Closing remarks from Martin Nordin immigration and crime
This is a debate article. It is the writer who stands for the opinions expressed in the text, not Aftonbladet.
Published 2023-10-19 13.06
Share the article
Save the article
full screen Åkesson shuffles and stacks the cards when he describes it as saying that you cannot have a lack of integration without immigration. Closing remarks from Martin Nordin. Photo: TT
FINAL REMARKS. Jimmie Åkesson puts forward the opinion that poor integration is an excuse for crime. You can of course think so. Personally, I believe that the connection between immigration, integration and crime is complex and not something you can draw definite conclusions about.
Åkesson opts for nuances and complexity. Immigration can be a cause of crime without being the “fault”.
Let me use an analogy to explain how I think: Is it the rain’s fault if a roof leaks and causes moisture damage? Of course not, the leaks in the roof are the problem. Is it then the immigrants’ fault that they end up in segregated areas, the children go to segregated schools and labor market integration is slow. No, it is of course the fault of the circumstances.
Åkesson mixes up the cards when he describes it as saying that you cannot have a lack of integration without immigration.
Of course not, because a platitude is no argument. Because in fact it is the opposite, which experience from other countries shows; you can have immigration without a lack of integration.
But Åkesson is right in one aspect. Sweden has experienced extensive asylum-related immigration that has challenged integration policy. Helping refugees with heavy emotional burdens requires extensive integration measures.
And in this respect, the policy has definitely failed: Because at the same time as refugee immigration has increased, society has not directed greater resources towards integration.
On another important point, however, Åkesson is wrong. The explosions and shootings are not the tip of the iceberg. Because an important point in my previous post was that although gang crime has increased, crime as a whole has not.
The importance of cultural factors also tends to be exaggerated. For example, there is immigrant groups who have had difficulties in Sweden but who have succeeded better in other recipient countries, which suggests that culture is not the problem.
Finally, regardless of what causes crime, Åkesson should focus on finding solutions instead of polarizing. Does it really matter if the fault lies in immigration or integration?
We cannot undo immigration, and re-migration is often unrealistic, especially when those who commit shootings are often born and raised in Sweden.
Furthermore, I am of the firm opinion that even researchers are allowed to have opinions and values. Excluding scientists from the debate benefits no one. I take it, Jimmie, that you don’t consider the scientists’ voices redundant?
Martin Nordin, docent in economics, Lund University
arrow Join the debate and comment on the article – like Aftonbladet Debatt on Facebook.
2023-10-21 01:00:14
#Åkesson #continues #simplify #polarize
