The immigration-induced crisis in Sweden seems to have passed the point of no return. In many urban areas the police are unable to exert their authority. The violence and lawlessness have now spilled over into less culturally enriched areas, and have become so serious that even some of the mainstream media outlets have begun to take note.
Fjordman has written about the situation at Snaphanen (in dansk or norsk; I can’t tell them apart): Er Sverige ødelagt? (Is Sweden destroyed?)
Our Swedish correspondent LN has translated three articles about the catastrophic failure of Sweden. The first one is from Samtiden:
Sweden is “a complete political failure,” writes Janne Josefsson. “State power is being hollowed out bit by bit,” writes Wilhelm Agrell.
Now Both Janne Josefsson and Wilhelm Agrell Raise the Alarm: Sweden is Going Under
by Dick Erixon
September 13, 2019
Two heavy public opinion makers, the journalist Janne Josefsson and the peace researcher Wilhelm Agrell, each in his morning newspaper, have today emerged with an emergency call that Sweden is undergoing violence and lawlessness.
Is that violence now approaching the establishment events in the media and academia?
The stench of powder smoke
Janne Josefsson writes in the DN Chronicle, “It is gunpowder smoke in the world’s best country” that Multiculturalism has created de facto apartheid in Sweden. Less than one percent of pupils have Swedish as a mother tongue in the Shumila school at Hisingen in Gothenburg — maybe four pupils out of 500.
Sweden is no longer a country; it is different worlds, and “a politically perfect failure”. But once the denial begins to dissolve, the government and Morgan Johansson (S) [interior minister] are being labeled “abominable beasts”. The words get worse: “The less they know how to solve the social situation in the country,” Josefsson writes.
The schools are “transmission belts” that deliver boys to the criminal gangs. At Shumila School, 26 percent of the boys were prosecuted for a crime within a few years of completing school. “We get the society we deserve,” concludes Josefsson.
Sweden’s internal armed conflict is sinking it
The state’s monopoly on violence no longer exists, the professor in intelligence analysis Wilhelm Agrell writes in a debate article in SvD [see the bottom of this post].
“We must act to save the country.”
He writes that “the phenomenon of internal armed conflict can help highlight the dynamics of an event that has great destructive potential for a society. In the typical internal armed conflict, different groups are fighting each other and to varying degrees a state power that has completely or partially lost its monopoly on violence.”
In such situations, violence escalates, as it is easier than reversing it. The latches have been released and the violence has its own dynamic. Agrell cites Lebanon in the 1980s and the Balkans in the ‘90s as examples where internal armed conflict has escalated to war. In an internal armed conflict, social functions break down and those who are able to flee the country.
Agrell believes that the development of violence has been uninterrupted for too long because both citizens and politicians have regarded Sweden as a safe country. The authorities are very slow to begin to consider serious organized crime as a social threat. “The violence is not only becoming more brutal and escalating, the victims may be anyone who happens to get in the way or anyone who is perceived to stand in the way…” State power has been cut out bit by bit and no longer exists. The country is broken. He believes that it is “the destructive dynamics of the internal armed conflict that we need to pay attention to and fight for if the country, the country in which we want to live, is to be saved.” Otherwise it will quickly get worse.
Will the government wake up now?
Will the government, with its support parties, wake up and take note of the fact that people within the establishment groups are now also sounding the alarm that the situation is extremely serious and acute? My answer is: no. You do not have the mental and intellectual capacity to understand that Sweden is no longer like it was twenty years ago. You also do not want to understand. You are afraid to comprehend reality. Therefore, they will continue to estimate while at the same time throwing out those who warn of the development — which of course mainly applies to the Sweden Democrats, who are ten to twenty years ahead of everyone else.
To acknowledge the situation is to acknowledge that Jimmie Åkesson is right. They would rather let Sweden go down than do that.
The only people who can break the deadlock are the Swedish people. They can show who they sympathize with. An edge in the opinion polls is probably the only thing that can induce the political powers to begin to take action.
The second article is from Fria Tider :
Bomb deaths in Sweden shock US police chief: “Nothing like what we have seen in the US”
The American ex-police chief Rick Fuentes is surprised at all the explosions in Sweden. There is nothing like it in the US, he tells Expressen.
Former US Police Chief Rick Fuentes is in Sweden to help the Swedish police fight gang crime.
On Tuesday he held a press conference with Ulf Johansson, the regional police chief in Stockholm, concerning a collaboration between the Swedish police and Rutgers University in New Jersey, where Fuentes currently operates.
But the former police chief is surprised at all the bombings in Sweden.
Has seen nothing at all like this in the United States
“I haven’t seen a grenade attack. It has not happened. We have not seen the use of explosives in murders and wounding people; it has not happened. It is a level of violence that we have not seen,” he tells Expressen.
He also explains that it is much more difficult for the police to deal with the violence that takes place by means of explosive blasts, but that there are definitely measures that can work against the gun violence.
At the same time, Expressen notes that gang violence has reached such a level that it “causes terror in Sweden”.
Finally, the op-ed from Svenska Dagbladet that was referred to above:
The shootings in Sweden
It is the destructive dynamics of the internal armed conflict that we must pay attention to and fight against, writes Wilhelm Agrell.
Agrell: We must act to save the country
Society’s monopoly on violence, the very hallmark of a sovereign functioning state power, has been hollowed out bit by bit and no longer exists. Armed criminal violence has effects that are more and more similar to terrorism, writes senior professor Wilhelm Agrell.
This is an argumentative text intended to influence. The views expressed are the writer’s own.
Serious social threats can either take the form of sudden and obvious events or emerge more gradually and at a creep. The sudden progress may come as a surprise and more or less take society unawares, but also the gradually-emerging threats can have the same effect. Society here does not perceive what is going on, looks back instead of forward, and takes too long behind the protection of a sense of continued normalcy. Too little and too late is the saying that describes the consequences. The trivialized, difficult-to-grasp or too unlikely threats will not be subject to preventive measures until afterwards, as they may already be overplayed, as with the overdue measures against the flow of volunteers to ISIS.
Sweden has suffered from increasing and more serious criminal violence. This development is not new, but was long considered a local law and order problem. The changing criminal violence can be described by statistics, but is also reflected in an increased concern among politicians, government officials and large civic groups.
The situation in the violent areas is sometimes described as a war zone, and in the moments when shootings and blasts occur, it is the war zone’s reference frames that are validly applied: the broken facades, gunshot victims lying on the sidewalk. The reference to war may be exaggerated and alarmist, but the phenomenon of internal armed conflict may help to highlight the dynamics of an event with great destructive potential for a society.
In the typical internal armed conflict, various groups fight each other and to varying degrees a state power that has completely or partially lost its monopoly on violence. This socially threatening effect is actually far more important than the number of deaths per year, which terrorism illustrates. These internal armed conflicts have a number of recurring characteristics, irrespective of the driving forces behind them.
The first such feature is the edge of violence, or rather the threshold. It is much easier for the parties in a conflict to seize and escalate violence than to return to a lower level of violence. The possible barriers that exist have been removed, and violence then acquires its own meaning and impetus, often sabotaging attempts to mediate and otherwise dampen the conflict. This is an observation from Lebanon in the 1970s and 1980s, the Balkan conflicts in the 1990s and Syria after the Arab Spring of 2011, just to name a few.
A second recurring feature is that the internal armed conflict affects, and by extension shreds, basic social functions and people’s everyday lives and, in extreme cases, their possibilities for survival, which sooner or later results in escape, where those who perceive in time the development of conflict and have material and mental resources are those who flee first.
The path to internal armed conflict and escalated violence is rarely clear, and may contain episodes of more or less absurd normality, such as when conscripts from the Federal Yugoslav army fought against Croatian forces queued at a Croatian bank office to raise their daily allowance, which they used to do.
Now it is found in shots on our streets and explosions in our residential areas, but we can still drive and shop in the shopping center, and if there are any open bank branches we would certainly be able to withdraw money there. Is this just life as usual, as it has been seen in so many countries for so long, and a result of Sweden simply being “normalized”, here as in many other areas?
It may be so, but this is also an important part of the problem itself. Sweden has been — and has been perceived as — a safe and secure country. Citizens have long taken this more or less for granted, and so has the state. The development of violence has therefore been able to continue for too long and gone too far before the warning signals have penetrated and countermeasures have been initiated. It was a long time before even the serious direct attacks by organized crime on the justice system were defined as a threat to society.
After the recent shootings there is a growing perception that what is going on is not only “the other’s” violence, internal settlements, but something that, just as directly as the direct attacks on the legal system, poses a threat to society as a whole. Not only does the violence become more brutal and escalated, the victims can be anyone who happens to get in the way or anyone who is perceived to stand in the way…
What we are forced to witness is a kind of insidious low-intensity armed conflict that is more than just ever-increasing violence.
Society’s monopoly on violence, the very hallmark of a sovereign functioning state power, has been hollowed out bit by bit and no longer exists. The institutions of society have been reduced to one of many perpetrators of violence. Armed criminal violence in this respect has effects that are more and more similar to terrorism, and, in the worst case, mutate in a direction where the boundary between the two is blurred. All of this is deeply disturbing and unsustainable; the country is breaking apart in a very fundamental sense.
So what is serious is not the situation here and now, which is bad enough, but where we are going. It is the destructive dynamics of the internal armed conflict that we must pay attention to and fight for if the country, the country in which we want to live, can be saved. All of these are things that should have been noticed and acted against while time was available. What is required now is crisis management, where the countermeasures are focused on the scale of threat we have not yet experienced and want to avoid having to experience.
Wilhelm Agrell is a senior professor in intelligence analysis at Lund University.