As the interview continues, you’ll hear him recount the series of events that led to his having armed police bodyguards accompany him whenever he ventures out of his apartment.
Alice Weidel is the co-leader (with Alexander Gauland) of the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany).
The following video shows a speech given by Ms. Weidel on the floor of the Bundestag. In it she addresses the manifold failures of the policies of the current German government (a coalition between the Christian Democrats and the Social Democrats) under the chancellorship of Angela Merkel.
Ms. Weidel is blisteringly effective in her presentation, as evidenced by the other parties’ attempts to shout her down. It’s encouraging to hear the list of issues she covers, which extend far beyond the topic of immigration, which is usually the primary focus of the AfD. These policy proposals indicate that the AfD has matured to the point where it has the competence to govern the country, if it is ever given the chance.
Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:
Many thanks to JLH for translating this essay by Matthias Matussek from Henryk Broder’s website Die Achse des Guten:
Why I Am a Nazi
by Matthias Matussek
August 31, 2019
I am a Nazi. God knows I am not proud of it, especially since it would be a grim, indeed the grimmest, hubris to claim that. Yes, I know what the Nazis did. They marched out in columns or hordes and attacked political opponents. They took a gloating pleasure in denunciation. They betrayed friendships and made sure that their friends were loaded onto trucks and taken to camps and murdered.
They bent over articles and books, not for the joy of reading, but to find “evidence” which could bring the authors into conflict with competitors, deprive them of office and make them objects of scorn. Their writings would be burned, because they did not adhere to the prescribed political line.
I have never denounced a human being because he celebrated his birthday with dubious fellows I didn’t know. “Better to turn someone in to the authorities than end up on the wrong side of things” has never been my way.
Nonetheless, I am a Nazi. Henryk Broder advised me to write that. We were at the Zurich summer WorldWeek festival where there were a lot of other Nazis, for instance our colleague, Alex Bauer, who had been beaten by Antifa and put in the hospital. And where there are Antifa, there are Nazis — you know, where there’s smoke, there’s fire.
We Nazis are multiplying to stay abreast of things, so those who are eager to extinguish us multiply like a brush fire. You could almost surmise that they start fires themselves, just to have something to do.
It was difficult, learning to be a Nazi. I was recognized as a Nazi for the first time by a young lady with blue hair and multiple piercings. It was when I went to a campaign event held by Mr. Gauland of the AfD, whom I had known until then only from television.
I did not have a clue that he was the chair of a, well… of the Nazi party, which as Messiah Schulz shouted out in the Bundestag, belonged “on the ash heap of history.” He got that formulation from Trotsky, who had dealt harshly with counterrevolutionaries.
“Piss off, you Nazi”
I was making my way to Gauland’s campaign appearance through a cordon of bushwhacking, spitting and swearing Antifa partisans, when a girl pressed a note into my hand. I thought it was one of these messages from a Chinese fortune cookie. Maybe her telephone number.
But no. It said: “Piss off, you Nazi.”
I gave it back and said, “Sorry, I’m not a Nazi.” She looked at me bewildered, as I did her.
The next time, I was standing around among Hamburg citizens on the Jungfernstieg, an upscale shopping avenue on [the banks of] the Alster, to take part in a “Merkel has to go” demonstration. The Hamburg Morgenpost-Online — yes, the one with the ads for call girls — announced that where we were standing, neo-Nazis had gathered while hundreds of peaceful counter-demonstrators were marching.
The videos below are not Counterjihad-related; however, they do concern cultural enrichment in a broader sense. They feature a Turkish-Dutch “entrepreneur” who exploits a loophole in the peculiar Dutch laws about the distribution of drugs in order to peddle laughing gas (nitrous oxide, N2O) on the streets of Amsterdam.
He’s an obvious rogue, this gas-dealer, but an engaging one. I can’t help but enjoy his repartee, despite his sordid trade and the decadent environment in which he works.
The Netherlands is well-known for its tolerant attitude towards vice, whether it involves substance abuse, sexual license, or other deviant behaviors. It seems strange that the Dutch Powers That Be should be fastidious about nitrous oxide. Yes, it’s toxic, especially in the quantities you see this dealer inhaling, but hardly more toxic than some of the other recreational highs enjoyed on the streets of Amsterdam.
I’m an old prude, so the unabashed hedonism (on the part of both native Dutch and culture-enrichers) on display in these videos seems creepy to me.
The translator includes these notes about the protagonist in the videos:
Deniz Üresin is a Turkish-Dutch rapper turned “entrepreneur”. A hustler playing the system to deal drugs (laughing gas) on the streets of Amsterdam without legal repercussions. He gets high on his own supply, walks around in camouflage, with a “security” patch on his arm, says he maintains law and order on the street.
Halfway through the first video he says he should be King of the Netherlands. Watch the little speech at the end, where he says he’s the future mayor.
Many thanks to C for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling.
Video 1 (Deniz on the street with his “business):
Video 2 (Deniz appears on a TV talk show):
Video 3 (Deniz in conflict with the city council):
Video 4 (Deniz in a one-man demo; note that he apparently has had a mild stroke, possibly neural damage he sustained from his own supply):
Video transcript #1:
A couple of days ago I posted the latest news from the Netherlands about the show trial of Geert Wilders. Our Dutch correspondent H. Numan sends this summary of the larger context of the case, and the political significance of the railroading of Geert Wilders.
The dilemma of the Wilders trial
by H. Numan
The Baron just beat me to it: I was planning to write about the Wilders trial. Well, I guess he doesn’t need me anymore… (just kidding). There are a few angles you really need to know about concerning the Wilders trial. The elites are digging their graves deeper and deeper.
First of all — and most important — are the legal consequences of that guilty verdict, the jurisprudence. Imagine you have a very large bookshelf, from wall to wall. Only one shelf contains all the books of law, with plenty of space left over. The remainder of that entire bookshelf is filled with jurisprudence. And that actually is the real law.
Lawmakers (parliament) create the law. They set the minimum and maximum requirements. The courts interpret it. Each and every verdict explains how the law should be understood and applied. Verdicts of lower courts can be overruled by higher courts, which creates new jurisprudence.
Wilders is the de facto the leader of the opposition. His important position is the reason for the court’s verdict. Yes, they dearly wanted to sentence him to the maximum possible, and then some more. But they can’t. Geert Wilders is far too important. Supposing they were to have sent him to jail, that would make him immediately a martyr. He would happily go to jail, knowing full well he won’t be staying long and upon release becomes the next prime minister.
So doing jail time was out. Next best option was a fine. The prosecution asked for a fine of €5,000. I wish I had that kind of money, but Wilders makes at least four times that in a month. This would also create an outcry among the electorate. Wilders would pay the fine with a smile, knowing that the cost of this kind of advertising is invaluable. It would be a free advertising campaign worth millions for just €5,000. Again, not a good idea. What was left over?
Guilty without punishment. That’s the court equivalent of take two paracetamol and call me in the morning. Or so it seems. In real life it’s a slow-working deadly poison, especially in this case. Wilders would go free, but only him. Anyone else can be convicted based on that flimsy jurisprudence. What’s more, they will be convicted. And for a lot more than €5,000. Because there is a precedent. The fact that Wilders is convicted will be a precedent. His conviction can and will be used against anyone else. Including the asked for, but not enforced, fine of €5,000. For Wilders that’s a nice investment, well worth it. For you and me it would be financially crippling.
This is a well-tried tactic of letting a big fish swim in order to catch a lot of small fry. As the precedent is there, the big fish will eventually be caught anyway. When I say ‘well-tried’, I mean it literally. The Romans used it a lot, especially during the later part of the Republic. Among others, that is how the inquisition got started. You didn’t think they popped out of nothing did you? ‘Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition’ is a Monty Python sketch. Not real life.
That’s the legal side of the Wilders trial’s dilemma. However, there is more, that being the political side of it. We haven’t got the trias politica for nothing. The separation of power is a cornerstone of democracy. It’s becoming more and more clear that this really is a political show trial, with the outcome not being reached by judges, but by civil servants and Wilders’ political enemies working together before the trial even began.
Regular readers will remember Jose Atento of the Brazilian blog Lei Islâmica em Ação, who has been translating material and sending reports for the past few years. Last weekend in Quebec I was interviewed by Mr. Atento, and he has translated my remarks into Portuguese for a Brazilian audience. He also translated his Portuguese introduction into English.
Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for the recording and subtitling:
As H. Numan reported earlier this month, there have been new developments in the show trial against Geert Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV) in the Netherlands.
Since then there have been additional reports in the media about the improper involvement of the Minister of Justice in the case. The following material has been translated from RTL Nieuws:
Senior government officials demanded a hard approach in the trial against ‘malicious’ Wilders
Top officials of the Justice Department have been involved in the content of the criminal case against Geert Wilders. They urged the Public Prosecution Service (OM) to tackle Wilders as firmly as possible in the case of ‘fewer Moroccans’ statements.
The interference is very sensitive because it is a criminal case against an opposition leader. Until recently, the Justice department and the OM denied any form of substantive consultation and coordination on the Wilders case. The PVV leader reacts with astonishment to the new revelations and calls it ‘outrageous’.
The documents now show that officials fed the OM with arguments against Wilders, who was an opponent of the then-minister, VVD member Ivo Opstelten. They call his statements “malicious” and “racist.” When these officials read a very confidential official message from the Board of Procurators General to Minister Opstelten of 10 September 2014, one of them wondered: “Is the OM convinced of the desirability and feasibility of prosecution?”
No reason for criminal case
They advise the Public Prosecution Service to go into it legally. The reason for this is the discussion within the OM about the case. The Public Prosecutor in The Hague even wanted to dismiss the criminal case concerning the first ‘fewer Moroccans’ ruling on 12 March 2014, as it turned out last week, more than five years later. And the public prosecutor’s own experts, from the National Discrimination Expertise Center, also saw no good reason for a criminal case in the statements on the election evening of 19 March 2014. They found the statements ‘not unnecessarily offensive’.
The top officials thought that Wilders should not only be prosecuted for the election evening statements, but also had to be tackled for the first statement, because otherwise the whole ‘legally substantive’ case would not be sustainable.
“I would leave this to the judge and put as few restrictions as possible in what you submit to the judge.” The officials also provide a series of legal advice, including on how the Public Prosecutor should deal with the likely arguments of the defense. Literally: “I have already discussed a number of points with the colleague of the Pag [public prosecutor, the Public Prosecution Service, ed.] Today.” And: “I will pass on the points that you mention to the colleague of the OM.”
Wilders announces that he and his lawyer Geert-Jan Knoops will again ask the Court to stop the trial. The appeal will be served again on Tuesday. Wilders: “It is inconceivable that the Ministry of Justice has dealt with my case in detail. It’s a disgrace, a political reckoning by the VVD minister and his department.”
The PVV writes:
Rasmus Paludan is a Danish activist who was relatively unknown until his sacrilegious treatment of a Koran got him into a spot of bother in Nørrebro back in April. The incident propelled him into political prominence, so that his party (Stram Kurs, “Hard Line”) gained 1.8% of the vote in June’s parliamentary elections.
In the following video recorded at last weekend’s retreat in Quebec, Ms. Price and Mr. Paludan discuss the current political situation in Canada, with a particular focus on next month’s elections. Despite his being the center of a series of scandals, Justin “Baby Doc” Trudeau is expected to win re-election. However, Maxime Bernier and his party, the People’s Party of Canada, are showing surprising strength in the latest polls.
Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for recording and uploading this video:
Dymphna and I have been posting these 9-11 anniversary essays once a year, beginning in 2005, so this makes the fifteenth. I’m on my own now, and I must admit to a certain discouragement: in the eighteen years since the Twin Towers fell, our ability to identify and deal with the danger of Islamization has markedly deteriorated.
Readers who are old enough to recall the fall of 2001 may remember the robust public discussions about Islam that took place during the months after September 11, even in the MSM. Even on NPR! I remember listening to the op-eds during “All Things Considered” in the car on my way home from work. Yes, the general conclusion — led by the pronouncements of President George W. “Religion of Peace” Bush — was that the perpetrators of 9-11 were “extremists” who had “hijacked a great religion”. But Islam was mentioned, and it was even possible to publicly dissent from the “extremist-vs.-moderate” party line without being hounded from one’s job and driven into hiding.
Not any more.
Over the intervening years, the patient infiltration and indoctrination by the Muslim Brotherhood has borne fruit. The word “Islam” is rarely used in any public commemorations of 9-11. In fact, the public remembrances themselves are becoming more and more frowned upon and stigmatized as “racist”, “white supremacist”, etc., etc.
In the Long War, Ilhan Omar is winning, and we traditional Americans are losing.
Mark Steyn says it much better than I ever could in “The Language of Losing”. Some excerpts:
The eighteenth anniversary of 9/11 was marked by the Administration inviting the Taliban to Camp David, and by the resignation and/or firing of John Bolton as National Security Advisor — which two events may not be unconnected. Because really, when the Taliban are running around Camp David, who needs national security?
We run around fighting for worthless bits of barren sod like Helmand province in Afghanistan, while surrendering day by day some of the most valuable real estate on the planet, such as France and Sweden.
In any war, you have to be able to prioritize: You can’t win everything, so where would you rather win? Raqqa or Rotterdam? Kandahar or Cannes? Yet, whenever some guy goes Allahu Akbar on the streets of a western city, the telly pundits generally fall into one of two groups: The left say it’s no big deal, and the right say this is why we need more boots on the ground in Syria or Afghanistan. Yesterday President Trump said he was committed to ensuring that terrorists “never again have a safe haven to launch attacks against our country”.
By that he means “safe havens” in Afghanistan. But the reason the west’s enemies are able to pile up a continuous corpse count in Paris, Nice, Berlin, Brussels, London, Manchester, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Orlando, San Bernadino, Ottawa, Sydney, Barcelona, [Your Town Here] is because they have “safe havens” in France, Germany, Britain, Scandinavia, North America, etc. Which “safe havens” are likely to prove more consequential for the developed world in the years ahead?
For the a change of pace, here’s a new pastiche from JLH, who has a knack for this sort of thing.
The Strangulation of Democracy
(In memoriam Sam McGee, and thanks to Robert Service)
There are strange things done in the Silicon sun
By the men who spin the gold,
And the cyber trails hold their secret tales
That could make your blood run cold.
The city lights have seen bad sights.
But the worst they ever will see:
Is not far away from San Francisco Bay,
Where they’re strangling democracy.
Now the men gathered there are from everywhere —
But they are here, we all know why.
They all play the game and their goal is the same —
A slice of the American Pie.
Oh, the wages of sin! They are raking it in.
The billions come rolling along.
To the wealthy comes power, and now is their hour
To buy the world for a song.
But it’s not simply greed, there’s also the need
To determine what’s good and what’s bad.
If you’re not in their group, then you’re out of the loop,
You’re as old as yesterday’s fad.
Join the crowd, show your face, tell us what you embrace,
Give a glimpse of your shy little soul.
This service is free, no psychiatrist’s fee,
Since you’re telling the world as a whole.
It’s a magical realm with no one at the helm.
Your entrails exposed on the ground
Attract the trolls first, and they’re not the worst;
Carrion-eaters in this place abound.
And so you’ve been shilled, your guts have been spilled,
And the vermin crept into your life.
There’s no magic spell to conquer this hell.
Just chill out and witness the strife.
Sit back and relax, pursue some fun facts,
But be careful what questions you ask.
Algorithmically speaking, the answer you’re seeking
May incite a tortuous task.
Seek President Trump, and you may soon be jumped
To trumps in the game of Whist.
Should you next try to reach for freedom of speech,
You may find yourself on a list.
Culture Wars International: EU there and Democrats here
The following essay is pretty inflammatory; but as we have all seen, acting in a nice, civilized, restrained, and decent manner towards a Hitler or a Stalin, and never saying out loud what is actually going on, only leads more quickly to our own doom.
The EU and America’s Democrats are two sides of the same coin.
Political correctness / culture wars / political Marxism began in Europe. Initially, it was a not unreasonable response to the powerful people (the aristocrats and tycoons) using their power to reward their friends, while keeping “the little guy” from being able to advance and earn a decent living. In Eastern Europe it developed as violent Communism. But Western Europe was different, in that it consisted of many individual, highly developed, independent nations. In each of these nations the struggle was between Conservatism and democratic Socialism. Both were nationalistic. But then Hitler brought things to a head by using Conservative Racist Nationalism to try to dominate the world.
World War Two brought about a Darwinian change in Europe. The most aggressive and militaristic Europeans died in the fighting. The survivors were the ones who were the most wimpy and pacifistic. They were determined to bring about a socialist utopia. Their first goal was to ensure that any Hitler wannabes could never again gain power. So they began a never-ending struggle against nationalism, militarism, capitalism, Christianity, and “white supremacism”. As a counterweight to Christianity, they promoted Islam as “the religion of peace”, especially because most of its adherents were non-white. To do this they had to delude themselves about the true nature of Islam, but they did it happily. Pretty soon they invited Muslims from nearby lands to emigrate to Europe, so that they could dilute the remaining native white conservatives, and they even subsidized the Muslims with welfare payments to make it easier and more attractive to them.
And so we end up with today’s situation in Europe: hordes of unassimilated, Christian-hating Muslims living in no-go zones, most receiving welfare, and committing crimes in the name of Jihad (terrorism, rape, etc.) while the “progressive” governments make excuse after excuse for them (they are unfamiliar with our culture, they are not practicing “real Islam”, they bring more benefits than losses, etc., ad nauseam). And naturally, if you are crazy enough to point out how insane this all is, they will inevitably ruin your life (shades of Stalin).
Seneca III sends his latest essay from the royal throne of kings, the sceptred isle, the precious stone set in the silver sea — the soon-to-be-Brexited Britain.
Traitors, Mobs, Demagogues and Useful Idiots
by Seneca III
Since prorogation was first mooted I’ve been trying to recall historic parallels with our current situation. Initially, as always, my mind swung back to the last days of the Roman Imperium — mainly, I think, because of the hallmark debauchery which came from moral and cultural decadence and which in turn gave birth to the same dangerous, unsavoury horde of false prophets, deviants, idiots and violent rabble that descend upon us now.
Both then and now cases of feverish mass derangement bereft of any logical foundations arose amongst peoples; all were aided and abetted by corrupt and power-hungry political demagogues. Both the Imperium and the UK were and are plagued with predatory alien tribes sinking their barbarian fangs into the body politic. In both, febrile mobs violent in act and rhetoric were and are on the streets daily and the descent into chaos accelerated. As Rome sank, so we are doing, but in this IT age much faster than in the past.
And Caroline Russell, a rather chubby member of the London Assembly representing the left-liberal Green Party, decided to give the Police a mouthful when politely asked to move along.
But with this knowledge of how things happen, how civilisations collapse, we do not need to follow Rome’s course into oblivion. We, the original indigenous masses, must regain our sovereignty, our right to determine our own future, to retake our lands for ourselves and ourselves only, to govern according to our ways. And we must ensure that the proto-tyrants of the Left and the EU Marxist-Globalist Theocracy together with their seventh-century foot soldiers never succeed in ethnically cleansing and subjugating us.
As it was at Waterloo and the Battle of Britain, this battle is ours to win or lose. With 59 days left going down to the wire it will be a damn close-run thing, so from those times past I offer two quotations.
On the night before Waterloo the Duke of Wellington and one of his aides rode through the lines of his soldiery who, to a man, were drawn from the commonalty and often referred to as the dregs of society or the criminal scum of Britain. They were eating, drinking and brawling around their campfires, apparently without a care in the world. Wellington is reputed to have turned to his aide and said, “I don’t know what effect these men will have on the enemy, but by God, they terrify me.”
A hundred and twenty-five years later after the Battle of Britain Churchill addressed a weary, bomb-damaged, wounded nation with these words:
Our Dutch correspondent H. Numan sends the latest on the show trial of Geert Wilders.
New developments in the court case against Geert Wilders
by H. Numan
In a few days, on the 24th of September, we’ll see if The Netherlands is a banana monarchy or a constitutional monarchy. Why? Because the court then has to issue a verdict about new developments in the case against Geert Wilders. If the country considers itself a true democratic state ruled by law, the court has no other option than to dismiss the case. However, I’m almost certain the court won’t do that. Too much has been invested in the destruction of Geert Wilders and his party, the PVV.
We have seen in the past that the rule of law actually no longer exists in The Netherlands. Let’s take a look at this case, for people who are new to it.
After the municipal elections in March 2014 Geert attended a party in The Hague. He asked his electorate if the wanted more or fewer [criminal] Moroccans in the country. The crowd cheered “minder, minder, minder (fewer, fewer, fewer)!” “Okay”, Wilder said, “we’re going to work on that.”
The progressive part of the country was in uproar. They did everything legally and illegally possible to get him indicted. Illegally, you may ask. Yes. In many cities police stations were open longer than usual, and supplied pre-printed complaint forms. You could mark one or all choices on the multiple choice form why you were offended by Geert Wilders. Just cross what you liked. Signing was not a problem. A thumb mark would do nicely, in case you happen to be illiterate or had a phobia of pork, alcohol and writing. There were many Moroccan volunteers present on those police stations to assist ‘grievously hurt’ people to fill in the form correctly.
The court was, like the first Wilders trial, a kangaroo court with the verdict ready before the trial even began. A complete circus. I have never ever heard about pre-printed complaint forms readily available for the public anywhere. Possibly the North Korean or mainland Chinese justice departments might look into that; it’s very helpful in political trials.
Any idea about the logistics involved? The coordination necessary? We’re not talking about one progressive commissioner who dragooned his unwilling officers to do his bidding. It was nationwide. Thousands of pre-printed forms had to be printed and distributed to most police stations. Those stations had extended opening hours, to accommodate the complainants. That means a lot of officers were doing overtime; those volunteers had to be found and fed — who’s paying for that entire operation? The taxpayer, of course!
This is entirely my opinion, of course. As nobody, not even the defense team, filed complaints with the court about this haphazard filing of legal complaints, I probably am not correct in seeing this as illegal. Though it really seems that way, at least to me.
After a lengthy trial Wilders was convicted, but not as most progressives had hoped for. He wasn’t fined €5,000. Had he been sentenced to jail, he would have been ejected from parliament. The prosecutor tried that, but the court didn’t go along with it. The court judged him guilty, but without penalty. Both Wilders and the prosecutor appealed.
The court wasn’t exactly happy with Wilders spilling the beans. He first tried to object to judge Elianne van Rens, but that was rejected. Mr. (Dutch title for lawyers, she actually is a woman) Elianne is member of D66, a party which considers itself the arch-enemy of Wilders. She said in an TV interview before the trial began that in her opinion Wilders should be convicted. This was not enough to have her removed. I wonder what else she could have done? Knotting nooses during the trial? Grinning at Wilders while slicing with her finger across her throat? The court expressed in her verdict its displeasure of Wilders calling it a kangaroo court and saying that the court had the verdict ready even before the trial began.
But there is more…
Tania Groth has translated two Swedish items that are suitable as emblematic bookends of life in Modern Multicultural Sweden.
First, this somber letter from a Swedish woman who has decided, along with her husband, to relocate to Budapest. From Katerina Magasin:
“We have been discussing leaving Sweden for five years and have now bought an apartment in Budapest”
August 24, 2019
I choose to publish this well-written farewell letter to Sweden. The writer has recently posted the text on her Facebook, and I want to spread her words more widely because they are nuanced, well-balanced, sad, but absolutely not hateful, that is, what one usually accuses people of being when they criticize the failing Swedish system. Indeed, many people feel a similar sadness in their hearts today, in 2019, when the situation in Sweden in many ways is becoming unbearable. “We have bought an apartment in Budapest”. So begins the post, written by Mercedes Wahlby. It sums up what many who live in Sweden today feel. I have previously published an interview with a couple who have now moved to Marbella, but believe that more of these emigrant voices are needed. Maybe they can make politicians wake up.
One can always hope.
It is not with a light heart and not without great anguish that we have made this decision. We have been discussing leaving Sweden for at least five years, back and forth. The husband who is ethnic Swedish has been the most motivating. Over the years I have tried to come up with millions of excuses to delay the decision. I have always hoped that it would eventually clear up in Sweden. But year after year I have seen that everything is only getting worse and worse, and I have little hope that this negative development can be reversed. I think it is too late, and it is possible it will not happen during my lifetime.
I can no longer live under this immense mental stress, insecurity, murder, shooting, executions, explosions, rapes and gang rapes, robberies, home burglaries, beatings, car fires, school fires, serious criminals who, after a relatively short prison stay, may again be released to move freely among us, an increasingly dismantled welfare system, lack of health care staff, teachers, elderly housing, lack of elderly care, an increasing number of poor pensioners, municipalities in principle bankrupt or in bankruptcy, all these no-go zones called something else, lack of police resources where it may take 1.5-2 hours for them to arrive at the scene of ongoing crimes if they arrive at all, the lying politicians regardless of political color and the accomplished so-called PC media, the demonization of people who think differently, the shrinking freedom of expression, the increasingly diminishing democracy, and last, but not least, the ongoing and widespread Islamization of the country. If I had wanted to live in this kind of country I would have had 53 other different countries to choose from!
I can no longer bear to hear or read daily that this is the new Sweden, and that I must learn to accept the situation. I can no longer bear to hear the police giving advice with a gradually growing list of new recommendations: lock the car doors while driving, do not go out alone in the evenings and nights, do not jog alone in the woods, do not stay in dark alleys or streets, do not wear expensive watches or gold jewellery, do not wear specific types of clothing, do not ride certain taxis or public transport alone in the evening or at nighttime, do not respond to advances, and do not look certain men in the eye so that they do not interpret it as an invitation, etc. In other words, stay within the four walls of your home! I feel like I live in a prison, that I can’t breathe freely, that I have to constantly think about and be observant of my surroundings and look over my shoulder.
I am originally a long-time French-Swedish citizen, and have been living in Sweden since 1972. I consider myself well-integrated and assimilated. My husband has said many times in connection with our discussions about, among other things, emigration, that I am more Swedish than he is. Probably he is right, because I loved the old Sweden and consider it my motherland. Sweden has given me far more than France has ever done. For the first time in my then young life, Sweden gave me happiness. I have also found two wonderful loves. I had the opportunity to get an education at an early age. I have worked hard and made a career, and have done well for myself all these years. I retired at age 67, but continued to take up assignments until the age of 69. I have repaid all my debts, including the student debts, paid high taxes and contributed more to the social contract than I have used.
For me, Sweden is more than just a country with wonderful and magnificent scenery, such as the high mountains where I stayed for three weeks in 1992, the pale red cottages with white trimmings, midsummer’s evening where you dance around the maypole and sing “the little frogs”. For me, Sweden is also the Swedish culture that our politicians, among others, deny. Sweden is the Vikings, their Asatro [pagan religion], their ravages even in my old homeland France, and more specifically Normandy, where I have my roots. Sweden is its great kings such as Wasa, Karl XII, Gustav VI Adolf, its authors as A. Strindberg, S. Lagerlöf, W. Moberg, A. Lindgren, its artists as A. Zorn, B. Liljefors. Sweden is A. Nobel, the many Swedish inventions where the list is long. Sweden is Skansen with the old cottages from bygone times where you can feel the wings of history, their crafts with, for example, glassblowing, landscape embroidery, wool and linen spinning, knotting and much more.
I have in recent years investigated an escape to a new country. For several years, France has been discounted as an alternative, nor are Spain, Italy, England, Belgium and the Netherlands attractive countries other than linguistically. Denmark has long been an opportunity, but it has its own problems, although not as serious as here in Sweden, and partly there are other reasons. Outside the EU, it is too late for us. We’re too old. There remain the Visegrad countries, and the more I hear and read negatively about these countries, the more interested I have been to investigate the content of the allegations myself. We visited Poland last year, and this year it was Hungary.
I was in Budapest for 35 days and it felt right. Among other things, I felt safe. Every day I went by bus and subway even late at night and at night. No problem. I would never dare to do that in Stockholm. I have seen a people who are friendly and helpful, who are proud of their country, their origins and their flag. In front of the Parliament there is, for example, a flagpole with the Hungarian flag, and while it is being hoisted it is honored by two soldiers.
I’m not naive. I don’t think everything in Hungary is perfect. For example, I have seen that there is poverty, that there are elderly people who are begging in streets and squares, probably because their pension is not enough. I have seen that there are addicts, and I have heard that there are problems with a certain kind of people very like those who are outside our grocery stores. I also understand that Hungary, which is under strong external pressure — not to say extortion — from the EU, will one day be forced to do what the EU wants, but then hopefully I will not be alive.
Language is a problem, but I will do my very best to learn it. I’ve already started. And I will not be a burden to my new country because I can support myself.
Old Sweden no longer exists and I cannot live in the new. I will take the old Sweden with me in my heart and never ever forget it. For the rest of my life, I will bear this sorrow and longing for my country, but also anger towards our politicians who have allowed and planned this and betrayed their people to the utmost. Soon I will return to Budapest for a real estate closing, and then I expect to have settled everything in the middle of Sweden within one year and be permanently resident in Hungary.
The second article from Samhällsnytt is disturbing, and quite graphic, so I’ve placed it below the fold: