Sweden’s inner cities are filling up with violent unemployed immigrant youths, the country is experiencing an unprecedented increase in rape and vandalism, and the government’s primary concern is… racism.
A law-abiding Swede of the 21st century has to be proficient in the art of doublethink. What’s really going on cannot be talked about. What the average citizen desires cannot be mentioned.
Take, for example, the poor fellow in Kristianstad who placed an uncensored want ad for an apartment in his local newspaper.
- - - - - - - - - -
Kristianstad is a small city in the south of Sweden, on the Baltic. It is part of the province of Skåne, and has advertised itself as “the most Danish city in Sweden”. From the images available on the web, it looks to be a picture-postcard perfect Scandinavian city.
And some unfortunate person in Kristianstad committed the unpardonable sin of wanting to keep it that way.
I’ve been aware of this story since it first came out on July 27th, but haven’t been able to find a translator for it until now. At my request, the indefatigable XY has volunteered for the job, and here is his translation of the article in Expressen.se:
The Center Against Racism rages against want ad
A person has placed a want ad in Kristianstadsbladet seeking an apartment “in an area free from multiculturalism and criminality”. The Center Against Racism is critical of the publication. “This ad went straight in; we didn’t have any discussions,” says Lasse Bernfalk, the paper’s editor and publisher, to Expressen.se
The ad was published in yesterday’s newspaper. The Center Against Racism is surprised that Kristianstadsbladet accepted the ad. “I was really sad. It is tragic when these petty, mean messages are allowed to be expressed,” says spokeswoman Jolin Boldt.
She has never before heard of anyone expressing their political views in a want ad. “Either it is a person who wants to be provocative with a racist message, and that should not be published. The other possibility is that it is a nutcase,” she says.
Lasse Bernfalk he is sorry that the ad was published. This is vacation season, he explains. The want ads are written on the homepage and then delivered to the department for advertising.
“Many are away. The control process has not been functioning.” Now he has talked with the staff about the importance of having a discussion before ads with controversial political messages are printed. He is of the opinion that a person is not allowed to state that he wants to live in an area with fewer immigrants and low criminality.
“You can live where you want, but we should not have that kind of message in an ad. Besides, if the person wants to be without multiculture he will have to find a village very far away. Multiculture is a natural part of society.”
Kristianstadsbladet hasn’t received any criticism from readers about the ad. “We usually get reactions from them quickly. But so far no one has said anything.”
— by Karin Olsson
There are so many notable quotes in this little article.
Multiculture is a natural part of society.
Since when? Who says so? What “multiculture” did Sweden have before 1970?
Either it is a person who wants to be provocative with a racist message [or the] other possibility is that it is a nutcase.
Those are our only choices? The man (surely it was a man!) couldn’t have possibly had any other motives? What if he just wanted to live in a neighborhood with a low crime rate, and to be able to understand the language of his neighbors? Is that “racism”?
This all puts me in mind of the classic movie Cool Hand Luke. Luke (played by Paul Newman) is an inmate of a prison camp, and there is a famous scene in which Luke — who has been brutalized and humiliated by the guards for repeated escape attempts — grovels at the feet of “Boss” Paul:
Luke: Don’t hit me anymore…Oh God, I pray to God you don’t hit me anymore. I’ll do anything you say, but I can’t take anymore. Boss Paul: You got your mind right, Luke? Luke: Yeah. I got it right. I got it right, boss. (He grips the ankles of the guard) Boss Paul: Suppose you’s back-slide on us? Luke: Oh no I won’t. I won’t, boss. Boss Paul: Suppose you’s to back-sass? Luke: No I won’t. I won’t. I got my mind right. Boss Paul: You try to run again, we gonna kill ya. Luke: I won’t, I won’t, boss.
The citizen of Kristianstad obviously does not have his mind right. But the local authorities, acting through the Center Against Racism, will soon get it right for him.
It won’t be long until he loves Big Brother. Soon he will say with happy sincerity, “I now realize that I was in error. My desire to live among my own kind was a symptom of a deep and abiding racism, which has now been extirpated from my psyche through the efforts of the State. I am grateful for the chance to make restitution to my multicultural brothers and sisters.”
But is a desire to live among one’s own kind necessarily “racism”? What if you just want to be surrounded by people whose manners and customs you intuitively understand? Why is that necessarily racism?
The most peaceful, stable, and lawful societies have historically had these characteristics. Were all their citizens racists?
And what if a member of an ethnic minority has the same impulse to live among members of his own group? Is that “racism”?
Last year I wrote about a computer program called the “Ethnic Simulator” that models this very issue. The relevant section is reposted below.
One piece of evidence for the ongoing racism of the dominant white culture is persistent residential segregation. Despite numerous federal laws; despite decades of busing, set-asides, minority preferences, and civil-rights lawsuits, residential segregation by race remains, and in some locations has intensified.
The only acceptable explanation, the only one which may be discussed in polite company, is, of course, racism among whites. What else could it be?
An alternative explanation is simply that people generally prefer to live among those who are most like themselves. At its extreme, this tendency is racism: “We hate those damned [insert racial epithet here]; they’re no better than animals!” But milder versions of the same behavior are probably instinctual, and are well-understood by most people at an intuitive level. We are most comfortable among those who speak the same language that we do, who look similar to us, who have customs we can understand, and with whom we share context about many everyday matters, so that communication is easier.
Natural Intelligence has developed an application called the “Ethnic Simulator” that models the residential behavior of people in the hypothetical ethnically diverse city of Metropolis. Go here to read the details about the Ethnic Simulator and download a freeware copy of the application.
The premise of the Ethnic Simulator is that ethnically distinct groups have a modest preference to live among their own kind. In Metropolis there are five ethnic groups — Blues (the majority), Greens, Reds, Grays, and Yellows. The application allows the user to set the percentage of preference of each group for its own kind. The default is 50% — that is, each ethnic group would prefer that at least half of its neighbors to be of the same group.
For the Blues, who are in the majority, meeting that requirement is easy — they don’t even have to think about it. But the Yellows, who are the smallest minority, have to scramble to find other Yellows as neighbors.
When you run the Ethnic Simulator, it begins with a uniformly mixed population. But the preferences of the groups cause clumping to occur very quickly — within about ten years. Within fifty years distinct ethnic neighborhoods have emerged, and if you let the simulation run for centuries, large sections of Metropolis have become “ghettos” for one group or another.
Interestingly enough, if you set the preferences for the larger groups to zero (that is, they are indifferent to the ethnic origin of their neighbors), and give only the Yellows a preference (and a modest one at that), you will find Yellows clumping in their enclaves fairly quickly. The preference of the Yellows would be entirely understandable — they are a tiny minority and want to stick together for solidarity’s sake — but it produces a result that the conventional wisdom would identify as “racism”.
You can see why this result is not fit for polite discussion. If residential segregation of ethnic groups is not due to the racism of the oppressive majority group (i.e., whites), then the very pillars of multiculturalism are shaken. Talking about this would definitely be classified as “hate speech”.
But the Ethnic Simulator does not prove that racism is not the explanation, just that there is another equally plausible explanation. After all, the premise is not unreasonable. Take the issue of interracial marriage — why does it lag so far behind the percentage of the races involved in the general population? If race were not considered, one would expect 12% of white people to marry blacks, and 88% of blacks to marry whites. Does racism explain this? Or do people simply have an inborn preference for those most like themselves?
An investigation like the one described above is forbidden under the Laws of Political Correctness. You can’t talk about such things. You can’t even think about such things. If you do, the
They’ll get your mind right. Then you’ll just sit there at your table in the sun, smiling that easy smile:
He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.
Hat tip for Kristianstad story: LN.