Why does a Swedish minister feel the need to attack another country’s birthrate policies? Why does she risk causing an international row by calling that country’s policies reminiscent of national-socialist ones? The answer is simple: this was not a message to Hungary, or other countries wishing to implement similar policies to boost native birthrates in lieu of fiscally expensive and socially costly immigration policies. This was a message to natives in Sweden primarily, reassuring them: only bad Nazis want to support the native population that is meant to inherit the nation.
The current stewards of Sweden, in their enlightenment, know that immigration is a much better and acceptable source of population repl- er, growth. After all, how else could they justify the near limitless uptake of foreigners into their countries with very little return? Not only a post-factum justification for the lazy policies of previous decades has to be made, the high ground also has to be claimed vis-a-vis nations that do not wish to follow a similar suicidal course by claiming this is the best and ideal policy for a nation. The causes of this Stockholm Syndrome are still not entirely clear – after all, the Swedes have been rather quiet on the Western front since the 30-years’ war. No colonies, no concentration camps.
Perhaps precisely this is the source of their apparent spiritual malady – they have experienced peace for so long that they no longer seem to be able to grasp how quickly war can erupt or how to defend themselves. An entirely pacified and domesticated population that experienced high trust and homogeneity for the longest time, who’s leaders have decided the country may now go gently into that quiet night. No matter the burning cars, mounting rapes and uncontrollable ‘multi-ethnic’ projects in which only those Swedes remain that have little other choice. Naturally, the ‘leaders’ live no-where near such areas and can wane themselves still in the essential 1960s Little Sweden, now just with added spicy cuisine and some more diverse ‘local color’. Multi-culturalism is something that happens to other people – everyone who lives in Sweden now is of course, a New Swede and because there is no native culture, everything and everyone is Swedish the moment the border is crossed.
That’s why policies that assert some form of support for ‘natives’ is an affront to the Swedish Project and the leaders must thus denounce it with their overplayed trump-card of Nazi-baiting. The Hungarian policies which essentially reduce or eliminate tax burdens for women once they have 4 children have no need to stipulate for whom these policies are intended. In Hungary, it is very clear who is a Hungarian and who isn’t. Neither has Hungary been a destination of net immigration up to 2015 and thus no large population of non-Hungarians that would take advantage of this policy unless specified otherwise. Having been curtained off by the Soviets for over half a century, they have not only not enjoyed the fruits of multiculturalism but are eager to re-assert the cultural independence denied to them while seeking strong alliances with like-minded nations such as Austria and Poland.
Two more divergent countries in Europe can hardly be found than Sweden and Hungary. While it is important not to put Hungary on a pedestal by any means, the differences are clear and stark. One nation is eager to survive and thrive in the future, finding strength in its roots. The other will dissolve itself unless the population awaken from their stupor. Corruption may exist in Hungary, as it does in many Eastern countries – a bribe exchanges hands, a favor is called in, one’s cousin is employed in one’s company first. But such simmering economic corruption, more rooted in co-operation than isolated competition, represents a material ill first, and a spiritual one second. It was born from the conditions imposed by the communist regime. The corruption that has seeped in the souls of many Swedish politicians and natives is much more insidious – for their country is now thought of purely in economic terms, an empty tract of land just like has been said of Germany by the new priests of vapid globalism. Here, Culture is negated for the natives but left for the non-autochthones to play with while they fill low-skill jobs, prisons, and welfare checks.
These still get to play kin- and group politics, while the natives may not. Cultural self-negation in favour of economic fetishism and colonisation are tied together, as the influx of burdensome migrants represents a great source of revenue for the construction industries that must build the new projects to house them, the banks that keep the (welfare) state afloat, and the law-firms that handle asylum litigation. The denial of culture and natural right is necessary – some blood must flow so that capital may too. The neighboring Fins can only scratch their head in confusion at their strange neighbor. Perhaps the Danes can also convert one of their islands into a Swedish reserve, next to the other island now being mulled over as a destination for rejected asylum seekers.