Call - not ostracism - reduces the SD's influence


Chronicle of Northern Halland, 5 December 2014

Is not it time to drop the term "Polish parliament"? Not good enough "Swedish parliament" well and good for a world that now witnessing the largest parliamentary collapse in modern times? And all this for the Sweden Democrats brought down the government's budget.

Is the SD therefore culprit? Yes, if we are to believe many pundits. It was SD, who voted for the Alliance's budget, even though the party really stood closer to the Government's proposals. It was SD as trilskt flexed its muscles in a demonstration of power. It was the SD who would rather devoted himself to political games (read: trying to outmaneuver the Green Party from the government) than political solutions.

But we have not forgotten one important detail? The biggest reason SD has such a strong influence today is because of the other parliamentary parties' unwillingness to talk - to put it mildly. There is no denying the facts. By systematically freeze out the Sweden Democrats have the other parties contributed to the antagonist has grown twice as strong.

This is not rocket science. It's very simple: "bullying" has aroused sympathy, and sympathy has generated voices. Additionally, SD has taken a monopoly on migration and integration issues because no one else dares to talk about it. Obviously, these questions are important for many voters. Can anyone therefore be surprised at the election results?

Should not then the other parties have learned a lesson? Yes, reasonably. But unfortunately it seems reasonableness and rationality have fled their cow. Instead, they pursue the same path, determined to ignore his opponent. Now talk Anders Björk and others that even marginalize Sweden Democrats by a coalition between the Alliance and the Social Democrats. A bad idea.

Firstly, we already know from experience that SD is neither being reduced in power or popularity just for applying an isolation strategy. Secondly, if the Alliance and Socialdemokaterna the unlikely form coalition, who do we have left in opposition: the extreme right and left forces in our country.

One need not be a political scientist to understand the parliamentary instability such a weak opposition would create. A strong democracy requires a strong opposition.

I share most people's concerns about the Sweden Democrats' immigration policy. And their humanity awakens anything but my sympathies. But think, there are two obvious problems with the way this party has been met.

  1. Think what you like about the Sweden Democrats' agenda, the party is a elected party. It got 13 percent of the Swedish people's voices. It is Sweden's third largest party. One can, on either moral or democratic grounds, ignore or sweep under the carpet voters in the manner made. If there is democracy, we want to affirm we will never attain the goal by behaving undemocratically.
  1. It can of course asserted that many (not all) Sweden Democrats harboring ill will toward immigrants. But what is better, to systematically demonize the SD for the sake of it or get involved in a factual debate with convincing arguments - for it is not very difficult. Is not the story clearly masters: hatred has never been overcome with hatred. It will not work this time either.

Please leader, for all our sakes, when you sit at the round table, do not be afraid to invite SD. The way to reduce the Sweden Democrats' influence on politics is not to freeze them out. It just makes them victims and increase their influence even more. It's a mystery to me that you have previously turned a blind eye to this fact.

But we do not negotiate with racists, someone might say, moreover, SD rooted in neo-Nazism. Certainly, but if it is consistent we should be, we should not exclude the west portion of all calls too? It was not long ago that the party acclaimed communist dictatorships. No, we must be able to have mature conversations between all the democratically elected parties, no matter what we think of them.

Moreover, the most successful politicians are the ones who lived by the motto: "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer." It's up close we can influence our environment and have greater control, not when we buries its head in the sand and pretend that if problems do not exist.

And if there is anyone who is worried about the debate, was just calm. It's actually not difficult to disarm the Sweden Democrats with sound arguments. (A tribute to the Liberal Party Robert Hannah which is one of the first to dare to take the debate on integration policy.)

But "xenophobia may not control," Gustav Fridolin has recently said. I agree. But if you really mean it, Mr Fridolin, then should you and other party leaders follow the above advice. Otherwise it will 22 March to be a dark day in the history of Sweden. For it is the day when Sweden Democrats get far more than 13 percent of parliamentary votes. Mark my words.

Remember where you read it first.

Guest Columnist: Louis Herrey