I’m a from Sweden and my main interest in Wikipedia is history. My major work as a Wikipedia’n is the Swedish section of Palestine. Most of the work has been to translate the English section that in my opinion is far better and much more NPOV than the Swedish quite anti-Israeli version. This is pattern that repeat it self in many subjects. Internationally in general and in the United States in particular there is an tradition of separating facts from opinions, that we in Sweden unfortunately don’t share.
In Sweden there is a Journalistic tradition of not labeling opinions as opinions but to disguise them as facts, in order to sneak them under the radar of the reader. Unfortunately I also have seen this behavior on English Wiki from some Swedish contributors. Keep an eye on Swedes!
On the English site I worked primarily with the story about the Sweden Democrats. I am a member of this party so both my interest and bias is obvious. I think is natural to work on subject that one is interested in, but the bias that automatically follows this must be handled. The best way to do is in my opinion to be frank and transparent. To firmly state ones position in the subject so transparency is kept.
My opponents don’t share this belief. On the contrary one of them have removed he’s prior declaration on he’s page that he believes in “freedom theology”, a quite leftist movement. Now he only states that he dislike “political correctness”. The other makes no statement what so ever regarding he’s political views but from he’s Swedish works I found out that he is a member of the V party (communists/socialists). But I don’t mind this, as long as its transparent.
My political views: edit
I am basically liberal, and a firm believer in individualism. I detest all kinds of totalitarian systems like Nazism, Communism and Islam. I am a big fan of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. If I lived in the US I would be Neo Conservative. I don’t regard myself as much of a nationalist even if I am a member of such a party.
You are a Swedish Scum, edit
and as a Swede myself I am ashame of people like you! Why don't you write that you are a racist? That you believe in racial difference between people? That your race is superior to that of others? That you hate Jews, Africans and any human tha has a colour of skin darker than yours? Didn't you state that you are a Sweden Demokrats party member? Sweden Demokrats? What is so democratic about this party? Is it democratic to repatriat people without asking them what they would like to do? You say you believe in individualism. I don't get it, you mean YOUR individualism and fuck that of others! Isn't that right? How can you be a member of this party and say all this bullshit about yourself? YOU ARE CONFUSED!
- ANSWER:
Hmm, where do you get all that fantasy from? First of all im pro-israel, second im married to a dark-skinned girl and have a son with her. So i think my son is un-superior? Yes, its very democratic to repatriat people if thats what the people of a certin country wants. Its also very un-democratic to take in a lot of people against the will of the own poeple, as Sweden is doing. Sweden belongs to the swedes, as most countries belongs (or should belong) to their people.
Du you think You have the right to demand that for example Thailand accepts 18 miljon immigrants (25% of it population). I dont think You do, but You demand that Sweden does. Can You explain this, mr "NOT-CONFUSED"?
Finally, if the immigration policy of Sweden were done according to the democratic principles (public debate, trancparancy of the problems it causes, its benefits and so on like we have in all other major political issues) then i say whe can't repatriat. But the policy is done out of the democratic system by a political elite (witch u probably belong to). This clears the way for me. So let the people decide, im fine with that. The day we speak open and democratic about immigration, that day i will stand behind what ever policy that is decided, until then the democrasy stays kidnapped.~~