Integration/assimilation debate Sweden


UPDATE: The issue is further discussed here: TO BE OR NOT TO BE SWEDISH (JEWISH) THAT’S THE QUESTION………

Sweden Democrat’s integration/assimilation debate causes Aftonbladet’s cultural writer, Martin Aagård to deny that: JEWS WERE GASSED AT AUSCHWITZ!

An important story crossed my desk today concerning the Swedish news daily Aftonbladet’s cultural writer, Martin Aagård, who minimized the Holocaust in pursuit of countering what he deems as ‘dangerous’ Sweden Democrat policies concerning who can be deemed as truly Swedish. He commits the same error as the target of his comments, perhaps even more so.

martin Aagård

All this brings up the important question concerning the use of words, and the proper definition of these words, concerning integration, assimilation, multiculturalism and the US version of the ‘melting pot’. What does it all mean?

The arguments offered by the Sweden Democrats, in this case, Björn Söder, basically surround the issues of the Left, and their consensus driven compatriots (from the other main parties), deeming new immigrants, refugees (illegal or otherwise) who have gained citizenship, as being de facto ”Swedish”.

To the SD party, ”Swedishness” is much more than just a newly gained piece of paper, the same can be said of the differences between the simple act of voting, and what it means to be a real functioning democracy. Gaining citizenship or voting in an election are both rights granted by the civil society to the individual for participation in their society,  which comes with certain amount of responsibilities. Both however, are only outward signs of the civil society, not it’s nuts and bolts.

According to SD members, handing out citizenship like candy to whomever makes it across their border, cheapens the significance, and I believe that is what most angers people who dare vote for the Sweden Democrats. That aside, the problem as I see it, is the complete misunderstanding/misuse of terms in defining what kind of society people want to live in, or are presently living in.

What does it mean to be ”assimilated” or ”integrated”, what is a ”melting pot” and what is ”multiculturalism”? It has always been my opinion that, as an American living in Finland, I’m a Finnish national/citizen, but not Finnish in the traditional (ethnic) sense of the word. I believe that I’m completely ”assimilated”, I abide by its rules and norms, take part of its culture and traditions, but my American heritage nevertheless remains. Am I to be considered as being only integrated, or assimilated, and if so, what does it really mean?

Some of the Jews that I know of personally, say that assimilation means a complete abandonment of their heritage and traditions, and that Jews in America would rather refer to themselves as ”integrated”. I fail to see how any orthodox Jew, or Christian for that matter, partaking in all of that society, abiding by its rules and norms, celebrating its traditions and national holidays, celebrting their own heritage and religious observances, and enjoying what they themselves call ”The Great Melting Pot”, can only consider themselves as being just ”integrated”.

Here’s a question to ponder. Should a vegan, who is truly a minority within a minority, be considered as being only integrated, and not assimilated? What about Bhuddist, or a Shinto? And here’s a pickle, what about Christian and Arab Christian citizens of Israel, are they to be considered as only being ”integrated” and never assimilated?

Such confusion in the proper understanding of these terms leads to situations like these:

Holocaust denial by the horrible socialist Aftonbladet, Sweden’s largest daily, or muddled thinking? The Tundra Tabloids readers need not be reminded of the Aftonbladet’s invented false organ trading by Israel at the time, which they had to apologize for.


According to a Tundra Tabloid’s source, what’s in question here is a (real) neo-Nazi site, (which I refuse to link to) writing about a recent interview on Swedish radio, with the Aftonbladet’s cultural writer, Martin Aagård, concerning the recent statement about Swedish Jews by the Sweden Democrats’ temporary leader, Björn Söder.

According to my Swedish source:

“A person called the journalist, and started asking him about this debate, citizenship versus nation/people. So, this journalist, being Aagård, got tangled up in his own arguments… Since the leftists mean that as long as you have citizenship, you are Swedish. The SD does not think that citizenship is just a legal document.

So, he then asked if any Jews were killed by the nazis by the same logic. There could be no Jews, since they were citizens of Poland or Germany. Thus, Germans and Polish, were killed and not Jews.

The stupid journalist sort of acknowledged that, not to speak against himself.”

Aftonbladet’s cultural writer could be considered as erring in the name of ignorance just as much as the temporary SD party-secretary, Björn Söder. While the Left took the grand opportunity to hammer Söder as a ”fascist” (even the Simon Weisenthal Center thought it prudent to include him on their Top Ten List of individual acts of anti-Semitism), I wonder if the Left will pound the Aftonbladet cultural writer as hard, if at all.


Aftonbladet’s culture writer Martin Aagård believes that no Jews were gassed in Auschwitz. But not because he has accepted scientific facts and based on that drawn the correct conclusion that “the Holocaust” is a fraud. No, according to Martin Aagård, no Jews were gassed – because there are no Jews or people at all, merely “citizens.”

 Here is the interview in question (no English subtitles).

The article ends here.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.