This New York Times report on Sweden's and Norway's differing attitudes toward Middle Eastern refugees ("Sweden has taken an open-door approach to people fleeing the conflict, accepting more Syrians than any other European country"; Norway is far less welcoming) provides a fascinating window into leftist beliefs.
“‘We are the moral guardians of the world. . . . We are righteous.’” Crikey, what self-regard. Are Swedes typically so arrogant?
“Norway . . . has . . . several decades of experience with immigration. Yet Norway is not encouraging asylum-seekers.” Love “Yet.” Ever consider that perhaps it should be “Thus”?
“In Sweden, a closely patrolled pro-immigration ‘consensus’ has sustained extraordinarily liberal policies while placing a virtual taboo on questions about the social and economic costs.” Distilled modern leftism: forcibly and hurriedly transform the national character, and prohibit discussion.
“[B]ecause of all the social, health, housing and welfare benefits mandated by the state, supporting a single refugee in Norway costs $125,000. . . . He asked voters to ‘open their hearts’ to Syrian refugees, even though the escalating cost of supporting them would preclude further welfare benefits for Swedes. The comment caused an outcry — not because it seemed to favor refugees over Swedes, but simply for suggesting that refugee policy needed to be considered on economic grounds.” Fiscally unsustainable, nationally suicidal.
“The Swedes, she said, ‘are extremely liberal toward immigration, but they have a very authoritarian attitude toward debate about it.’” Again, pure leftism: reckless, dogmatic, expensive, and intolerant of dissent.
“[T]he Breivik massacre — the 2011 killing of 77 people by an extreme right-wing Islamophobe”: Breivik is no “Islamophobe”; he committed the murders, and professed fanatical anti-immigrant sentiments, in order to discredit opposition to Muslims.
“For Norway and other wealthy countries, helping as many refugees as possible in the Middle East may make better economic sense than welcoming them on their own soil. But that approach risks conveying the message that the West doesn’t really want Syrians in its midst.” Heaven forbid. Only an immoral culture would eschew an inundation of Syrians.
Fascinating. And tragic.