The Swedish issue, and the perception of Sweden in Israel

[MikeHarm]

I've heard that Mexico does that also.

[faito anto]

Peter, all this shows is that there are people, born Jewish, who take a "can't beat them, join them" approach.
They follow a basic pattern of "I will be accepted if I go out of my way to show that I am with the europeans and not jews."

They are pathetic, and the europeans who love them are also pathetic.

Those countries u mention are not constantly met with absurd UN condemantion. Chinese/Austrian fencers are not barred from world championship competitions etc. Please stop being so disingenous Peter.
You know it is not an equivalent comparison.

Also, to compare South Africa with israel is another ridiculous comparison, almost as ridiculous as pkt and fechter comparing israelis to nazis, but not as offensive.

"Within Israel, Jews are a majority, but the Arab minority are full citizens who enjoy equal rights. Arabs are represented in the Knesset, and have served in the Cabinet, high-level foreign ministry posts (e.g., Ambassador to Finland) and on the Supreme Court. Under apartheid, black South Africans could not vote and were not citizens of the country in which they formed the overwhelming majority of the population. Laws dictated where they could live, work and travel. And, in South Africa, the government killed blacks who protested against its policies. By contrast, Israel allows freedom of movement, assembly and speech. Some of the government's harshest critics are Israeli Arabs who are members of the Knesset."

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths

[Ramrod]

Originally posted by PeterGustafsson
Sweden extradites non-Swedes, except those facing capital punishment. In Sweden - as in most of Europe - CP is considered an abomination of nature, and those in favor of it are considered sickos.

Those in favor of capital punishment are considered sickos, while those who murder innocent people are considered worthy of government protection?

Why is capital punishment considered an abomination of nature but not the murder that justifies it?

[counterattack]

Europe does not believe in justice, it believes in rehabilitation. The rights of the criminals are no less than the rights of the victims. This system is creeping into the U.S. as well. Any country that would put a statute of limitations on extraditing perpetrators of the Holocaust doesn't come across as a country very clear on the concept of justice.

As for news coverage, I spent almost a month in Norway (I know ity isn't Sweden, but I haven't spent any time in Sweden) in December/January and I read the news. I will say that at least in Aftenposten and Dagbladet (two of the biggest papers in Olso area) the reporting was unbalanced. The assumption was that Israel was guilty, racist, oppressive, and that the poor Palestinians were just doing what they had to do. The reporting about the U.S. was very negative also. This suits Norwegians fine since "the U.S. is the root of the world's problems", as I heard at a New Year's party. Also, the original Norwegian constitution banned Jews from the country, and their tradition of anti-semitism has only been restrained by the general lack of Jews in Norway to oppress.

The U.S. is slightly more balanced. The newspaper editorials tend to be pretty much pro-Palestinian, but the politicians are more pro-Israeli. As the demographics shift and Muslims outgain the Jews in clout, i.e. when the next current generation of children become adults, Israel will lose its last ally. I hope for their sake that they make peace before then...

[faito anto]

Yes, this is the marvel of Europe. Even after getting rid of their Jews, they managed to keep their anti-Semitism.

And of course, they are very jealous of American success. In half a century, the USA overtook Europe as the world power. This is one of the main causes of anti-Americanism.

Originally posted by counterattack
Also, the original Norwegian constitution banned Jews from the country, and their tradition of anti-semitism has only been restrained by the general lack of Jews in Norway to oppress.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Snips below by me.

Originally posted by counterattack
Europe does not believe in justice, it believes in rehabilitation.

Sentences here are considerably shorter, and rehab is indeed the PC word. I personally vote for the only party that wants to extend sentences somewhat, but I am not so dumb so that I believe that what I think is right is automatically a vote-getter. Crimes during furlough occur here also, but has that been used in political ads? No. Why? The party that wants longer sentences for criminals knows that that position will get their core voters to happier - voters who will vote for them anyway. Time for another comparison between USA and Europe (Sweden).

In USA, about 50% vote in national votes, and the voting percentage varies greatly with socioeconomic status. In Sweden, that latest parliamentary vote had an attendance in the high 80ies, very low by Swedish standards. The non-voting is also relatively evenly spread among the different voting groups. This means that it is a major election winning strategy in USA to get the previous nonvoters to vote. In Sweden, this is a supplementary strategy at best - there are not all that many nonvoters to chase, and a high proportion of them will not vote no matter what. This means that a election strategy featuring an issue which will please core voters, but put off possible converts from other parties, is very liable to backfire. Another thing is that a large part of the voting immigrant population comes from countries where the state has wielded a large axe, and they don´t want any more state punishment what so ever. OTOH: Recently, rape punishments have gotten longer, reflecting more feminist clout. Also, the biggest party is really tough on tax evasion and similar crimes, not surprising for a party that repeatedly wins election on soak-the-rich tax hikes.

As for news coverage, I spent almost a month in Norway (I know ity isn't Sweden, but I haven't spent any time in Sweden) in December/January and I read the news.

If you can read Norwegian, you can read Swedish. The languages are very similar, and culture also. Try here for a the largest daily newspaper: www.aftonbladet.se

The U.S. is slightly more balanced. The newspaper editorials tend to be pretty much pro-Palestinian, but the politicians are more pro-Israeli. As the demographics shift and Muslims outgain the Jews in clout, i.e. when the next current generation of children become adults, Israel will lose its last ally. I hope for their sake that they make peace before then...

Ah, someone willing to think about voter demographics at last! I agree with you, the relative birth rates are not helping the Israeli cause. In Sweden, the Muslim/Jew population ratio stands at 50:1, and is increasing (immigration, birth rate, etc.) I have heard that the ratio is similar in some other European countries. I don´t think, however, that the US. Muslims will "outclout" the US. Jews when the outnumber them, I think that it will take considerably longer. I rember reading in Newsweek that some Israeli leader (Barak?) also was interested in the demographics.

Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[Fechter1]

Originally posted by counterattack
Europe does not believe in justice, it believes in rehabilitation. The rights of the criminals are no less than the rights of the victims. This system is creeping into the U.S. as well.

You don't believe in rehabilitation?

Justice and rehabilitation are not diametrical opposites. In fact, the US justice system is largely based on rehabilitation as well (except for capital punishment, of course).

Any country that would put a statute of limitations on extraditing perpetrators of the Holocaust doesn't come across as a country very clear on the concept of justice.

What's the statute, and to whom does it apply? (And who requested the extradition?)

As for news coverage, I spent almost a month in Norway (I know ity isn't Sweden, but I haven't spent any time in Sweden) in December/January and I read the news. I will say that at least in Aftenposten and Dagbladet (two of the biggest papers in Olso area) the reporting was unbalanced. The assumption was that Israel was guilty, racist, oppressive, and that the poor Palestinians were just doing what they had to do. The reporting about the U.S. was very negative also. This suits Norwegians fine since "the U.S. is the root of the world's problems", as I heard at a New Year's party.

The U.S. is slightly more balanced. The newspaper editorials tend to be pretty much pro-Palestinian, but the politicians are more pro-Israeli. As the demographics shift and Muslims outgain the Jews in clout, i.e. when the next current generation of children become adults, Israel will lose its last ally. I hope for their sake that they make peace before then...

If their coverage of the situation seems unbalanced to you, imagine how US coverage must seem to them. Personally, I find that US news coverage on global events is deficient to say the least, and definitely biased, so I try to go to international news sources whenever possible. But that's just me. I like to be able to see an issue from both sides.

The next time you hear a comment like that ("The US is the root of the world's problems."), just ask them to support that stance. Not all will have the arguments ready to back up their words, but you just might learn something from those that do. Don't automatically assume they're wrong just because they disagree with you. They might be right, after all. Although I highly doubt that the US is the root of all evil (so to speak), the perception that it might be could be just as damaging. Don't be so quick to judge them. Open a dialog. That's how you learn, that's how you really solve problems and make friends. That's how you make peace.

Also, the original Norwegian constitution banned Jews from the country, and their tradition of anti-semitism has only been restrained by the general lack of Jews in Norway to oppress.

Did they keep that original constitution, or did they change it (and when)? To judge the Norwegian people today by a document that was abandoned long ago (previous question) does not sound very fair to me. (Granted, the fact that it's happening to me quite frequently might have slanted my opinion in this matter...) On that note, what tradition of anti-semitism? Please provide some background.

[Fechter1]

Originally posted by faito anto
Yes, this is the marvel of Europe. Even after getting rid of their Jews, they managed to keep their anti-Semitism.

And of course, they are very jealous of American success. In half a century, the USA overtook Europe as the world power. This is one of the main causes of anti-Americanism.

What about anti-Europism? What are the causes of the anti-European sentiments in the US (are there similar sentiments in Israel?)?

My point here is not pure contradiction, nor am I trolling for another argument like the one we had before. I am simply trying to establish that there are two sides to every argument.

You claim residual anti-semitism in Europe. Have you ever traveled there (actual question)? The manner in which you bring up the issue, you make it appear that Europeans are against Israel (and jews in general) simply because they are jews. Have you ever considered alternate possibilities? If you were constantly criticized and judged by someone, wouldn't you develop a dislike for them? When you think about it (and please do before answering), could that be the reason for your anti-European views? (Not meant as a jab, meant as an honest question)
Criticism is easy. Understanding is hard. But that's how you solve problems.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

snips below by me.

Originally posted by counterattack
Also, the original Norwegian constitution banned Jews from the country, and their tradition of anti-semitism has only been restrained by the general lack of Jews in Norway to oppress.

So, I did a little googling. "The Virtual Jewish History Tour", http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/vjw/Norway.html

states that the first time the rule forbidding jews entering Norway was repealed was in 1630. It was later reinstated, but repealed finally in 1851.

Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[edew]

Originally posted by Ramrod
Those in favor of capital punishment are considered sickos, while those who murder innocent people are considered worthy of government protection?

Why is capital punishment considered an abomination of nature but not the murder that justifies it?

People kill people all the time, starting with Cain and Abel. Murder is almost natural, albeit grisly and undesirable.

States do not kill people. Because people can't (easily) kill the state. The people create the state and can demand that the state not be in the business of killing people (or demand the state be in the business of killing people, it's the pick of the people). I prefer to live in a place where the state cannot kill people.

That's the difference.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Originally posted by Ramrod
Those in favor of capital punishment are considered sickos, while those who murder innocent people are considered worthy of government protection?

Why is capital punishment considered an abomination of nature but not the murder that justifies it?

I don´t feel like going into the pro/con debate on CP here, those debates almost always turn into opinion-stating and nothing else. The case opposing the CP is stated on several webpages, do a googlesearch if you are thusly inclined. (Oh, another thing. A murderer who is not extradited to a jurisdiction with CP is not let away scot-free in Sweden, he is tried on the murder according to Swedish laws. In theory at least, when this situation has arosen the foreign DA´s have agreed to waive the CP as condition for extradition.)

On the topic "why did CP lose in Europe as a viable political stance?" I don´t really know. I suspect that the opinions and personalities of those Europeans that left for USA - as opposed to those who stayed - has a lot to do with it. On the final result: Suffice to say that the anti-CP stance has won a overwhelming, final, and total win over the pro-CP stance in Europe.

A fuller answer requires a legal-sociological dissertation, somthing that I am not in the mood for now. My virus throat has become better, so much fewer postings soon.

Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[jeff]

People should be outraged by rape (and punish it accordingly) because it's a heinous crime, not because feminists gained "clout". Only the victim population should care? Similarly, *everybody* should be outraged by an "artistic display" glorifying genocidal acts like suicide bombers, not just people of the victims' ethnicity. Letting war criminals who committed crimes against humanity live free without being brought to justice is tantamount to condoning the acts they committed (and provides neither justice nor rehabilitation). A society lacking a sense of outrage against these behaviors has misplaced its moral compass.

Of course anti-Semitism is still there. There's a 1,000 year history of it; it didn't just go away in the past 50 years. Chants of "Death to Jews" in France in the past year (to give just one example) should provide a clue. Unfortunately, the middle East situation gives bigots a chance to claim their anti-Semitism is anti-Zionism. 60 years ago it was "Jewish internationalism" that provided the excuse. Burning down a synagogue doesn't make that subtle distinction clear...

Complaining about the victim populations' efforts to gain justice is nothing more than blaming the victim. (Oh, there go those pesky people complaining about the bigotry showered on them. They keep criticizing and judging. It's so much easier to blame them than to face up to the possibility that they're right. And it's much more satisfying to blame them for having upset us.)

"Anti-Europeanism" is a red herring. The anti-US rhetoric in Europe is far more inflamatory than the opposite. Even Bart Simpson's and Rumsfeld's comments. When Zimbabwe's Mugabe and Chinese President Hu Jintao separately visited Paris, they were greeted with pomp and ceremony, notwithstanding the blood on their regimes' hands (Tibet? Who cares!). When Putin visited London there were Russian flags all over London (Chechnya? who cares!), but when Dubya visited London he was described as a war criminal.

It's clear that there is a vicious double standard here (and faito anto's last post hit the nail on the head). It doesn't induce me to want to understand the flawed reasoning that leads people to think along these terms. There's not a lot of common ground I share with people holding such foolish, self righteous, uninformed opinions.

Fortunately, neither Europe nor the US are monolithic, so there are people with whom one can have reasonable conversations.

Peter: how's the strep throat doing?

[jeff]

Ah, I see that Peter's throat is better. Our posts crossed. Peter, why would that lead to fewer posts?

You know, if Charred Phoenix ever returns to this board (not that I'm wishing for it), he's going to think this pro- or anti-CP thing is either about him or the Communist P party... Anyway, a totally separate subject, deserving its own thread should we all decide to go down that path.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Snips by me.

Originally posted by Tireur
So......if the victims had larger families, you might institute the death penalty?

Don´t think so. I can never remember reading in the paper any family member of a victim coming forward to ask for CP, even under the condition of anonymity.

Legal stuff is not what wins elections here, the biggest party wins elections on entitlement programs and soak-the-rich tax hikes.

Peter Gustafsson

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Originally posted by faito anto
Peter, all this shows is that there are people, born Jewish, who take a "can't beat them, join them" approach.
They follow a basic pattern of "I will be accepted if I go out of my way to show that I am with the europeans and not jews."

They are pathetic, and the europeans who love them are also pathetic.

Not that I know them personally, but I would suspect that if they are called pathetic, they will be less inclined to come around to the position of the person calling them so. But I can´t stop you if you want to alienate possible future allies.

Those countries u mention are not constantly met with absurd UN condemantion. Chinese/Austrian fencers are not barred from world championship competitions etc. Please stop being so disingenous Peter.
You know it is not an equivalent comparison.

I know full well that the situations for those countries is not the same, but I would like to remind you that you brought them up.

Also, to compare South Africa with israel is another ridiculous comparison, almost as ridiculous as pkt and fechter comparing israelis to nazis, but not as offensive.

It was not a comparison between the realities of the situations in the two countries. It was a partial explanation on why the media scrutiny goes in the direction it goes. Those are not one and the same. The title of this thread includes the word "perception", and for a reason. Old South Africa and Israel share(d) many common activist/media opponents in Europe, and that is enough to explain the scrutiny - the realities of what happened in both countries need not enter into the equation.

Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[Fechter1]

Originally posted by jeff
People should be outraged by rape (and punish it accordingly) because it's a heinous crime, not because feminists gained "clout". Only the victim population should care? Similarly, *everybody* should be outraged by an "artistic display" glorifying genocidal acts like suicide bombers, not just people of the victims' ethnicity. Letting war criminals who committed crimes against humanity live free without being brought to justice is tantamount to condoning the acts they committed (and provides neither justice nor rehabilitation). A society lacking a sense of outrage against these behaviors has misplaced its moral compass.

I agree. As long as the standards and definitions are applied equally.

Of course anti-Semitism is still there. There's a 1,000 year history of it; it didn't just go away in the past 50 years. Chants of "Death to Jews" in France in the past year (to give just one example) should provide a clue. Unfortunately, the middle East situation gives bigots a chance to claim their anti-Semitism is anti-Zionism. 60 years ago it was "Jewish internationalism" that provided the excuse. Burning down a synagogue doesn't make that subtle distinction clear...

Complaining about the victim populations' efforts to gain justice is nothing more than blaming the victim. (Oh, there go those pesky people complaining about the bigotry showered on them. They keep criticizing and judging. It's so much easier to blame them than to face up to the possibility that they're right. And it's much more satisfying to blame them for having upset us.)

I don't blame victims for seeking justice. As long as it's directed at the actual culprits. As I've said before, don't judge me by and blame me for something that some of my grandfather's contemporaris have done. That will help only to foster a dislike of the victims, and continuation of the "tradition".

It's clear that there is a vicious double standard here (and faito anto's last post hit the nail on the head). It doesn't induce me to want to understand the flawed reasoning that leads people to think along these terms. There's not a lot of common ground I share with people holding such foolish, self righteous, uninformed opinions.

And if they hold the same opinions about you, nothing will ever be resolved and we're back to the beginning. If you understand the reasoning, you at least have a chance at influencing it and correcting some of the misconceptions. That's what I meant.

However, that might force us to reexamine our own opinions, and nobody wants to do that and find out we're wrong.

I'm tired of people saying "I'm right because I can't possibly be wrong." You just can't argue with people like that. Me, I don't mind being proven wrong but please support it with facts.

Fortunately, neither Europe nor the US are monolithic, so there are people with whom one can have reasonable conversations.

My sentiments exactly.

[jeff]

Fechter1, I think we're largely in agreement (at least in the last set of posts). My comment on modern anti-Semitism was to show that it exists in Europe in response to your comment about "residual anti-Semitism". By the selection of example country you see I wasn't pointing it at Germany.

About the people holding strong anti-US opinions: I agree that you don't gain understanding that way, but you have to interact with people who are receptive to reasonable discussion. Otherwise you're just wasting your efforts.

I do believe there is a strong anti-US bias in Europe, and not just due to the current US administration. I recall rhetoric from 1968 onwards that claimed that the US was provincial, culturally backwards, imperialistic, &etc, and compared us unfavorably with the USSR and China despite their obvious (but denied) defects. So, as unpleasant as things are now, it's not a new situation. We are parochial here, due to single large country, land-mass, and economic and military strength, and look across the pond less frequently and with less emotion than the Europeans. So I think the conflict is more revealing about Europe's insecurities than they are about the US per se.

[counterattack]

Hear, hear! Well spoken, Jeff.