Sverigedemokraternas näst största problem


Häromdagen såg jag dokumentären “Lake of Fire“, som handlar om abortdebatten i USA. Noam Chomsky är med i filmen, och pratar först om hur abortdebatten kan ses från olika håll rent filosofiskt. Därefter går han in på ett massivt, värdemässigt problem som abortmotståndare ofta vägrar ta hand om:

Med andra ord: om abortmotståndare verkligen bryr sig om barns – och kvinnors – rättigheter och att rädda liv, borde de spendera sin tid på att förhindra något som dödar fler barn och kvinnor än aborter, nämligen hur USA:s regering ger extremt litet pengar i bistånd med syfte att generera rent vatten i länder där folk behöver det. Bara som exempel, egentligen. Medan regeringen spenderar extrema mängder pengar rent krigsekonomiskt.

Hur knyts det här till Sverigedemokraterna?

SD:s politik är mest driven av viljan att stoppa invandring. Varför? På grund av kostnaderna1 som detta medför för Sveriges medborgare.

Olika vetenskapliga tänkare uppskattar kostnaden för invandringen att uppgå till cirka 1% av Sveriges BNP. Nu räknar vi naturligtvis inte med intäkterna.

Sveriges ekonomiska brottslighet beräknas att kosta landet minst 5% av vår BNP2. Den ekonomiska brottsligheten genererar naturligtvis inga inkomster som medborgarna får ta del av, och brottslingarna åker sällan fast, och när de gör det, är straffen låga eller inga.

Summa: om Sverigedemokraterna verkligen skulle bry sig om vad vi medborgare lägger skattepengar på, skulle de koncentrera sig på annat än invandringen.

Vidare kommenterar Chomsky i dokumentären att personer med den typen av resonemang “can’t be taken seriously.”

Det största problem som Sverigedemokraterna lider av, är inte deras oförmåga att kunna lyssna till vetenskapliga sanningar och därefter koncentrera sig på att attackera de som verkligen gör landet illa rent ekonomiskt (genom brott); partiets – inte de som röstat fram SD, utan partiet – största problem är att det i grunden är xenofobt.

  1. Jag skulle gärna höra SD lägga lika mycket tid på att diskutera intäkterna som är involverade med invandring.[back]
  2. Se BRÅ, “Brottsutvecklingen i Sverige fram till år 2007, Kapitel: Ekonomisk brottslighet”, s306.[back]
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Movies I've watched recently:

  • Dödlig drift (1999) - IMDb 1/10

    2015-08-24 21:02

    This film, somehow, marks a new low in Swedish filmmaking; you have Mikael Persbrandt, playing a serial killer in his usual way of waiting--a--long--time----between--------words-to-denote-mental-problems, you have Stefan Sauk, mostly known for crying in strange places in all kinds of productions, and a slew of known Swedish, what went wrong? The film begins almost admirably, from a Swedish film perspective: the serial murderer kills and then surveys the scene, watching the people who discover the corpse, which is disposed of outdoors. After that, however, Persbrandt joins his family for a dinner where he holds some kind of speech before handing his mom a trophy. Subsequently, things go south. All dialogue is weird, there are some inexplicable dancing scenes - including even more inexplicable g-string underwear - amidst fleeting cops that should be professional but aren't, and you feel no sympathy or empathy for anybody in the film, while everything feels amateurish in the extreme. _Everything_, including the soundtrack, which is more hurtful than the murders. Still, it's a laugh. See sedated.

  • Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) - IMDb 9/10

    2015-08-23 09:40
    * * * * * * * * *

    Just as "The Thin Red Line" lured loads of boys into cinemas, thinking they'd see something resembling "Platoon" or a mindless Schwarzenegger flick, "Mad Max: Fury Road" takes another route. There's enough action here to shake a stick at, mainly where CGI doesn't really stand a chance to the real-live graphical action and the special effects are concerned, but the real difference is in the human, here. Both in the contrasts between good and bad, including all of the grey areas, of which there are, humanly speaking, many. This film manages to inject feminism into your everyday man-packed genre, it's almost maddening to think that this film has come into existence. At the same time, even a broken clock strikes the right time twice a day. Not that THIS is a broken clock. No, no. This is a world where civilisation is not as us rich westerners know it. It's a world where our poorest live, in cities of dust, with the richest at the top, degrading the ones down the hierarchical line, just along the lines of capitalism, making the ones at the bottom think that's where they belong, all cogs serving the greater good, which in the film is named "Valhalla", to where you gladly sacrifice your life to go, whenever your master feels like it, or you are programmed to. There is no mercy here. No preconceptions like we are used to. People are people. The film starts off brutal, in the wolf's cave, as it where, before Theron's character decides to go off the decided path together with the tyrannical ruler's "wives" and gets hunted for it. In an early scene, when the escaping party makes a run for it, one of the enslaved "wives" kicks the chastity belt she's been made to wear, and quickly jumps into a rig. Theron's communication with Hardy is nearly breathtaking. I mean, enough said, right? I loved the nomenclature. The mixture of language. Words such as "smeg" (possibly culled from TV-series "Red Dwarf"?), "kamakrazee" and "guzzoline" were well-used. Lines like "Is that just the wind or a furious vexation?" and "We will McFeast in Valhalla" actually made sense, rather than seeming like something extremely uncomfortable from, say, True Detective (season two). "How long has it been?" - "Seven thousand days. And then the ones I can't remember." The film's anti-xenophobic. Just see the interplay where War Boy and Hardy's character is. At first, the hatred is inherent, almost inherited; the more they get to know the situation, themselves and each other, respect and like is gained, as with Hardy's and Theron's characters. It's as though naivité and innocence are shown as-is: good things, really, in comparison with prejudice. The fights, the action, is nearly without comparison. I was slightly reminded of the introductory scene in "Saving Private Ryan" when seeing the first battle, but this is beyond that, with a magnificent display made throughout the film. It's really a feministic film, a world based on no bars hold, or rather, on men, women and beings trying to break out of their gender-based cage and away from bad preconceptions. I can't even begin to say how much I loved the action scenes, the cinematography and the quick editing. The soundtrack is just manic, Wagneresque, and it actually works (where that method is usually, 99 times out of 100, trite beyond words), while you have attackers lurking, coming out of every crevice... It's almost like watching Gilliam's "Brazil", it's so far from this world, that it's almost like watching an action-film apotheosis happening before our eyes, in bright, sparkling colours. Killing never looked this good. This film really stimulates growth in thinking areas, while being ham-fisted in a really good way. THIS is the way to go, for all action films. Just a thing pulled from the IMDb trivia department that says a lot about this film: "The film editor, Margaret Sixel, is director George Miller's wife. When she asked her husband why he thought she should do it as she had never edited an action film before, Miller replied, 'Because if a guy did it, it would look like every other action movie.'" I love this film.

  • Johan Falk: Slutet (Video 2015) - IMDb 2/10

    2015-08-19 21:33
    * *

    This film ends the Johan Falk franchise. Admittedly, I've only seen the last five of these, but it doesn't matter. Where some franchises borrow from Shakespeare and epic stories, this one loans from The Gallery Of Sour Faces, as seen on the movie poster. No happy? No. Falk, played by the anthesis of miens, Jakob Eklund, is out to save himself, his family, his colleagues and to avenge everybody, while acting the doused village idiot, somehow still being prone to mass-killings, despite constantly being hounded by expert killers from the Belarus. One is left none the wiser after the franchise has ended, really. There's simply nothing to take away from this, not even the action, which is plain and dodgy, even seen from a gun-bullet-body perspective; I hoped to gain some kind of ham-fisted pleasure from this, but ended up in dismay. I must confess that I expected it.

  • Johan Falk: Lockdown (Video 2015) - IMDb 2/10

    2015-08-18 20:52
    * *

    In the end credits, this film hails people whose names may not be mentioned, for security reasons. They helped in making this film believable, the credits say. Well. A lot of the security procedures that are displayed in this film are incredulous, and it won't take more than a single glance from somebody, say, a custody officer, to find a slew of factual errors here. So, yes, this film talks the talk, but does it walk the walk? No, not really. There's no tension here. The most actual, life-affirming thing that happens in this film, is police corruption as a whole. Otherwise, this film is based on non-believable dialogue and vexation; when one of the police in this film gets shot, I'm happy, as that means that person will most probably hush up from it. I'm no psychopath, but the characters are so unbelievable, you care as much of someone dying here, as you do about swallowing a glass of water. Less so, in truth. So, all in all, what have I taken away from this experience? Nothing, I think. I can't remember much about this film, apart from it feeling amateurish. Guns. Gangs. Violence. Corrupt cops. My psyche has already ousted most of this film, which says one thing: I'm glad to find my mental defenses well prepared against this kind of pap.

  • Fifty Shades of Grey (2015) - IMDb 1/10

    2015-07-05 19:25

    Actually, I will start off my review by quoting Anthony Lane's review of this film: "Mostly, he sounds like your basic stalker: “I’m incapable of leaving you alone,” he informs Ana—a notion that appears to stimulate her, although it would easily warrant a call to 911. She succumbs, up to a point, but her recurring doubts lead Christian to dish up one of those crusty old no-means-yes propositions which feminism has battled for decades: “You want to leave? Your body tells me something different.” Pass the butt plug." Indeed. This film is tragic, in a variety of ways, and sexy in none (for me, at least). And probably for a bunch of other people as well, as this film has marked 4.2/10 on IMDb, which is remarkably low. Still, I give this film 1/10 for a variety of reasons. The characters are one-dimensional. The main character is "god" and, because of the book, is never-smiling and drab. I mean, if he'd only have been interesting in some way! He comes across all Bruce Wayne-y, body sculpted, can do everything (fly a helicopter, play the piano, own at least 75 different neckties), but lacks everything that he should have. Compare this with the lead character in Steve McQueen's "Shame": he says very little, but exudes so much, much more than this film collectively ever will. The female lead character is just an object, nothing more. A boring, self-deprecating object with a touch of defiance, only there to display her as an individual, somebody who doesn't let anything happen to her as she's master of her own will. Still, shit like "I'm incapable of leaving you alone" creeps me the hell out, it is _not_ sexy or passionate. It's cheap. And cheapens a lot of things. A lot of people who actually do enjoy BDSM have raised their voices against this film as it's apparently against what is considered safe BDSM use, and goes against more than that. The soundtrack is a safeword in this film; down-watered covers, mainly used to be "sultry" and "sensual", no doubt, but are, in fact, like adding poop to your champagne. Not that this film is champagne in any way, shape or form; champagne is palatable. This film is not. Avoid. There will be sequels. I'll avoid those.


My saved links (weekly)

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

“Dödlig drift” – missa inte den här filmen!

Eyes left.

Svensk film har tydligen nått sin höjdpunkt (på vissa sätt) redan 1999 utan att jag visste om det, tills häromdagen. “Dödlig drift“, säger jag bara. Filmen är regisserad av Rolf Börjlind som bl.a. har Jönssonligan-, Papphammar- och Beck-filmer på sitt samvete; filmen har en all-star cast, ex. Mikael Persbrandt, Sissela Kyle, Stefan Sauk, Kjell Bergqvist, Vanna Rosenberg, Suzanne Reuter, Jakob Eklund och Robert Jelinek1.

Filmen är egentligen ett sedvanligt svenskt filmmagplask, undantaget några särskilt minnesvärda scener. Ett par av dem måste sparas för eftervärlden; skit i Nationalmuseum, this is where it’s at.

Först, en scen där Bergqvist och Kyle dansar sensuellt (…) med varandra, tills Persbrandt dyker upp och hotar att fucka upp den fina stämningen men odramatiskt joinar. Och vad är det för musik som spelas upp? Det låter som om Tom Waits supit ned sig på ett 1980-talskaraokeställe! Giffen nedan visar inte när Persbrandt hoppar in, men hela dansen finns i YouTube-snutten precis under:

Och vad vore svensk filmhistoria utan litet solo-Persbrandtdans? Med en klänning? Hela klippet finns i YouTube-snutten under:

Varför hände det där? Jag vet inte.
Spelar det någon roll? Nej.

Spelar alla över i den här filmen? Nja, det säger väl sig självt, men mer än någon gör ju Sauk och Bergqvist det i vanlig ordning, medan Persbrandt gör sitt sedvanliga öppen-mun-med-stirr-ut-i-intet-då-han-ska-se-katarsis-ut. Annars är det precis som vanligt. Älskar hur Bergqvist och Kyles djuraffär heter “Snakeworld”, apropå inget.

Men ta och se den här filmen. Den är roligare än att se en Beck- eller Johan Falk-film, och den är faktiskt mer intressant – vad gäller Persbrandts underligt skrivna karaktär – än 95% av alla svenska filmer som gjorts.

  1. …som inte är med i popgruppen The Creeps! Evigt tack till Kotta för rättningen![back]
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,


Tags: , , ,

My saved links (weekly)

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.