Sweden’s Immigration Debate Sparks Race Controversy: Hanif Bali’s Take

A few weeks ago I ended up in a bad mood after one an interview in Göteborgs-Posten. In a high school sentence I happened to use the word r. After the migration debate, Sweden will have a race debate, I said.

Sometimes I wonder if the left thinks it can only win the debate if it paints its opponent as Dr. Mengele. Socialista Flamman editor-in-chief Leonidas Aretakis was quick anyway attack and he accused me of being a skull-gatherer.

But to all those clutching their pearls and nose rings: I don’t want a debate about race, it’s just what I think we’re going to be. getting

It is certainly true that there are groups of people who have a strong cultural bond with each other. These collections, in turn, become biological and genetic as they reproduce for generations especially within their group. This is how clans are created. Like the Swedes, Palestinians or Kurds.

But I want to make it clear that man is far too complex to be summed up by the concept of race. It’s a pseudoscientific term, about as precise and scientific as the Swedish Migration Agency’s eye age assessment.

Funnily enough, a racial debate quickly flared up in Flamman after Aretaki’s attack on me. There he received responses to speeches from left-wing debaters who defended the concept of race and emphasized its practical importance.

The evolutionist Patrik Lindenfors, the religious historian Stefan Arvidsson, the sociologists Tobias Hübinette and Catrin Lundström have all repeatedly defended the concept. Perhaps they are colored by American literature, where the r word is more frequent than punctuation.

However, the situation in Sweden is very different from the situation in the United States. Our situation is much worse. There are greater differences in unemployment between the foreign-born and the home-born in Sweden than between blacks and whites in the United States. Even in the adult PISA, called PIAAC, there are smaller differences between blacks and whites in the US than at home and abroad in Sweden.

We try to put it into words all the time: ethnicity, race, adidas knights and gucci captains.

I apologize for this crude division based on skin color, but that is how Americans divide their statistics. It is also in this way that the racial ideologues of the left want to divide the conflict in Sweden. In this way, you will have an eternal and unbearable conversation about race and racism.

We are now in the third generation of divided immigration courts. It is clear that the real and persistent differences in success between domestic and foreign children have a significant impact on society.

The left seems to be ignoring the fact that Sweden has the biggest differences in the level of employment, skills and education between the domestic population in the entire western world and foreign. But we know that these abilities are inherited in generations – whether you want to believe in biological or social theory.

So the differences need to be explained – which the left is obviously doing with accusations of racism. However, it is not possible to make a charge of racism without classifying the person accused in terms of race. In Sweden, the left has chosen the word “ethnic”.

If you look at demographic statistics, observe the behavior of children and take into account the number of ethnically divided people, it is clear that Sweden is getting a new ethnicity.

In our concrete underground areas, we can see the shapes of a new group, mixed multi-ethnic, but non-Swedish immigrants with a common local culture. Something called creolization. Trying to categorize this group by terms like race or skin color is ridiculous.

At the same time, there is movement from the other side. Leonidas Aretakis and I – along with most other famous debaters on this topic – have something in common: We are the children of Swedish immigrants. Aretaki’s descendants may be as Greek as Selma Lagerlöf and Gustav Fröding Iranian.

The big question is the extent of these two parallel movements. There is a lack of data and curiosity from academia. Instead, the sociologists are stuck with useless American racial concepts.

We try to put it into words all the time: ethnicity, race, adidas knights and gucci captains. We should leave this debate about semantics and instead ask ourselves how Sweden will handle this new destructive mixed culture that has established itself in our million dollar programs.

To what extent can the Swedish organization absorb and assimilate these without losing itself?

It is a debate where the concept of race does not make us any wiser.

Hanif Bali is a freelance columnist on the editorial page of Expressen. Read more of his texts here.