In 2005, the Swedish Crime Prevention Agency published a report about the link between immigration and crime. Since then, no comprehensive study has been conducted even though Sweden has experienced a large influx of migrants in combination with a rising crime rate. This study conducted by Göran Adamson and Tino Sanandaji is the first purely descriptive scientific investigation on the matter in fifteen years. The investigation (from 2002 to 2017) covers seven distinct categories of crime, and distinguishes between seven regions of origin. Based on 33 per cent of the population (2017), 58 per cent of those suspect for total crime on reasonable grounds are migrants. Regarding murder, manslaughter and attempted murder, the figures are 73 per cent, while the proportion of robbery is 70 per cent. Non-registered migrants are linked to about 13 per cent of total crime. Given the fact that this group is small, crime propensity among non-registered migrants is significant.
In this piece, Göran Adamson argues that the anti-racist rhetoric is naïve and dangerously counter-productive. In theory, they refer to populist parties fueling on the anti-racist elite's outcries. In practise, however, the anti-racists have forgotten all about it, and seem to believe that right-wing populism will vanish if only it is told off. Shocked, anti-racists say populist parties gain voters despite having certain views. But nobody votes on a party despite its view. True to leftist sensationalism, anti-racists always talk about fascism within right-wing populist parties, thereby overlooking a wide array of other causes for voter appeal. Prone to instant aggression, anti-racists react with fury to any populist provocation, thereby contributing to the meteoric rise of contemporary populism in the West. Instead of conducting a proper analysis, anti-racists say how can people vote on these parties and so on -much like an anti-racist bourgeoisie. Anti-racists, Göran Adamson claims, seem to think knowledge of right-wing populism is compromising, as if you would be tainted by it. In fact, it is the other way around. Criticism requires knowledge -and an ignorant anti-racist might, in the long run, have no power to resist the allure of right-wing populism. People vote on right-wing populist parties, anti-racists maintain, because these people fail to understand. But they claim they do, even though they have reached other conclusions. The responsibility of the financial and political classes for provoking popular reactions is minimized, while the distress among ordinary people is belittled or moralized. The political class ignores a central leftist principle: social behavior has often political/economic explanations. As a direct result of multiculturalism, the pet theory among anti-racists, society's underprivileged groups -domestic workers and migrants -are in constant conflict instead of uniting against globalization and neoliberal deregulation. This is called divide and rule. In their quest for ideological purity, any anti-EU sentiment, anti-racists claim, is right-wing extreme, hence driving scores of voters into the arms of right-wing populism. These parties are further boosted by the fact that anti-racists sneer at family values and cultural traditionalism. Vocal victims of EU's austerity measures are dismissed as right-wingers, further fueling political polarization. Popular and populist, anti-racists maintain, is basically the same thing. As a result, democracy becomes politically tainted, and the anti-racist elites are the only safe-guard against unaccountable elites. Right-wing populists never cease to talk about our roots, while multiculturalists never stop talking about roots overseas. Save for that geographic detail, they are two branches of the politicalromantic tree. Right-wing populist parties prosper, but not despite anti-racist efforts, Göran Adamson argues, but as a result of them.
and Stjernfelt note that, as a result of the cartoon crisis in 2006, the Danish People's Party was forced to embrace freedom of speech. This concession could only be made, however, by putting the label of "Danish values" on the declaration. All of this, the authors argue, amounts to "culturalism of the right." 3 It is all about "us": "we" are important and fascinating; "our" perspective is penetrating; our culture is deep and majestic, and it awakens the spirit; universal declarations are words on paper and lofty cosmopolitanism. The self-perception of right-wing culturalism is myopic, pompous, and lacking in self-irony.This culturalism of the right-closely related to "classic" nationalism and British jingoism-is mirrored by "culturalism of the left." Whereas the former cannot help succumbing to self-pity and sentimental images of its own nation, culturalism of the left is equally zealous on behalf of nations, cultures, and religions overseas. "From the left shore of culturalism," the authors argue, "we hear the culturalist battle cries about recognition of the most antimodern and distasteful religious practices"-justified with romantic verbiage reminiscent of that above: "they" are deep and "their" culture, and religion must be defended at all cost; human rights and freedom of speech are merely used in order to abuse and humiliate "the Other." 4 The exoticists shun self-irony, and they idealize the foreign cultures into which they have sunk their personality. Whether these traits-ethnic aggression, collectivist pessimism, and lack of self-reflection-are linked to a domestic community or to a nation overseas, they are surrounded by the same culturalist mythology.In this essay, Eriksen and Stjernfelt's idea of "culturalism" will be used in order to support three arguments. First, right-wing populism and multiculturalism share common roots in the theory of Johann Herderpoet, literary critic, and champion of the early nineteenth-century romantic backlash against the Enlightenment. "The Herderian idea of group difference," Kenan Malik argues, "gave rise to both racial and pluralist views and there remain . . . common bonds between racial and multicultural notions of human difference." 5 Second, multiculturalism is not, as is often maintained by its critics, stained by Herder's conservatism and nationalism. It
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.