Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Kent Ekeroth, the international secretary for the political party, Sweden Democrats (SD) and a candidate for the Swedish parliament in the elections in September 2010.
FP: Kent Ekeroth, welcome to Frontpage Interview.
I would like to talk to you today about the Islamization of Sweden.
Let’s begin by you telling us a bit about the political climate in your country. To what extent have political correctness and multiculturalism infiltrated the society and what destruction are they wreaking?
Ekeroth: Thanks Jamie.
We’ll a friend of mine once described Sweden as a “politically correct dictatorship,” which is a rather good description on how far things have gone in Sweden. I can give you a few examples of exactly how far we are talking about. Our prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt, said the following soon after he was elected in 2006:
“The core Swedish is only barbarism. The rest of the development has come from outside.”
Mona Sahlin, now the party leader of the Social Democrats, which is the largest party in Sweden with about 35% of the votes, said in 2002:
“I think that what makes so many Swedes envious of immigrant groups is, you have a culture, an identity, a history, something that binds you. And what do we have? Mid-summers’ eve and such ridiculous things.”
The party leader of the Center Party, who is in the current government coalition, said the following:
“It is really not the Swedes that built Sweden. It was people that came from abroad.”
These three quotes are a pretty clear indicator that things have gone very wrong in Sweden. The Swedish media is censoring the fact that the perpetrators of violent crimes are foreigners. One example of this is when a major Swedish newspaper, Expressen, printed a picture of a criminal that they pixeled to avoid identification. Moreover, they whitened the pixels so that the readers would not see that he was a non-white.
The Swedes have shed their judeo-christian heritage in favor of secular humanism, which is not a heritage but a worldview. So in effect, these self-hating Progs are right– the Swedes are a nothing people.
Being a secularist atheist (although not a Swede) I must differ with Jesusland’s opinion, for Islam has no more implacable opponent than an aware atheist. I note how some Christians (not all might I add) have been trying to claim that the reason that Islam is advancing is because we English and Europeans more generally have abandoned Christianity. This is nonsense. It is very much the Christian attitude of “turning the other cheek” and offering charity to your foe that is at the root of our problems when dealing with Islam. Most indigenous people in the UK, Sweden and elsewhere in Europe still possess these residual Christian values, and it is these that underpin multiculturalism and deference to Muslims and other minorities. Christianity is built upon a sense of guilt, whereas Islam is built upon a sense of shame. When a Christian feels sinful, this sense is internalised as guilt, whereas Muslims externalise sin and turn it into blame, projecting their hatred outwards onto the kuffar, women and rationalists. This externalised hate is one of the key features of Islam, and one that most Christians simply cannot comprehend. Christians offer charity to all in need, whereas Muslims restrict charity to members of the ummah.
Judeo-Christian heritage? What about our Classical Greco-Roman heritage?
I do not believe that the Swedes are “a nothing people” because they refuse to believe in an imaginary friend (or indeed foe) in the sky. Anyway, we need to put our differences aside. All non-Muslims need to work together to resist Islamisation: http://durotrigan.blogspot.com/2010/06/england-anatomy-of-counterjihad-and.html
You only have to look to history to see that the commandment to turn the other cheek hasn’t been a huge influence on Christians. From Constantine’s battle at Milvan bridge, to the Crusades, to the beaches of Normandy, Christians have been representing for Christendom for literally millenia. See St. Agustine’s “just war.” Turning the other cheek is seldom applied on the individual level, and never, EVER applied on the grand scale of war and conflict. A Nigerian christian, for example, won’t go looking for a fight, but when the Muslim horde rampages through his village, believe me, he will grab his machete as readily as the next guy.
What we are witnessing in Europe isn’t internalized christian pacifism, but rather Leftwing cultural relativism. If all cultures are the same, then the Islamization of Europe is not even considered an offense to which they should turn the other cheek. On the contrary, it’s considered “cultural enrichment.” That is the fruit of cultural relativism, and this is a Leftwing anti-Christian ideology. It is a rejection of their own jude0-christian heritage (a heritage which, by the way, includes the Greco-Roman, just as you recognized modern Leftism includes much christian ethic) because christianity stands in the way of their marxist utopia. Islam is merely a tool they are using to destroy Western judeo-christian culture. The Left believes they can control this beast, but they are sadly mistaken.
Being an atheist does not make you my enemy, nor even necessarily a liability in this cultural struggle, as long as you recognize who the real enemy is– The LEFT. Islam is merely their tool. We cannot stop Islamization as long as Leftism predominates.
Ps., and most importantly, there is no such thing as an “atheist culture.” Cultures develop over countless generations. It isn’t just something you decide upon from one day to the next.
Greco-Roman, too, is not a culture. It is a way of thinking.
The “nothing people” are those who have discarded their culture, even their very history, in the name of the Left’s dogma of cultural relativism.
@Durotrigan
“Most indigenous people in the UK, Sweden and elsewhere in Europe still possess these residual Christian values…”
It is the only thing holding western civilization together at this point and it will not last and as Jesusland kinda points out the left is deteriorating the bond as fast as they can.
In this thread I try to explain this:
http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=23500&cpage=1#comment-15740
@Jesusland
You said:
“there is no such thing as an “atheist culture.”
I have to disagree with you.
First I have to explain some basics of Communism. Communist requires Atheism though Atheism on its face doesn’t require Communism, neither one can exist as a society without out the other.
Given that Mao has proven Communism creates its own culture and in a short period of time.
Mao was able to destroy the old Chinese culture and build a corrupted culture based on the corrupted system.
Ox,
Perhaps so. But to the extent that Western atheism has a “culture”, it can only be found in such things like “shock art” and other such cultural transgressions. Atheist “culture” is, to date, nothing more than transgressivism against the perceived dominant judeochrsitian paradigm. It’s a negative, not a positive. It’s a void that is easily filled with no shortage of nonsense.
I would recommend the book, ‘Human Accomplishment’ by Charles Murray on this exact subject. Rather, a chapter or two is on it. Specifically the notion of post modernism as a rebellion to actual culture and art. A sort of anti art, artistic movement which was meant to destroy all classical or skill based art. This is not so far from Nazism, communism, leftism etc. which all share a general desire to smash capitalist conservative and dare I say, ‘natural’ human cultures in the case of leftism, without offering so much as a single idea as to what should replace it that would be better. Communism and Nazism of course intended to create the perfect man once they slaughtered off all the under-evolved, however and whoever they variously imagined and defined them to be.
My point is, post modernism, what I suspect some of you are referring to as ‘atheist culture’ was a deliberate and planned, and very destructive movement from within the arts and has also worked hand in hand with the Frankfurt school’s political correctness and moral and cultural relativism as tools to destroy modern western technical capitalist society, which has created the most wealth with the greatest freedoms and the most advancements and with the greatest harmony with the environment that the world has ever seen and perhaps greater than most could have imagined a few hundred years ago. So of course, had to go to great lengths to try and screw it all up.
Eeyore,
that sounds 100% spot on.
@Eeyore @Jesusland
Yes, the left and atheists work to create a void. That void is the foundation of western civilization without it we will fail.
Once the void is complete something will fill the place. Communist use the void to create a faith in government using science as the foundation. Islam or any other major religion at the time has a real shot at filling the void.
Hello Jesusland and OxAO and thank you for your replies. Once again, I must reiterate that although I am an atheist this does not mean that I subscribe to Frankfurt school leftism or any other form of Communism. I find transgressive shock art tedious and vacuous, and appreciate the architecture of a Gothic cathedral far more readily than something thrown together in imitation of the Bauhaus school. Like Dawkins, I don’t actually need to “believe” in a deity to appreciate the fruits of our traditional Western culture, which as you both correctly point out, is a product of our collective Judeo-Christian and Classical heritage. I feel temperamentally more akin to the pagan Ancients than to Christians in my outlook, but this does not mean that I cannot appreciate the essentially humane worldview of non-literalist Christians or indeed explicitly religious works of art.
What is described as “rebellion” in our society is actually a form of commodified conformity and it does not attract me at all. Eeyore, I concur that “transgressivism” is unappealing, dull, nihilistic and eternally adolescent. As for Greco-Roman culture being an “outlook” rather than a culture, I must disagree, for there would have been no Renaissance art without the Classical originals to serve as exemplars. The scholarship of the Ancients far exceeded that of Dark Age Europe, as did their engineering. No, I simply do not subscribe to the idea that one has to choose between Christianity, Islam or slip into some kind of multiculturalist relativistic void. Western Civilisation is much more than Christianity, although its Christian inheritance does indeed form an integral component of it. We shall therefore have to disagree gentlemen, but remain united nonetheless: Islam must be uprooted from our societies, and together we shall ensure that this objective is achieved. A state of normalcy in political debate can return once we have rid ourselves of this menace.
Sorry OXaO, but I’ve only just read your earlier thread. Thanks for the link. I’ve come across your position before and to a certain extent can understand where you’re coming from, but I’m with Eeyore on this score: we need figures such as Wilders in each of our countries. Men and women with a robust belief in Western culture and liberties who are willing to defend them and who do not fall into a cultural relativist trap.
Still, I am glad to stand alongside you in the struggle against Islam, for our differences are but small beer in the grand scale of things. El Cid, Ferdinand and Isabella, Charles Martel and Jan Sobieski may all have fought against Islam for Christendom, but despite my atheism I am eternally in their debt for their efforts made my freedom possible.
@Durotrigan
You said again:
“I am an atheist… (and you’re not a socialists)”
Then I would bet you are not an atheist. It is more likely you are agnostic.
Which is more or less what I am
An atheist is one that has faith there is no god. Yes it is a faith. Since no one can prove there is or is not a god to take either side takes faith.
Agnostic is one that doesn’t know.
@Durotrigan
you said:
“Men and women with a robust belief in Western culture and liberties who are willing to defend them and who do not fall into a cultural relativist trap. ”
“western culture and liberties” will bend and change because there is no foundation. It is like building on sand it is just going to fall.
What you are defending is something that can not last since it doesn’t have a strong foundation to believe in.
George Washington said it best:
“Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. “
OxAO, so far as the God question goes, I’m at one with Epicurus:
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
As an individual, any atheist who sees the Gramsci-loving Left for what they truly are is good enough for me.
@Durotrigan
Then why call him God?”
For those and other reasons I call him if he exists at all the creator.
That doesn’t mean he watches over our lives.
look swedissh faggot, kent whatever dirt,
most of muslims are gays but %99 of them actives, that is fucking parties.. if u need a muslim husband u dont need to provoke them .. tell it and they will send you one..
u mother fucker..! you atheist..! do you know that god has only one religion.. and that religion was honored with 4 books.. first was sent to david, second to moses, third to jesus and 4th to mohammed.. and the holy bible you read says this from the mouth of jesus that another messenger named ahmah(that is mohammed) will come and ask you to choose the way of god..
and again you faggot atheist.. god has only one religion and it is the faith.. and islam is only the 4th step of this religion.. and religion cannot be named as jewish, cnristian or muslim.. your brain which is not bigger than a northern bird will understand this when you will be able to read your holy bible which is only a copy of the book of moses and rewritten by jewish fallowers of jesus. no 6 of it ….. and u will find this 6th by yourself..
if christ is god’s son why there are thousand of different sects and sub-sects of christinanity, if moses is the real messenger whya there are too many sects of jewism.. if mohammed is tghe the last messenger and islam is the real religion of god why there are sunnies, hanefies, shiites, alevites, etc..
make your bird brain to work and understand the god and god,s creations.. moron..
if you are trading the faith of realbelievers yoiu will be dissaponted..
dirty swedish faggot.. ur political life is utmost 2-3 years..
The above post is an excellent example of Islamic scholarship. A solid refutation that only Socrates himself could refute. I do so appreciate it when Muslims join in real respectful debate like that. My respect grows and grows for Islam when I read stuff like that.
He must be a member of the Islamic Thinkers Society.