Last Thursday I re-posted one of his comments, and in the discussion that ensued he made yet another comment that is worth reproducing on its own.
Afonso Henriques asked:
The question is, Conservative Swede, do you favour little Havanas and Chinatowns in Sweden, or you think Sweden is better off?
If you answered positively to the first question, what would the amount of all the ethnic minorities be acceptable in Sweden? 0,5%; 1%; 2%; 10%; 50%?
Conservative Swede made this response (abridged, and edited slightly for clarity):
There are many ways to answer such questions, many angles to look at it from. And the answers will depend on the country and its history, and of course on what you expect and hope the country to be in the future.- - - - - - - - -
The only general rules I could think of would be that 50% is a disaster. And 10% with a doubling (or more) per generation is just a situation to get to the 50% very soon. But a stable 10% needn’t be a problem. Bulgaria is a little more than 10% Muslim, but it’s a stable historical population, not at all problematic such as the 5% in Britain or Sweden.
Regarding Sweden: I’m an alien here. I have denounced this country (the sinking ship). My relation to the indigenous people is the one of an anthropologist. I will stay a couple of years more for participant observations.
The Sweden that existed when I was young is already gone. It hasn’t become manifest yet, but it has already happened.
Let me give you an illustration of what I mean. Assume that you killed someone. You are in shock and horror, and you bury the corpse in your garden. It’s a highly tragic event, but the tragedy has not become manifest yet. Eventually things will come up to the surface — the corpse is bound to be found, you will go to jail, etc. But even though it has not become manifest yet, your life is already destroyed.
Or compare it to a giant meteor heading for our planet, so big that even modern technology can’t stop it. It’s ten years away, hasn’t hit us yet, but the end is already programmed.
This is why I search deeper in my roots for identification, e.g. Germanic and Roman roots. The history of Sweden is unique in the way it has been a cold corner of the world where nobody wanted to go. We have never been invaded, except for temporarily by fellow Scandinavians. Still 40 years ago the population was so astonishingly homogeneous that probably only Japan could be its match (if even that). This makes our culture fragile. The innocence of such a culture, that had been around a millennium and more, cannot survive a flood of mass immigration. For such a country 2% would have been a good roof figure.
But this Sweden is already gone. For the “new” Sweden, I do not know. I leave the question for the indigenous people here. We have already passed 10%. Depending on how you are counting, the figure could be 20%.
In the Sweden of 40 years ago, Southern Europeans and Middle Eastern people were seen as more or less equally strange. It was a culture of innocence created under a highly protected isolation. Dark and hairy people in general looked alien. Swedes were not used to it. Swedes can still have problems in seeing the difference between a Frenchman and an Iranian.
The protection and innocence facilitated by the historical context created a uniquely egalitarian culture. Women were more equal and free then anywhere else. Farmers were more equal and free then anywhere else. Of course, this could be said of Scandinavia as a whole. But Denmark is closer to the continent, less isolated, less innocent. Which makes the Scandinavian features become more balanced there; and Danish culture more sustainable, less vulnerable than the Swedish.
While I’m mourning that this culture had to disappear, it seems clear to me that Swedish culture was just as destined to disappear as the Inca culture. The Indians were weak for other reasons. Due to their long genetic isolation they were destined to die in masses by diseases, whoever found the way to their continent. It could have been the Chinese rather than the Europeans. It would have led to the same result. The demise, and how it would happen, was already encoded in their destiny.
Likewise with Sweden. Of course there will always be traces of Swedish culture here, quite as there are traces of Inca culture in South America. But it won’t be quite the same. The highly ironic thing is how this uniquely egalitarian culture, this culture of such equality and freedom for women, is being destroyed in the name of egalitarianism, feminism, multiculturalism, etc. I see it as symbolic of how liberalism will ultimately always kill itself in its higher phases.
In search for a new and more stable identity I first looked to Europe. I’ve also tried out America, Christianity and Catholicism. But eventually I found each of them full of weaknesses too, some of them really scary. I was looking also for a unified civilization, a unified front against Islam. But I found a civilization that is weak because it’s so divided.
Christianity has always led to a lot of infighting, especially over the interpretation of the Trinity. Americans and Europeans distrust each other. People of different nationalities distrust each other. So I decided to lean towards localism instead (the only question was: where?).
I was right in looking backwards, because it made me learn about who we are. But I think the answer is actually found by looking forwards. Look at America. What is America? What does it mean? It’s the result of a mix of Europeans with a common experience. A common experience so thorough and defining that it abridged previous national identities, and something new was created.
But this is also what we have ahead of us in Europe: a common experience so thorough and defining that it will change our identities.
Of course, I’m not saying that Europe will become America; too many variables in this situation are different for that. Actually, some of the ideals used to create America will be reversed. But surely the concept of “we” will be morphed by the common experience we have ahead of us.