wise decision. Edward’s loyalty is primarily to his family and he is expected to carry on the family line, no matter what happens to the world.

We want grandchildren, the father and mother of Edward state. That was the reason Seibert left the US and why he found a new wife and wrote this remarkable book. Sorry his personal longing for grandchildren might not come true within his own lifespan, but being a true Darwinist he seems not to care as long as his genes evolve.  I am impressed by his honesty and his clear-sightedness in so many important areas.

DRAWBACKS

However a few glitches stick out that I noticed.

His criticism of Jewish cosmopolitanism and their support for black grievances against the whites but also admiration of their learning, success and separation of culture does not make sense. He scorns them for promoting universal values yet they have survived by keeping to themselves.

He wants to instil a sense of being superior in Edward which is of course fair for any parent, but stating it in a book makes a teenage and adult Edward Seibert embarrassed and maybe bullied. Tell him rather, but do not write it. His personal future being the topic of a book by his father is enough.

Digressions abound. Most of the time entertaining but for readers with little interest in the history and evolution of our civilisation, they could make up another book, the third in line.

Bitterness is accidentally surfacing, as when the old family and children are mentioned. I find them awkward even if their attitudes and life choices are set into a general picture of the decline of the West. How they relate to their father after this publication I do not want to think about.

These are small drawbacks in a great book. Yes it is by far the maddest thing I have read in a long time but I like his old tyme style. He is certainly a Grumpy Old Man to most people, a proud one at that but he has every reason to be a Happy Elderly Man.

GRATITUDE

Many thanks Graham Seibert for the splendid endeavour accomplished with starting your new family and the book to you written to set yourself a goal in your home schooling.  I am sure that in a century or two Edward will be as well known as Émile.

Två folkdemokratiska decennier – Sverige som det snälla Vitryssland

Belarus - Minsk - National Library - modern architecture

2013 ekar det konstigt av nostalgi över Sveriges 1970- och 80tal. Det kan vara Fridolin, Greider naturligtvis, och alla som ställt sina förhoppningar till gråsossen Stefan Löfven att föra landet in i, ja vart ? Tillbaka till framtiden dvs till 1970talets utopiska samhällsbygge och 1980talets expansiva offentliga sektor som inte stod Östblockets folkdmokratier efter särskilt mycket.

-LO går med röven in i framtiden , sade Metallbasen Göran Johansson en gång.

LO basen Bertil Jonsson var också rakt på sak om sin organisations konservatism, men positivt tolkat:
-Vi står i vägen !

Samma tongångar känns igen i dagens debatter , särskilt när 25 till 55 åringar debatterar. Det är som att allt var bättre förr, 1975 ungefär. Då fanns pedagogiska barnprogram i TV2 (Ville Valle & Viktor, Kapten Zoom), proggmusik och solidaritet. Då fanns samhörighet och ansvar för varann. Om något kan kallas reaktionärt är det denna oupplysta nostalgi, särskilt hos de som föddes på 1970talet.

Det är som om de inte vill veta något om statsmonopolkapitalismen, de korporativa organisationernas samförstånd (trots att de diggar Ebba Gröns Staten och kapitalet, som är en vänsterkritik av sossarnas och Wallenbergarnas korporativism), avsaknaden av alternativ till vård, skola, omsorg och, viktigast av allt, den misskötta utopiska ekonomin. De sk arbetsgivaravgifterna ökade till 39% vid 1982, utöver de kom fackligt framförhandlade tillägg. Skatter och löner ökade liksom priser medan tillväxten krympte. Stagflation, oljekris, nedläggning av branscher och statliga uppköp av förlustbolag. Samtidigt brassade sossarna på, sedan Fälldin regeringarna i lika hög grad (de skulle vara bättre sossar än sossarna), med ständigt nya löften och mer offentliga utgifter.

De offentliganställda antal fördubblades under 1970talet och blev en väljarbas att vara lojal mot. Enpartistaten byggdes upp och sitter fortfarande bergfast i det allmänna medvetandet, oavsett partifärg. Svensken är folkdemokrat light och gillar det, men skäms samtidigt lite. Löntagarfonderna var på vippen att kasta oss in i en västlig slags folkdemokrati men Gösta Bohman och Curt Nicolin insåg faran och mobiliserade. Idag hånas de av dagens 70talister som nog tycker att fonder var väl inte så farligt ändå. Eller så vill de införa revolution som 80talisterna Martin Schibbye och Johan Persson för vilket de hyllas i media.

När jag, född 1958, lyssnar till medborgare i de fd folkdemokratierna i Östeuropa och i Sovietunionen kan jag höra samma suckanden om att allt nog var bättre förr. Åsa Linderborgs gråtmilda artikel om 1989 års befrielse av Östeuropa och sedan Ryssland går igen. DDR upplever visst fn ett liknande uppsving när diktaturen ska ursäktas med att alla fick i alla fall gå i samma skola. Fö reste många svenska lärare till just DDR i samarbete med Skolöverstyrelsen och lärarfacken. Socialdemokraternas skolpionjär Stellan Arvidsson, tillika ordförande i Vänskapsförbundet Sverige- DDR, ledde studiebesöken.

Ibland är det som att Sverige tävlar med Vitryssland om att vara den sista folkdemokratin. Vitryssland är den onda varianten, vi den goda. Samma korporativa, halvtotalitära drag finns inte bara inom socialdemokratin utan även inom folkbildningen, bondekooperationen, hyresgäströrelsen och nu verkar även Svenska Kyrkan och flera muslimska grupper via Seglora Smedja och Tro & Solidaritet ha hittat varann och byggt upp korporativa drag. Kollekter som samlas in i Svenska Kyrkan går till Seglora som taktfast trumpetar ut de rätta (ibland religiösa men mest organisationspolitiska) åsikterna.

Stat, kommun och landsting tar hand fortfarande om 65 % av ditt löneutrymme om du räknar in skatt, arbetsgivaravgifter och moms. Få vet detta och upplyses de viftar de gärna bort det pinsamma faktum att de bara till 1/3 kan förfoga över vad de arbetat ihop. Med dessa oerhörda resurser, världens näst största skattetryck efter Danmark, lämnar svensken över makten till de som vet bättre. Experterna, byråkraterna, journalisterna, myndigheterna som alla fixar och donar med våra liv, helt självklart. Om alla dessa personer som vi tilltrott nästan alla surt förvärvade slantar, också samarbetar med varann och har gemensamma hållningar i frågor om invandring, kultur- och mediapolitik, familjepolitik, energipolitik, skola osv och inte tillåter andra alternativa åsikter att höras lever vi fortfarande i en folkdemokrati. Det snälla Vitryssland.

Litteratur:
Claes Arvidsson, Ett annat land. Sverige och det långa 1970talet
– ” – , Olof Palme. Med verkligheten som fiende
Julian Barnes, The Porcupine
Assar Lindbeck, The Swedish experiment
– ” – , Ekonomi är att välja
Karin Sjöborg- Svanvall, Kentucky Fried Children
Mattias Svensson, Glädjedödarna

Medborgarskap och förmåner

medb

Vår välfärdsstat locker många. En minoritet har flyktingskäl enligt FNs konventioner, ca 10 %, meden de flesta kommer in pga andra skäl. Den största andelen är anhöriginvandring, inte sällan till nya parförhållanden. Allt detta brukar påtalas av Merit Wager, Gunnar Sandelin m fl så jag tänker inte upprepa fakta och argument för detta här, se länkar nedan.

Vad diskussionen om invandring bör handla om är principiella ställningstaganden. Tino Sanandaji har nyligen försökt argumentera för att medborgare i ett land har rätt till sina förmåner på ett äganderättsligt sätt. Ingen kan frånta oss medborgare detta men vi kan utsträcka den rätten till andra, om vi vill. Till asylssökande som väntar på beslut, till tiggare från EU länder, till sk papperslösa (illegala utlänningar) och till de personer som för tillfället befinner sig i landet. Sjukvård, akut eller inte, ekonomiskt understöd, skolgång osv. Allt detta kan vi medborgare besluta att andra ska kunna ta del av, men vi kan också inskränka dem rätten.

Vi skulle, som Philippe LeGrain föreslog det svenska Globaliseringrådet 2008, dela upp invandrare i kvot- och konventionsflyktingar med rätt till understöd medan övriga får arbeta för sitt uppehälle. Det skulle medföra slitningar men knappast värre än idag. FN tar ju ut de flyktingar som vi tar emot så den processen sker inte på Migrationsverket.

Vi kan vidare förenkla regelverket så att enbart svenska medborgare (och de flyktingar som beviljats enligt FN rätt till uppehållstillstånd) har rätt till alla förmåner i landet, dvs skolgång, hälsovård, bidrag till föräldrar och barn etc. Med detta skulle ett incitament att bli medborgare kraftigt förstärkas. De som tar sig hit får skäl att finna jobb för att kvalificera sig under de fyra år de behöver vara här. Utökar man krav på medborgarskap till att även klara av svenska och omfatta värderingar som vi vill främja, t ex efter Hollands medborgarskapsmodell, så finns ytterligare skäl att integrera sig snabbt i landet. David Camerons uppstramning av förmåner för invandrare till Storbrittannien pekar i samma riktning. Naturvligtvis för akutvård undantas men inget mer.

Enkelt budskap:
Kom hit men klara dig själv. Efter fyra år får du samma villkor som andra medborgare, dvs vi vet att du är att lita på och vill bidra till Sverige.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Inte fler sociala turister från EU 2014

schengen_area jpg

I sista stund ikväll tors 7 mars 2013 meddelas från pålitliga finska YLE att EU skjuter upp beslutet att släppa in Bulgarien och Rumänien i Schengensamarbetet.

Därmed får vår ansvariga minister Hillevi Engström sitta vackert på plats i korgen, eftersom hon till skillnad från Finland, Tyskland och igen här, och England inte insett hur illa den fria rörligheten kan bli om de två korrupta och fattiga länderna tas in i på allvar i Schengensamarbetets välfärdsstater.

Vad innebär då Schengen som Bulgarien och Rumänien vill komma med i? Jo. I 3 månader får en EU medborgare vistas i ett annat land, sedan måste man visa att man kan försörja sig efter att ha registrerat sig hos polisen. Av de många tiggare jag ser dagligen nu i kalla mars 2013 i Stockholms innerstad tror jag få kan visa något lagligt sätt att klara sitt uppehälle och knappast att de ställt sig i någon kö hos polisen efter 3 månader. Med Schengen skulle de visserligen ha dessa krav men slippa andra och de kan komma att få ekonomiskt bestånd. Till sommaren lär de bli mångdubbelt fler. Kylan är vårt bästa värn. Hade vi bättre klimat och samma generösa villkor och mottagande skulle landet varit är mer befolkat av besökare som inte gjorde rätt för sig.

Med dagens beslut är vi därmed för någon tid fredade från ytterligare sociala turister men det finns andra kategorier som bör också förhindras att öka och helst minska sin andel. Nedan finns ett försök till en kategorisering av skilda grupper av sociala turister, som är mer varierande är Göran Persson befarade 2003 och delvis var medskyldig till. Några kategorier som jag sett är dessa:

Papperslösa/Illegala utlänningar
Dessa personer får numera ha sina barn i skola, uppsöka sjukvård och betala mindre än svenska medborgare för behandlingar. De skyddas av godhjärtade medmänniskor som emellertid inte använder sin egen plånbok utan andras för att dela ut pengar till dem. Reser de med kollektivtrafik utan biljett finns de godhjärtade där med twitter hashtaggen #reva som varnar om kontrollanter finns i tunnelbanan.

Polisen försöker skilja de invandrare med tillstånd och väntande asylsökande från de som fått avslag eller tagit sig in i landet olagligt. Problemet är att dessa grupper ser identiska ut. De har oftast mörkt hår och mörkare hy än infödda nordbor. Integrationsminister Erik Ullenhag verkar inte ha förstått detta elementära faktum när han kritiserar polisens metoder för att skilja agnar från vetet. Rasprofilering är inte lagligt enligt våra egna lagar och EU konventioner men det innebär inte att polisen inte ska våga be om legitimation från gratisåkare, personer som smyger undan polisens närvaro och andra tecken på tveksam legal status i landet. Att regeringen Persson godkände Schengen samarbetet 2005 som innebär ökad inre utlänningskontroll verkar inte många ”upprevade” politiker och journalister ha reda på. Debattinlägg för polisens projekt Reva 1, 2 , 3

Ensamkommande sk ”Ankarbarn”
För några år sedan myntades begreppet ankarbarn. Med det menar barn som skickas in i ett godtroget landet, t ex Sverige, och låtsats inte ha någon familj. Efter tillstånd dyker plötsligt mor och far och syskon upp. 2007 till 2010 hände det i 10 % av fallen, ja tom i 25 % av fallen enligt Migrationsverket i en notis på deras hemsida som nu är borttagen: ”Under åren (2007–2011) beviljades totalt 6 109 ensamkommande barn/ungdomar permanenta uppehållstillstånd. Under samma period har 1 487 personer (föräldrar och syskon) beviljats uppehållstillstånd på anknytning till ett ensamkommande barn det vill säga knappt 25 procent.”

Vänta sig in
Gammal beprövad taktik. Historikern och socialdemokraten Åke Wedin skrev 2006: ” ”Generositeten med humanitära uppehållstillstånd fick två negativa följder. Den förstärkte signalerna till omvärlden. Snart visste alla, att det inte behövdes asylskäl eller skyddsbehov för att komma in i Sverige, det gick bra att ”vänta sig in”.

Outvisningsbara
Denna veckas sk nyhet är att drygt hälften av alla som ska tvångsutvisas (intressant begrepp för övrigt) kan inte skickas iväg då deras egna hemländer vägrar ge dem resedokument och ta emot dem. Problemet har funnits länge och polisresurser och platser på förläggningar belamras med dessa omöjliga personer. Vare sig de själva eller deras länder (Iran, Irak, Somalia mf l) är några man helst vill ha att göra med och vore man elak skulle man helt sonika skicka dessa motsträviga personer till Transnistrien , ett område vid Moldavien som inte har någon regering alls som kan ställa till problem.

Dock är vi svenskar inklusive mig inte elaka utan vi nöjer oss att betala för deras uppehälle, låt vara magert. Dock kan dessa utvisningsbeslutade personer hamna i en ny asylprocess om nya uppgifter skulle komma upp eller landets status förvärras, t ex fler bomber i Bagdad. Då vidtar en ny ansökan så är karusellen igång igen i åratal. Och de som står på tur till flyktingförläggningen för att ta dessa outvisningsbaras plats får fara till annat dyrare boende på Migrationsverkets och skattebetalarnas bekostnad. Se kategorien ”Vänta sig in” ovan.

Media
Tillhör samma kategori som ”Att vänta sig in” men får draghjälp av media ryckvis i tider av nyhetstorka. Kräver gärna mer än bara en familj på flykt, gärna spädbarn, sexuellt utnyttjade, apatiska sjukdomar, självmordshot etc. Humanitära och ömmande skäl duger ett tag men sedan tröttnar läsarna och tittarna, så bara de mest entusiastiska håller ut.

Försörjning
För de som stannar i Sverige utan tillstånd finns huvudsakligen fyra försörjningsmetoder; svartarbete, kriminalitet, tiggeri och prostitution. Bara ytterst få kan räkna med stöd från socialtjänst (EU medborgare i vissa ömmande fall, t ex sjukvård) och ideella föreningar. Soppkök i all ära men de kommer inte upp i de nivåer som krävs om man ska leva någorlunda gott. Då gäller det att ligga i dagtid i Bromma och andra villaområden.

Dessutom finns som jag påpekade i min blogg om försörjning risk för att småkriminella hamnar i gäng med mer allvarlig grov kriminalitet och politiskt motiverad kriminalitet, terrorism. Att leva på flykt och vara beroende av andras välvilja och gentjänster kan leda in fler in på fel bana. Kriminalitet, stora pengareurser och etnisk/religiös isolering är ibland relaterat (Gudfadern men också miljonärssonen Usama bin Ladin).

Välfärdsstat el invandring
Att Sverige och andra västländer måste välja mellan en generös välfärdsstat eller en generös invandring står klart. Diskussionen om Fredrik Segerfeldt och Johan Norbergs bok Migrationens kraft inlägg 1 och 2 visar hur argumenten måste brytas mot varann öppet utan anklagelser. Mitt eget inlägg i frågan är mer blygsamt men visar ändå vilka siffror det handlar om, 60 miljarder i statsbudgeten.

Dessa flitiga kunniga bloggare kan rekommenderas för de som vill veta mer om migrationsdebatt.
Merit Wager, Affes statistikblogg, Andreas Johansson Heinö Snaphanen

EU 2014 ?
Tillbaka till EU beslutet ikväll att avslå Rumäniens och Bulgariens medlemskap i Schengen, något som man uttryckligen lovat och stadfäst men som nu läggs på is. Kan detta vara det första steget mot en mer ansvarsfull migrationspolitik inom EU? Kanske för de inblandade länderna Finland, England och Tyskland, men knappast för Sverige. Sommarens tiggare kommer bli allt fler innan vi drar i bromsen. Redan nu skulle polisen kunna lagföra dem efter 3 månader och vid avsaknad av tillräcklig försörjning skicka hem dem, ev via sin ambassad som skedde 2012 i bärplockningstider under stor gråt och tandagnisslan från mediavänstern.

Som jag skrev i inledningen finns det all rimlighet att vara godhjärtad och bjuda in folk att bo hos sig och betala för deras mat och omkostnader, men det kan inte åligga den svenska staten att försörja de som tar sig hit utan pass, försörjningsutsikter eller legalt uppsåt. De kan bo hemma hos de familjer som har rum och köksbord att dela. Minskade vi skattetrycket rejält skulle dessa godsvenskar kunna visa upp sin vänlighet utifrån sina egna besparingar. Det måste väl ändå vara finast. Att jag ska betala för något de vill är knappast inget att skryta över.

Romer klarar sig själva men Ullenhag förvärrar med miljoner

I veckan (19 juli 2012) beslöt integrationsminister Erik Ullenhag att stödja romska kvinnor med att ge dem en särskild telefonlinje för att tala sexualitet mm till priset av 50 miljoner. Detta är ett otyg som inte ens alla romer själva vill ha men tyvärr i linje med Folkpartiets tidigare utredning om romernas situation i Sverige.

Det finns flera fel med Ullenhags utspel i sommartorkans Sverige:
1) Romerna anses inte kunne lösa sina egna problem och görs därmed ansvarslösa.
2) Sverige som land betecknas som skyldiga till allt romer gör och därmed ansvariga för allt.
3) Att ge en etnisk grupp särbehandling leder ofelbart till att fler grupper ställer liknande krav.

FPs välvilja ska riktas genom befintliga kanaler för arbetslinjen,som i detta fall blir socialtjänst, Försäkringskassa och Arbetsförmedlingen. Kvinnor som våldtas inom äktenskapet eller inte får ha preventivmedel klarar sig bättre om de själva klarar sin försörjning, inte via flummiga telefonlinjer med egna privilegier. Romer ska kunna klara av sina egna problem och behandlas varken bättre eller sämre än andra svenska medborgare.

Bort med den skymfande särbehandlingen och ge romer respekt. Romen Allan Schwarz skrev 2010 angående Maria Leissners utredning som beskyllde svenskar på samma infantila sätt som Ullenhag gjort 2012:

”Vi romer tar avstånd från hennes krav på en sannings- och försoningskommitté och en massa av hennes uttalanden liksom från hennes vilja av att smutskasta det svenska folket! Vi förundrar oss också över att Leissner återkommande vill göra oss romer till offer där vi utmålas som inkompetenta och underlägsna människor, som behöver ledas av statliga svenska tjänstemän med henne i spetsen.”

Socialist scandals 1990s – 2000s in Sweden

1. 1994. Business minister and union leader Björn Rosengren went to porn Club Tabu using union money ($8000 for one night), claiming he did not understand what kind of establishment he gotten into so late at night. Evidence of him being with prostitutes at the time is still around but not substantiated.
2. Fall 1995. Mona Sahlin, labour minister and deputy prime minister by then, later party leader 2007- 2010, had to leave her posts when parliament discovered that she had used public cash to purchase private services and goods, paid nanny services illegally, not paying child-care fees, taxes, 98 parking tickets and TV/ radio fees in time forcing her to the Swedish Enforcement Agency (Kronofogden). She had just accepted the post as party leader after Ingvar Carlsson in 1995 but left next year all political positions. She went during her personal crisis on a vacation to Mauritius with three staff members paid by government.
3. 1996. Public municipal employees’ union leader and Örebro county head Sigward Marjasin was charged with mismanaging public and private finances but later freed in court. Leading social democrats denounced him.
4. Winter 1998. Stockholm social democratic leader Mats Hulth had been buying drinks on taxpayers’ behalf for many years media reveals. Municipal rules for alcohol consumption had not been followed. Hulth was supported by the local social democratic club but had to resign.
5. 2000. Family ties within the social democratic party and sphere becomes obvious when the son Thomas of former minister Lennart Bodström and the daughter Brita of former minister Anna-Greta Leijon become ministers too. Families Nuder, Larsson, Toreson, Carlsson, Palme, Holmqvist, Damberg, Marén, Lindh and Holmberg were also using the social democratic party nespotic networks.
6. Winter 2001. Extraordinary rendition of two refugees after 9/ 11 by CIA at Swedish airport to Egypt without guarantees of the men not facing torture. UN, Human Rights Watch and Swedish parliament objected afterwards to the deportation. Responsible minister was the deceased Anna Lindh whom every involved social democrats conveniently later could blame.
7. Winter 2002. Prime minister Göran Persson’s wife Anitra Steen headed suppousedly unaware the Swedish alcohol monopoly Systembolaget when systematic corruption was revealed between suppliers of wine and liquor and the Swedish government buyers.
8. Spring 2004. Party leader Göran Persson bought a mansion with 500 acres for $2 million. Many hard working Swedes did not forget this, even if the purchase was perfectly legal.
9. Summer 2004. Finance minister and deputy prime minister Bo Ringholm was criticized for being lax in illegal wages paid by a sport club Enskede IF where he was president for ten years. Police investigation was started but shut down since crimes were done too long ago.
10. Fall 2004. Metal union officials went to sex clubs, bought liquor and dildos (to give to loyal women) for union members’ money in Trollhättan. One evening in Brussels three union officials spent $7000 on liquor and prostitutes.
11. Winter 2004. Prime minister Göran Persson was made honorary doctor at Örebro University on dubious grounds. The official motivation for his degree in medicine, science and technology (subjects which non-graduate Persson never had studied) could be viewed as a reward for his support of Örebro university college when applying for full university credentials. Earlier attempts had been refused by academic authorities but Persson made way for the new regional university.
12. 2005. Trade union LO fired two officials (Jan Edling and Olle Sahlström) when they wrote about how the union and socialists used false labour statistics (real unemployment 20 % rather than officially 5 %) and corruption in housing foundations meant for poor widows of workers’ families going to union officials.
13. Spring 2005. Gunilla Ekberg expert on sexual trafficking and prostitution at a government ministry threatened female journalist Evin Rubar and other women organisations, but minister in charge Mona Sahlin did not react.
14. Spring 2005. Social democratic parliament member Ola Rask forced to leave his leadership of socialist and union education center due to having two positions, and a pension, at the same time.
15. Spring 2005. Government Employment Agency in Nyköping threatened to withdraw benefits unless unemployed construction workers went to Stockholm to protest against budget cuts in unemployment benefits together with the union. The government Employment Agency official signed the letter together with union officials and both stated that the march was mandatory.
16. Summer 2005. Center Against Racism, created by ministers Jens Orback and Mona Sahlin, did not use their government grants properly and had little activity but many expenses on hotels and restaurant. The anti-racist center got new grants each year without control.
17. Fall 2005. Police used union officials when checking on foreign transport companies after a storm in southern Sweden. Unions checked for collective agreements (optional according to Swedish law) while the police looked at safety arrangements. Unions used the uniformed policemen to obtain secret information from foreign chauffeurs that they had no reason to give to union officials.
18. Fall 2005. Zakarias Winberg was fired from his position at a trade union after writing an article declaring his loyalty to Christian Democratic Party, not to the labour movement.
19. Winter 2005. School minister Ibrahim Baylan stopped a report from National Agency for Schools which had found that private schools made better results and that teacher qualifications did not matter. In Sweden agencies are independent from ministers, but Baylan made the agency remove the report from internet immediately. An edited version was uploaded later and Baylan had to explain his actions to constitutional council at parliament.
20. Spring 2006. Göran Persson was sentenced but with no punishment in court for illegal constructions at his mansion under the care of his brother. Neither of them knew that such constructions must be reported to municipality and a plan for working safety be prepared.
21. Fall 2006. Göran Persson threatened to withdraw government bonds in telecommunication multinational Ericsson because CEO Carl-Henrik Svanberg said that a shift of political power could be refreshing.
22. Fall 2006. Leading lady of Stockholm municipal social democrats Annika Billström lost her political position but used regulations to fund her private business while being supported by taxpayers after her lost election. Legal but immoral many thought.
23. Spring 2009. Union leader Vanja Lundby- Wedin did not act or understand when as board member of the union pension fund AMF, she supported its CEO with $9 million when he was laid off on top of the $6 million salary.
24. Fall 2010. Two local socialist politicians went to Stockholm, got drunk and brought prostitutes to the unions premises. Buying sex is illegal in Sweden and the legislation is heavily supported by the social democratic, feminist, green and left parties.
25. Summer 2011. Party leader Håkan Juholt got parliament to pay for his apartment while his woman stayed there too. He also mismanaged rented cars and travels to Belarus on parliament funds.

Socialist scandals in Sweden 1970s

SOCIALIST SCANDALS

1. Fall 1972. Croatian terrorists hijacked a plane at Malmö airport, asking for release of Yugoslavian terrorists that had killed an ambassador and occupied a consulate in Sweden and money. Minister of justice Lennart Geijer could not withhold against the terrorists and gave in to the demands.
2. Spring 1973. The labour unions own faltering construction company BPA was saved unconstitutionally by Olof Palme through a foreign aid project for Algeria, a corruption pattern that would unfold later .
3. Summer 1973. Bank robbery in central Stockholm leading to robbers holding hostages for five days. Sympathy arose between robbers and hostages leading to the Stockholm syndrome. Olof Palme emerged as soft on crime, talking to the robbers at their request for 45 minutes that was taped by the police. However 20 minutes remain lost of the conversation. Palme used the tense occasion when tear gas had disarmed the robbers to speak as a politician rather than a statesman and thereby using a crisis before the election.
4. Spring 1975. West German embassy occupied by left wing group Baader Meinhof terrorists which left four people dead and severely injured terrorists. The injured were immediately sent to West Germany in spite of doctors’ recommendations and with no negotiations with German officials. The minister in charge Anna-Greta Leijon was one year later hunted by same terrorists wanting to take revenge by kidnapping her, which did not happen due to clumsy planning by the terrorists. Swedish left wing activist Pia Laskar was sentenced in planning kidnapping the minister but later brought into social democratic and union circles as lecturer on queer and left activism .
5. Oct 1975. A spy working for the social democrat party was revealed at Gothenburg municipal hospital where he surveilled left wing activists. Two leading social democrats, police officer Hans Holmér and journalist Ebbe Carlsson, were involved but not charged. They were however charged later in 1980s for other illegal actions doing police work without legal authority.
6. Oct 1975. Pentti Ketola, Finnish social democrat, was stopped at Stockholm airport with cash coming from Germany to help Finnish unions campaign against communists .
7. Jan 1976. Hans Eriksson, leader of Transport workers’ union, vacationed in fascist Spain paid by employers in spite of the union blockade of Spanish general Franco’s dictatorship. Eriksson would later resign due to mismanagement of union funds.
8. Jan 1976. Ingmar Bergman, world famous film maker, were questioned by taxation authorities in front of actors during a rehearsal at National Theatre Dramaten and left Sweden for five years to Germany.
9. March 1976. Astrid Lindgren, world famous children’s author, had been double taxed with 102 % and wrote a satire in the largest tabloid about the greedy witch Pomperipossa in the land of money.
10. May 1976. Brothels with politicians, royals, judges, military officers and heads of government agencies as customers were linked to the social democratic party. Polish prostitutes associated with the communist country’s Stockholm embassy courted military officers and ministers. Under age girls were involved. Police investigation was hampered by leading socialist leaning police officers. Documents are still partly filed secret.
11. Aug 1976. Female clerk at parliament who took notes for ministers Palme et al. was cohabiting with important drug dealer who was given pardon by minister of justice Geijer. The woman was given new job in the labour movement .
12. Nov 1977. Geijer, by then former social democrat minister of justice, were named among other politicians including Olof Palme in the press for visiting prostitutes. Palme lied about Geijer and the whole affair in parliament and to media.

13. 1973 IB affair. public disclosure of a secret intelligence bureau, IB (Informationsbyrån) that without agreements from parliament and in opposition to routines of secret services, had registered and persecuted left wing activists and others that the ruling socialist party disliked or feared. The bureau did not exist officially in the intelligence services, so there were no laws on military or civil intelligence to follow.

Debatter i veckan

Sista ronden av Timbros arrangemang på Teater Brunnsgatan 4 gick av stapeln 9 maj. Det första gav goda skratt men lite substans. Jag gav mig ned till Brunnsgatan i tron att Johan Lundberg, Göran Hägglund och Åsa Linderborg skulle visa lite mer djup. Dessvärre var nog denna gång än tunnare soppa. Lundberg mullrade, Linderborg dinglade med kjolen och bara log när hon fick frågor om sin syn på Lenin från Lundberg (blog dan efter). Om någon höll måttet var det KDs Göran Hägglund som verkligen försökte tala om elitismen i kulturvänstern men pladdrades bort. Gratis underhållning och vin, tack Timbro och tack LO som hotade med strejk på 70talet så att SAF fick samla in fondmedel vars avkastning nu blev till Timbro.

Veckans andra debatt var heldagsföredrag på libertarianska FreedomFest. Jonas Himmelstrands berättelse om hans flykt undan Uppsala kommuns socialförvaltning var gripande. Hans tre barn som varit i hemundervisning i sex år kunde inte garanteras säkra av socialtjänsten själva. De sade rent ut detta. Samtidigt hade familjen fått viten på över 200 000 kr för brott mot skolplikten. De flydde i feb 2012 till Åland.Se hans initiativ Rohus och Mireja. Libertarianerna i Mises Institutet och Piratpartiets Falkvinge berättade om statsmakt och frihetpatos. Som gammal folkbildare var det härligt att se unga och gamla samlas från 9 till 19 en lördag med att lyssna på ett tiotal tankvärda föredrag. Tror detta arrangemang uppfyllde alla regler för bidrag men inte tog emot några. Härligt.

Swedish self – images, state individualism and my writings

I have written earlier here and here about the book I am writing on about the Swedish self- image that partly will be a reply to the influential concept of ”state individualism” in the 2006 book ”Är svensken människa?” by historians Henrik Berggren and Lars Trägårdh.

Historian Lars Trägårdh has become a source for the new moderate government polices to ensure continuity with the welfare state of earlier leftist years. The Guardian let him explain his views when Cameron was here and as well as the moderate daily Svenska Dagbladet and the very useful web discussion forum Newsmill let him speak for an influential audience recently.

Below is an expanded draft plan of the book that will amount to a critique of Berggren’s and Trädgårdh’s optimism of their coined concept of ”state individualism”, see the links above for presentations.

Draft of writings on Sweden – an outline:

Introduction

Sweden the last century is a microcosm of the affluent West, modernity and individualism. The last decades have been tougher but still the Swedes make it well in most global market indexes, except for primary education.
This study will tell both the success story of the welfare state and its downfall. The two theses I will pursue are that the Swedish welfare state has given rise to an unfettered individualism supported by the welfare state. This statist individualism is cherished by all political parties and has deep national roots. Secondly, radical policies to correct and nurture the Swedes’ behaviour and minds in good directions are sprung from belief in expertise, science and government. The isolation of Sweden outside continental Europe has been crucial for nurturing exceptionalism during the Swedish Empire 16-18th centuries and in its unique leap from a poor rural economy with peasant democracy to a modern welfare state in very short time in the last century.

This study will try to link the welfare state with the unique domineering politically correct policies in 21st century Sweden, where the most embarrassing is not doing and thinking what is correct, from sorting out the garbage to memorizing with ethnic groups could get offended by speaking one’s mind. The Swedes must collectively be made to make the right choices by political campaign, ideologist state apparatuses and benevolent media when buying alcohol, deciding on child care, caring for oneself when unemployed, sick or old and finding a place to live in. The centre-right parties in 1990s and since 2006 have reformed some welfare state mechanisms with great excitement together with the centre-left parties with less excitement. But all parties want to use the enormous state apparatus and its experts to control choices, processes and outcomes.

I will argue that this belief in the good state and its well meaning civil servants was accelerated by leftist policies since 1968. With a vocal intellectual bureaucracy under PM Olof Palme elected 1969 the Swedish welfare state changed from a modest reformist state handing out pensions to an aggressive Moloch that interfered with not only your wallet, taking two thirds to itself, but also your values and self-respect. What distinguish Sweden during 1960s – 1980s from other nations were the ability, need and desire to employ loyal teachers, doctors, lecturers, bureaucrats and PR agencies in municipalities, ministries, government monopoly media etc.

The results are still with us whenever we enter public spaces or deal with the government. We are the children, the government is the adults. The legendary social democratic PM Per Albin Hansson created used national romantic term “Folkhem” (People’s Home”) in 1928 to describe his social utopia. In this national home, everybody should be treated equal. No bullies, no favourites, no downtrodden children. The nostalgia and force of the term Folkhem is still in repressive use after its heydays 1930-1970.

Earlier research and commentary

Earlier research and journalistic commentary has been done successfully by foreigners like R Huntford, M Zaremba, M Rojas, M Alapoeus, A Brown, N Sanandaji, M Karaveli but also by self-critical Swedish scholars and authors like V Moberg, S Rydenfelt, S Burenstam Linder, T Segerstedt, H Zetterberg, J Norberg, B Sundberg Weitman, A Edwardsson, M Henrykson, S Fölster, P Engellau, B Rothstein, A Lindbeck, PT Ohlsson, J. W.F. Sundberg, C Arvidsson, L Trägårdh, Å Daun and KO Arnstberg along with proceedings from Axess seminars on Swedish history and modernity. My contribution will be to condense these findings and draw conclusions that will bring contemporary perspectives. Little has been published in English with a comprehensive narrative of the particularly Swedish road to modernity and individualism. My approach will be to tell the history of Sweden trying to explain how the distinct features of Swedish nationality made the late 20th century welfare state to implode yet without any sound and fury.

The findings so far seem to be that the Swedes wilfully accept living in a state with little respect for rule of law, with little knowledge of individual rights against authorities, paying over 60 % of wages in taxes, fees, VAT and payrolls and succumbing to a nationally correct culture and media. Swedes are simply not interested in much else than consumption, security and efficient government. Humanity, integrity, religiosity, moral values and individual responsibility and courage are not popular issues and make them nervous. I may accept that being somewhat bland, anxious and with few human traits common to other cultures and peoples is the pale Swedish prerogative but then we should not be proud of being sheepish. Swedish politicians and representatives usually take a very high moral ground with little base. Our history of forced sterilizations in 20th century is enough to prove out incapacity to both being the epitome of modern welfare state and an example of scientific rationalisation, eugenics, social conformism and mental hygiene going mad.

The current situation

What has accelerated the inner contradictions of the Swedish welfare state is the inability to speak openly about any of these matters in media and research. Slowly the intellectual debate will change but new areas since 1980s have replaced the older socialist paradigm, e.g. government versions of feminism, multiculturalism, child care, security paranoia etc. With state controlled media, education and weak parliamentary system with little civil society backing, the executive branch of government runs the country like a corporation. No matter if the CEO is socialist or not, the state machinery runs effectively in praise of the meek citizens.

Table of contents

Prel title: Swede land

Introduction
Part 1 History: hubris, humility and hubris again
History 1000 – 1930
Hubris 1930 – 1970
Humility 1970 – 2000
Hubris again 2000 – 2012
80 pages

Part 2 Anxiety, conformism and policies
Schools
Academia
Gender
Immigration
Culture/Media
Legislation
Foreign policy
Business/Economy
Welfare
Anxieties
180 pages

Part 3 Alternatives, ideologies and national mentality

70 pages incl references

Total 330 pages

Part 2 will cover the current debates in these policy areas after year 2000; with some exceptions (the mad 1970s in foreign policy and primary education will not be forgotten). Part 3 will conclude with references to current political philosophy and ideological debate in Sweden. Liberalism and conservatism has been revived since 1980s by liberal minded publishing houses (MTG, Axess) and think tanks (Timbro, Ratio, SNS) and will be considered along with useful studies by young writers like Hadley-Kamptz, Bard & Söderkvist, Norberg, Olsson et al. Little discussion on the particular issues, more on the national character of political culture and thought in Sweden. Debates in UK and USA on communitarianism, civic humanism and contemporary liberalism may be included.

Sweden and its past – a place for ideological innovation

Recently two texts have caught my attention. The first text is the Fokus´ article about the New Moderates usage of Henrik Berggren and Lars Trädgårdh´s thesis about the ”state individualism” in Sweden.The second text is by Nina Samandaji on the Swedish Model reassessed

Both texts try to wrestle the history of Sweden from its social democratic dominance. They seem to say that Sweden was already on its way to the welfare state, building on liberal values, protestant work ethics and market economy. Nima Sanandaji is a young liberal conservative who started his own think tank Captus, while Henrik Berggren is social democrat, looking backwards. Lars Trädgårdh has been associated with the Christian college Sköndal. What divides them is their usages of the new and ideological innovative Swedish history. Berggren and Trädgårdh seem stuck in their preservation of a exceptionalist story of Sweden, even if they broaden the story to be founded on pre-socialist principles. Sanandaji is looking both to the history, but he sees Swedes moving to USA making a better life for them there than other nations. The exceptionalism is not nationalistic. His hope is to the future of Sweden, building on what has changed since 1995 in business life, slimmer government and social reforms to enhance work rather than benefits. Berggren wrote recently a biography of Olof Palme. He has not left him yet. Others have.

Folkpartiets landsmöte

Jag åkte till Karlstad i en oktoberhelg 2011 for att besöka landsmötet inom Folkpartiet. Här finns några rader.

Partistyrelsen lyckades trixa fram ett svar om marginalskattenivåer som räddade FP från en syn på välfärd som alltid ska innebära höga skatter. Märkligt att det 2011 i Sverige upprätthålls att ett samband mellan höga skatter och hög välfärd alltid gäller, även inom borgerligheten. I Europa finns flera länder med lägre skatter men snabbare och bättre vård t ex.

Det blir en grannlaga uppgift att tala med folkpartister om detta men jag ska försöka. Här finns några argument från Timbro om välfärdens framtida finansiering, här om fler företagare (som genererar mer skatt till välfärd) från Fores och här historisk inspiration från landsbygdsliberaler. Bara sätta igång !

Sweden and the Swedes 1900-2010. Outline of book idea

I am currently planning to write a book on Swedish political history and lives in the welfare system. Here is ToC

Table of contents

”Sweden and the Swedes 1900-2010.
The ambition and failure to care for, control and develop bodies and souls”

Preface

1. Samples of welfare state lives and individuals 2011

Part 1 Hubris. 1900-1986.
Introduction

2. History of the welfare state 1900-1986. Myrdals. Statist individualism 19th century. Child rearing, modernity, control.
2.1. Birth of welfare state 1900, 1906, 1932, 1945, 1957
2.2. Critique. Early social democrats, liberals, conservatives. Lindbom, Moberg.
2.3. Olof Palme 1969. LO, wage earners funds. Law 1974. Repressed culture.
2.4. 1976. Centre-right govnt. Crises. Literary criticism (Fagerberg et al)
2.5. 1982-1986. Palme back. Downfall

Part 2 Modern, rational and correct individuals and policies.
Introduction

3. Education
3.1 Schooling
3.2. Higher education and research

4. Gender, families and sexuality

5. Security, clientelism and morals

6. Immigration and integration

7. Foreign policy.
7.1 Säpo, KGB

8. Business and economy

Part 3 Humility. 1986 – 2010
Introduction

9. Economy and politics 1986- 2010
10. Community and individualism.
11. Social media opposition and new liberalisms.
12. Still corrected, still modern, still life
.
Eplilogue

The last part 3 will be hard to picture but little has happend in the lives of citizens that really has given them more freedom. Security is the overall ambition yet. Trying to combine more freedom with individual responsibility is not seen yet.

Lazy but dangerous thinking on 9/11 in Swedish media

The main dailies Svenska Dagbladet and Dagens Nyheter were cordial but did not go into excuses for Bin Laden’s 10th anniversary today, but socialist tabloid Aftonbladet could not let off a lazy lecture by F Wirtanen.

He rants of about Colin Powell’s speech in UN Feb 5, 2003 when the defense secretary explained of the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq under Sadaam Hussein. There were chemical, biological as well as efforts to get nuclear weapons from North Korea earlier.

Israel bombed already in 1981 a nuclear reactor build the French but Hussein was on the dirty bomb market ever since in order to get plutonium and technology, just as Libya and Iran was. Aftonbladet cannot stay of the anti American trend in Swedish media and invites the great journalist and writer Jan Guillou later this eve for chat with readers.

Guillou wrote a few days after 9/11 2001 that Bin Laden had right demands on the US, but was a fanatic. Guillou wrote en eulogy 1975 on Hussein’s Iraq. btw. . .

The liberal tabloid Expressen is relativising the number of victims in NY 9/11, almost 3000, in relation to the 35 000 that has been jailed and/or sentenced for terrorist crimes since then. ”Hubris and revenge” characterized the US reaction after 9/11 the commentator writes.

Yes indeed, revenge after the largest number of dead at any single terrorist attack is quite understandable. This kind of comparison is also taken on the death toll of Afghanis and Pakistans due to terrorist attacks which now go over 20-30 000.

Many commentators write as if the US started the war by responding to the attacks, not the opposite. Truth is that Al Queda started the war on terrorism by 9/11 (and a lot earlier already by 1993 but leave that for now) and the South Asians and Middle Easterns should blame their Saudi villain for their problems and deaths, not US.

Simply Evil. Christopher Hitchens states the facts behind the attacks ten years from today. The role of the intellectual is to introduce complexity into a discussion, the Hitch starts but goes on.

”But what I learned in a highly indelible manner from the events and arguments of September 2001 was this: Never, ever ignore the obvious either.”

Blair says similarily that it was ”deeply naive” to believe the west’s response had radicalised extremist Muslim factions.

US did not deserve 9/11, nor did it start the following war on terror but was forced to react and no one can deny that the Al Queda and similar terrorist networks and states (including Hussein’s Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Quadaffi’s Libya and to lesser extent Venezuela and Cuba) were and are threats to freedom, stability and human dignity.

The leftist defence of dictatorships culminated in the post 9/11 frenzy on security and surveillance but must be blamed for what it is: lazy and dangerous thought. Swedish media makes this day harder to bear, not lighter.

Den som tar emot bidrag är icke fri- befria dem och oss

Förändra lagen om socialbidrag genom krav på flytt till arbeten, motprestation, inga nya bostäder automatiskt vid barnafödsel och ingen riksnorm för bidragets storlek.

Det ska vara skillnad mellan att ta emot bidrag och att arbeta. Socialtjänstlagen och praxis vid beslut om bidragsutbetalning leder dock till mindre skillnader och dyra system.

Det handlar om drygt 10 miljarder i ekonomiskt bistånd (socialbidrag) till en halv miljon bidragstagare varav 150 000 långvariga biståndsmottagare (bidragstagare). Till detta kommer kostnader vid socialkontoren, utredningar vid andra myndigheter, mer ohälsa osv. och omätbart mänskligt lidande.

Andra ersättningssystem tas inte upp här, men som vi vet av sjukskrivningsdebatten innan valet 2010 finns det starka krafter som snabbt bildar opinion.

Medierna driver gärna extremfall (“Filip”, “Annica”) som tippar hela diskussionen om majoriteten av de sjukskrivna/sk utförsäkrade och ev. arbetsoförmögna. Samma öde om inte värre kommer drabba alliansregeringen om den tar upp några av mina förslag till 2014. Men det kan inte vänta.

Regelverket kring socialbidragen (eufemismerna “ekonomiskt bistånd, “försörjningsstöd” visar hur Socialstyrelsen och kommuner vill styra tankarna) vill stödja arbete, självständigt liv osv men leder ofta till motsatsen, belagt i otaliga utredningar sedan 1980talet. Helena Rivières skrift “Bidragskulturen – filosofien bakom socialbidraget” 1998 står sig tyvärr.

FLYTTA

Punkt ett: Bidragsmottagaren kan besluta var denne ska bo. Till exempel som vi ser i de invandrartäta förorterna (“ebo”- reformens resultat) men också i Norrland, särskilt om barn finns med i beslutet. Högst andel biståndshushåll med barn 2010 var det i Sorsele med 21 procent.

Omtanke om att barns uppväxt ska ske i samma ort i barn-och ungdom leder i de flesta fall till bidrag via socialtjänst eller arbetsmarknadsåtgärder. Men om socialsekreterarna i Norrland tror att alla dessa barn kommer lämna sin vackra hemby vid myndighetsålder tror de fel.

Ett till synes dystert antal har vant sig och sett hur man kan leva ganska gott ändå. Generationer hamnar i bidragskulturen. Inte dystert alltid.

Det kan inte och ska inte vara möjligt att individer ska bo var de vill och ta mot bidrag utifrån detta villkor. Men lagen ger inget tvingande utrymme att flytta, bara uppmaningar.

Enligt en studie av fd jugoslaver som kom till Sverige 1990talet med samma yrkes- och utbildningsbakgrund hade bara 25 % av de som hamnade i Malmö arbete medan de som flyttat till Småland arbetade tom. mer än svenskarna. Ingen flytt, inga pengar.

FIXA BOSTAD

Min andra punkt handlar om egen bostad för unga ensamma mödrar. Bor man hemma och blir gravid finns lite hinder i socialtjänstlagen för att den unga modern tar sitt ansvar och bor kvar i den numera något mer trångbodda bostaden.

Barnets “bästa” (som tolkas av socialsekreteren och modern) blir anledning till att skaffa ny egen bostad, minst 2 ROK som socialkontoret betalar. Fadern finns i bakgrunden eller ej, det vet vi inte och ska heller inte rapportera om via grannarna.

Men sannolikheten är betydligt större att också han tar sitt ansvar och fixar eget hem om modern fortfarande bor hemma och inte kan flytta pga kostnaderna. Men med socialkontorets hjälp lever de hellre själva gratis utan att fadern gjort ett dugg. Skäms.

LOKAL NORM

Den tredje punkten handlar om riksnormen för socialbidrag. Fram till slutet av 1990talet kunde kommuner besluta om kostnadsnivå utifrån lokala priser. Det ansågs orättvist och riksdagen antog riksnorm (2011 ca 3700 kr) . Undantag nedåt får göras om det finns särskilda skäl, men uppåt går bra som i Stockholm stad.

Vi kanske helst vill vara som riksdagen, goda fina medborgare som hjälper de svaga och bevilja alla bidragstagare samma summa varje månad. Men den goda viljan leder fel och bort från respekt och egen försörjning.

Skillnaderna verkar kanske inte stora mellan en riksnorm och en lokal norm, ett par hundra i sydsverige och en tusenlapp i norr kanske, men det finns bidragsmiljarder att spara om dessa bidragsmottagare inser att de kan klara sig utan bidrag och tar arbete/sysselsättning.

Själva skillnaden ska man inte stirra sig blind på utan incitamentet till förändring, flytt, arbete/sysselsättning osv. Lokala beslut bäst.

MOTPRESTATION

Den fjärde punkten handlar om att införa krav på motprestation i form av sysselsättning/kompetensutveckling för bidragsmottagare över 25 år (varför ska dessa undantas?). Landskrona införde detta 2009 men fick kritik av Socialstyrelsen och en självutnämnd ilsk bloggosfär.

Anledningen till kritiken, vilken var korrekt enligt lagen, var att kommunen satte alla över 25 år i organiserad sysselsättning, något som ska prövas individuellt och vara ett undantag enligt kap 4 §4 i socialtjänstlagen.

Folkpartiet driver saken men inte högljutt, utom Helen Odenljung I Göteborg. I skriften “Folkpartiet gör skillnad i regeringen” (2009) talar man om sina krav och hur man agerat 2006-2010 där man inte haft minister/department, men detta krav om motprestation finns inte med trots att det finns med som uttalat folkpartikrav sedan 2000talet.

Regeringens långtidsutredning LU2011 och bilaga 11 i synnerhet kan bli ett steg framåt med ett undantag: totalt fel i rapportens policyrekommendation “Ta bort möjligheten för kommunerna att villkora försörjningsstöd på motprestationer för biståndstagaren enligt 4 kap 4 § i SoL”.

Troligen finns motprestationskrav i praktiken ute i kommunerna men man talar tyst om det och den individuella prövningen görs rutinartat, dvs i strid med lagen. Bättre ändra lagen och tysta mediekritiken formellt. Ingen motprestation, inget bidrag.

BEFRIA

Att leva på bidrag innebär ett beroende av de som betalar bidragen, till sist oss skattebetalare. Beroendet leder till att man inte kan leva som man vill.

Ytterligheter som att bevilja bidrag för elektricitet till personer som lider av folkskygghet och tvingas sitta inne vid datorn eller bidrag till internet och dator/lap top för skolbarn leder fel.

Har ett system byggts upp med rutinutbetalningar blir det svårt att dra in dessa bidrag men det måste blir svaret. Att konservera ett system pga vana leder ingen vart.

Men det blir politiskt tufft igen att driva dessa punkter för löntagarpartierna i regeringen. Bidragstagarpartierna har fått en till medlem, SD, så nu står det fyra mot fyra.

Den nyvalda ordföranden för S-Kvinnor, Lena Sommestad, skrev ogenerat 2010:

“Parollen ‘det ska löna sig att arbeta’ har historiskt varit betydelsefull främst som ett argument för sänkta marginalskatter. Det ska löna sig att arbeta några timmar till. Under senare tid har denna paroll också blivit ett argument för att försämra de sociala försäkringarna.

Utifrån föreställningen att det finns de som hellre väljer sociala ersättningar än arbete, ska valet att arbeta bli mer lönsamt. Det är uppenbart att denna paroll inte är tidlös, och än mindre tidlöst socialdemokratisk.

Socialdemokraterna har alltid värderat lönearbetet högt, men synen på arbetet och dess plats i samhällsekonomin har under tidigare epoker varit både bredare och mer insiktsfull”.

Sommestad kan räkna med att bidragstagarna inte kan sin socialdemokratiska historia heller. Gamle socialministern Gustaf Möller vrider sig i sin grav. Den som tar emot bidrag är icke fri. Befria dem och oss själva samtidigt

Redigerad version pa Newsmill

http://www.newsmill.se/artikel/2011/08/29/den-som-tar-emot-bidrag-r-icke-fri