The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Getting to Denmark
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From The Guardian:

Mette Frederiksen: the anti-migrant left leader set to win power in Denmark

Social Democrats are election frontrunners but critics say their leader has dragged the party sharply to the right

Richard Orange Copenhagen

Sat 11 May 2019

… Mette Frederiksen, leader of Denmark’s opposition Social Democrats, was in hospital with food poisoning when the prime minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, called a general election last week, and was two days late joining the campaign.

But the 41-year-old has all the momentum, with her left-of-centre bloc starting with an eight percentage point lead, and few doubting that she will become Denmark’s youngest-ever prime minister after the election on 5 June.

… A victory for Frederiksen would be a boon for Europe’s social democrats as they gaze across the continent at a dispiriting political landscape. But it would not be without controversy, for under Frederiksen the party has been ruthlessly reshaped: dragged to the left economically – and sharply to the right on immigration.

“For me, it is becoming increasingly clear that the price of unregulated globalisation, mass immigration and the free movement of labour is paid for by the lower classes,” she wrote in a recent biography.

Denmark’s current right-wing coalition government last year enacted the most anti-immigration legislation in Danish history and, rather than position her party in stark opposition, Frederikson has embraced much of it.

Under her leadership, the SD have called for a cap on “non-western immigrants”, for asylum seekers to be expelled to a reception centre in North Africa, and for all immigrants to be forced to work 37 hours a week in exchange for benefits.

She has reached out to the populist Danish People’s party (DPP), doing a series of joint interviews with its leader, Kristian Thulesen Dahl, and discussing cooperating with them in government.

But it is the government policies her party has supported which have been most alarming for her allies in the left-of-centre red bloc. These include a law allowing jewellery to be stripped from refugees, a burqa and niqab ban, mandatory handshakes irrespective of religious sentiment at citizenship ceremonies, and a plan to house criminal asylum seekers on an island used for researching contagious animal diseases. In February, she backed what the DPP has branded a “paradigm shift” – a push to make repatriation, rather than integration, the goal of asylum policy.

 
Hide 106 CommentsLeave a Comment
106 Comments to "Getting to Denmark"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Yeah, and Macron tried to fool the right in France into thinking he’d stop the immigrant flow….except one look a his history showed him to be a closeted-Globalist tool. Which he is currently acting like.

    Leopards don’t change their spots.

    • Replies: @snorlax
  2. I’m sure isteve readers know this already but the “seizing of jewelry” thing was in exchange for wellfare.

    • Replies: @Peter Lund
  3. newrouter says:

    “They have to go back” is a winning platform.

    • Agree: George Taylor, Hail
  4. snorlax says:
    @R.G. Camara

    Yeah, if you care about national survival you must never ever vote for leftists. That goes double in a proportional-representation system like Denmark. These guys sound more my speed.

    • Replies: @International Jew
  5. Is there some reason this particular Danish center-left party can’t expect to reap votes in the long (or short) term from the immigrants they let in, or their children, etc? On that issue hinges the true desire of any leftist party to restrict immigration.

  6. It seems there is more than a bridge that separates Denmark from Sweden:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9048005/danish-women-least-feminist-world/

    A joke sometimes heard when bumping into someone on an elevator is, “That’s rape in Sweden.”

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  7. Hasn’t Denmark been a basically national socialist state (only without invading Russia) since, like, forever?

    And aren’t the Danes consistently rated the happiest people on earth?

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  8. Sean says:

    The Left always has the capacity to move right on immigration and take the steam out of an up and coming party on the issue. Denmark is admitting more non European immigrants than ever. How they are treated is not going to stop them coming and multiplying in the country.

  9. Hasn’t Denmark been a basically national socialist state (only without invading Russia) since, like, forever?

    Douglas Casey pointed out around 1980 that the Scandinavian countries were in fact fascist, not socialist. Just in their civvies.

    Compare the treatment of Saab with that of the rest of GM. Just which country’s administration was practising socialism?

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
  10. a push to make repatriation, rather than integration, the goal of asylum policy.

    Careful there. Denmark is the world’s biggest exporter of human semen.

    When the rest of the world gets their Ancestry.com and 23andMe results, guess who will be showing up at the door?

    With a very solid argument.

  11. @Moral Stone

    I could be wrong, but my understanding is that most European countries are at least good about not extending citizenship (and voting rights) to foreigners, even if they let them stay and lavish them with welfare.

    European countries aren’t burdened with a constitutional “birthright citizenship” requirement like we are.

  12. Altai says:

    Do you wan to be Denmark or Dubai?

    Oligarchs always want Dubai.

    • Replies: @bored identity
  13. Anonymous[154] • Disclaimer says:

    Does the leopard change its spots?

    Remember Frau Merkel claimed in 2010 that ‘Germany has no appetite for immigration’.

  14. Anonymous[154] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    In fact, Germany – always a nation that based citizenship on blood and not birthplace – recently moved, under so called ‘Christian Democrat’ rule to scrap that rule and extend full German citizenship on the descendants of its untold millions of third world citizens.

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    , @a reader
  15. @Sean

    The Left always has the capacity to move right on immigration

    The fact that unchecked immigration is a leftist policy shows how far the Left has changed in the past, say, 40 years. At one time they cared, or pretended to care, about workers’ rights and conditions; now they have been completely hijacked by the globalists. The Left have become the globalists’ useful idiots and will doubtless be treated suitably if the desideratum of a one-world government is ever achieved. See for example this much-viewed video:

    See also leftist enthusiasm for the EU, a virtually undemocratic organisation whose principal activity is making life easier and more profitable for giant corporations and their overlords, the banks.

    Are these people really that stupid, or have they merely been brainwashed by the public education system? (No prizes for the answer.)

  16. @Mrandmrsjohnqsmitherson

    And something the natives already had to do.

    In practice, though, the “refugees” are still exempt 🙁

  17. “…mandatory handshakes irrespective of religious sentiment at citizenship ceremonies,…”

    bored identity is still mandatory literally shaking right now.

  18. @Moral Stone

    No reason at all.

    They don’t need to get all or even most of immigrant votes themselves, actually. It’s enough that a leftist party gets them.

    We have proportional representation here, with no Greek-style bonus to the biggest party. We also have negative parliamentarism — a government doesn’t need a majority of parliament in favor of it, it’s enough not to have a majority against it. That means that all governments are coalition governments and that some of them are even minority governments, usually with one or more of the extreme parties as parliamentary support.

    So whether the social democrats get the immigrant votes themselves or the more extreme leftists parties get them doesn’t really matter.

    They still have to get enough natives to vote for them, though, so they have been making hardline noises for some time. They know they wouldn’t be able to muster a majority if they didn’t change their image and rhetorics.

    It’s mostly rhetorics, though.

    Oh, and Danish People’s Party is mostly a redistributionist socialist party. They have never really been tough on “refugees” and they have toned down their rhetorics since the founder of the party stepped down as leader.

    They have also had to support a minority coalition government containing a party called Liberal Alliance. That’s a party with some good ideas about the economy but with disastrous ideas about immigration. It was founded in 2007 under the name Ny Alliance (new alliance) as an offshoot of De Radikale, one of the parties most in favor of immigration and “refugees”. Ny Alliance’s main political platform was resistance against Danish People’s Party.

    DPP has been moving towards the social democrats because they think they can hand out more stuff to their voters that way and at the same time perhaps turn up their anti immigration rhetoric.

    Now that there are two new parties who want a much stricter approach to immigration, it looks like DPP will lose lots of voters.

    Stram Kurs (Hard Line) is the most extreme and most dilettante of the two. The other is Nye Borgerlige (The New Right), which is in favor of stopping or drastically slowing the import but doesn’t want to reexport anybody. They are actually quite soft.

    —-

    A note about the translations:

    “liberal” in a european context does not mean what it unfortunately does in an American one. The Europeans are right.

    “Borgerlig” can be translated as “right” but it isn’t a translation I like. It leaves out too many connotations, such as “citizen” and “burgher”.

    “Radikale” is a party that in my view is very, very radical. In some sense, they always were, but the original intention was to have democracy, parliamentarism, and freedom of press. That sort of thing. It certainly was not to replace the population with unruly low-IQ foreigners.

    • Replies: @Beckow
    , @Lot
  19. @Reg Cæsar

    And when you try to explain that, do you get, “but they don’t hate anybody”, too?
    Also, Denmark had a better occupation than the rest of Europe.

  20. @Anonymous

    The EU pressured them to do it.

  21. AKAHorace says:

    There isn’t any reason why a left wing party cannot be for lower immigration. In fact if you are serious about having a social democratic society over the long term you pretty well have to be for low immigraton.

    • Agree: Paleo Liberal
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  22. Denmark has always seemed considerably less cucked than Sweden. Certainly it’s culture seems more masculine and extroverted. Given the genetic and cultural similarities between the two, I wonder why they turned out so different?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  23. @Hapalong Cassidy

    How much are Denmark and Sweden conscious rivals of each other?

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    , @Reg Cæsar
  24. sb says:

    In Australia immigration restriction policies ( aka the “White Australia ” policy ) originated from the poliitical left particularly the trade union movement
    Mind you in those days the left was concerned first and foremost with the well being of working class families and the Labor movement was said to owe much more to Methodism than to Marx .

    Tell that to the young lefties of today and I doubt that they will believe you.

    • Replies: @Gordo
  25. @Altai

    Dubai has a better climate, better night-life, and way better public executions.

    The globalists always prefered head-rolling over curling.

    • Replies: @Dr van nostrand
  26. Whitney says:

    A 41 year old leftist woman is not going to save anything. Women in power is pure destruction. It seems like at this point we have to wait for the women to destroy everything so the men can rebuild it again.

  27. @Steve Sailer

    Since military conflict has long since ended, the rivalry is mostly unconscious. Swedes, for instance, consider Danes to be deceitful and untrustworthy. Danes (and most everyone else in the Nordic area) consider Swedes to be judgmental absolutists. Norwegians joke about Sweden being, “The whole North’s watchdog.”

    Denmark deserves some credit for losing its great power status gracefully. It suffered a series of disastrous defeats at the hands of Sweden which forever ended its great power status, and then proceeded to suffer a series of national humiliations beyond that:

    • Destruction of its navy by the British during the Napoleonic Wars
    • Norway handed over to Sweden at the end of the Napoleonic Wars
    • Defeat at the hands of Prussia and Austria in 1864 and further loss of territory
    • Sale of the Danish Virgin Islands to the USA in 1917, the unpopularity of which made them reject America’s 1946 offer to buy Greenland
    • Bloodless invasion and occupation by Germany in 1940
    • Independence of Iceland in 1944
    • Autonomy of Greenland in 1917

    Yet you see no resentment in Denmark today (unlike Swedish hysteria over Russia). They simply maintain a quiet confidence, sure of their superiority of peasant peoples like Norwegians and Icelanders.

  28. Logan says:

    There is no obvious reason why pro-immigrant sentiment should be harnesses to the Left.

    What we might call the “traditional left” was a class-based group, the poor (or those who thought of themselves as such or sympathized with them) against (those they thought of as) the rich and powerful.

    The fixation on race/gender/sexual orientation is actually pretty recent.

    IOW, your slogan can be “Powerless of the world unite against your oppressors, regardless of your/their ‘identity!’”

    Or, it can be “Powerless of the world allow yourselves to be divided and therefore conquered by your oppressors, based on your ‘identity!’”

    It is, to my mind, not at all obvious which is more “leftist.”

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  29. Meanwhile, the MSM reports that our president met yesterday with the “controversial, far-right” monster, Viktor Orbán, the Prime Minister of Hungary.

    Orbán has this shit down, and he has overwhelming support at home. If you have ever listened to him speak to a group, you know he is intelligent and articulate on issues in a way we haven’t seen in the West since the Lincoln-Douglas debates.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @Known Fact
  30. @Buzz Mohawk

    How’s Orban’s financial honesty? One of our commenters says his circle has sticky fingers, so I worry he’ll come a cropper over money.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    , @newrouter
  31. @Steve Sailer

    I can’t answer that. I’m not that good.

    However, I am suspicious of any criticism of Victor Orbán that is ad hominem, because that kind of attack is a tactic of the Left, often used here in the United States against leaders of the same persuasion.

    Since some corruption has always existed in Eastern Europe to a greater degree, so far, than here in our country, maybe we have to take the usual bad with the now important good.

    I don’t know. What I do know is that Orbán is clear and serious about preserving his country’s sovereignty, culture and people. Who else is going to do that?

    My wife, a triple citizen of the United States, Hungary and Romania, just mailed in her ballot for Hungary’s EU elections. This is when the citizens of individual members vote for their representatives to Brussels, similar to a mid-term US election. She voted for Fidesz, Orbán’s party — with my enthusiastic support.

    BTW she has known about Orbán since he was a young man. He has a long, consistent history of working for Hungarian interests. He is no Beto O’Rourke.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
  32. @Thorfinnsson

    There are two reasons I love Denmark:

    1. Hamlet is one of the best plays ever.

    2. The woman with the most beautiful chest I’ve ever seen is Danish!

    OK, a third reason:

    3. I LOVE the Danish pastry! (Which I’m sure probably isn’t Danish in origin, and many will correct me further down the thread…)

    I think there are more reasons, but I’m in a hurry and must get back to doing something a bit more productive. BTW, Mette Frederiksen is somewhat attractive, even given her politics.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  33. Spect3r says:
    @Moral Stone

    They will be getting some votes from imigrants, trust that.
    Politics in Europe is not as segregated into group mentality as in USA

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
  34. @Captain Tripps

    1. Hamlet is excellent, but not Danish. It’s no more a credit to Denmark than Romeo & Juliet is to Verona.

    2. Unfortunately, her spectacular endowment is not typical of Danish (or Scandinavian) women generously. For ample bosoms in that part of the world you’re advised to look to Poland (whose women unfortunately have a butterface problem).

    3. The Danish pastry is Danish in origin, though it’s a Viennese style pastry and described as such in the Nordic Area. Kind of like how a classic New York pizza slice is an American food.

    I’m of Swedish rather than Danish origin incidentally. Denmark is none the less a very nice country with more realistic politics than Sweden. Corporate Denmark isn’t as successful as Corporate Sweden, but prosperity is basically identical regardless.

  35. @Buzz Mohawk

    The Atlantic says: “like Pol Pot or Josef Stalin, Orbán dreams of liquidating the intelligentsia, draining the public of education, and molding a more pliant nation.”

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/george-soros-viktor-orban-ceu/588070/

  36. @Spect3r

    Newsflash: a number of immigrants voted for Trump, too.

    In the general sense, Europe is still white as Reagan’s America, which is the only reason ethnic bloc voting isn’t showing up on your radar.

  37. @snorlax

    if you care about national survival you must never ever vote for leftists

    Yes. Even if they’re sincere about restricting immigration. Because the very idea of a welfare state rots society from the inside out. It weakens the family, resulting in a low birth rate and social isolation. It enables indolence. It expands the state which inevitably shrinks civil society.

    After a couple generations of that, what’s left has no will to defend itself from invasion.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @AKAHorace
    , @Peter Frost
  38. @Hypnotoad666

    We’re not burdened with it either. The “birthright citizenship” was meant for freed slaves. It did not apply to Indians (natives, not the ones from India) and still does not apply to diplomats. It is entirely a creation of leftist judges who decided to ignore the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” part.

    If we’re going to survive, birthright citizenship needs to no longer apply to foreigners and ideally multiple generations will have their citizenship (if attained that way) revoked. I do realize this likely will not happen if we remain a democracy.

  39. @Thorfinnsson

    “Hamlet” appears to have a little bit of influence of Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe. It’s not much, but it’s likely Shakespeare heard somebody talk about the Copernican controversy and incorporated it in his most expansive play. Stoppard’s movie version of “R&G Are Dead” has a lot of astronomy/physics references.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  40. AKAHorace says:
    @International Jew

    if you care about national survival you must never ever vote for leftists

    Yes. Even if they’re sincere about restricting immigration. Because the very …

    Are you sure ?

    There are plenty of right wingers who have fallen in love with mass immigration. If you are rich it is much more pleasant and secure to live in a country with massive immigration, low wages and no prospect of the lower classes uniting against you.

    The line between pro and anti mass immigration is much more important than the line between left and right. The first question is Should we have a nation state ?, the second question is How do we run it ?

    Once a nation state is destroyed with mass immigration it may be impossible to undo the damage.
    Your first allegiance should be to those who agree with you on the idea of a nation state unless they want to run it irreparably badly.

  41. @Cagey Beast

    LOL “The Atlantic.”

    Orbán is famous lately for eliminating taxpayer-funded, Leftist, Cultural Marxist, SJW-type curricula from Hungarian higher education — to the loud cheers of Hungarians like my wife, and myself and virtually everyone else.

    I don’t give a rat’s ass what MSM writers write, because I can’t trust them.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  42. @Thorfinnsson

    1. Well, thank you for correcting me; but it’s still my idealized vision of a possible early medieval Denmark, so I’ll incorrectly stick with that.

    2. But that’s what makes it so spectacular! The Germanic dirty blonde with the fine endowment stirring something ancient within me (I’m a quarter German, Lower Saxony in origin I believe) is the fabulous exception! But you gave away the game; I was trying to be PG-13 for Steve’s blog by making a general reference to “chest” which can also mean a storage box in English. I’m also part Polish (1/8th) and I agree with your observation about the ladies.

    3. Yes! The Danish took a Viennese concept and perfected it!

    Thanks Thorfinnsson; Sweden is just fine (current political devolution notwithstanding); my DNA profile says I’m 2.5% “Scandinavian” but doesn’t distinguish between Norwegian or Swedish (or Danish?); typical American mutt I’m afraid but largely Scottish/English/Irish. The DNA profile says the Scandinavian came in at least 250 years ago or before that; probably a result of the Viking incursions, but who knows…

    • Replies: @Lot
  43. Peter Frost says: • Website
    @International Jew

    The shift to global immigration, and the overall increase in immigration levels, was a bipartisan effort. In fact, in the United States it was the Republicans who led the way to ever higher immigration intakes:

    http://www.unz.com/pfrost/obama-white-americas-bogeyman/

    the very idea of a welfare state rots society from the inside out. It weakens the family, resulting in a low birth rate and social isolation.

    The postwar babyboom was largely due to the emergence of the welfare state, as well as high levels of unionization and economic protectionism. “Conservatives” dismanted all of that, with predictable results.

    Before the “New Deal,” and even before the Great Depression, fertility rates were very low throughout the West. Yet the social safety net was very rudimentary at that time. No welfare, no unemployment insurance, and no old age pensions. I get the impression that some people are reversing cause and effect: certain groups exploit the welfare system, and we blame the welfare system for the social dysfunction of those groups. Bad logic.

  44. Beckow says:
    @Peter Lund

    …It’s mostly rhetorics, though.

    It is always mostly rhetoric. Whether it is opportunistic – left wanting to save some relevance – or outright deceptive like Macron, doesn’t matter. Even Salvini has talked a bigger game than what he is actually doing.

    Mass migration from the Third World was underway by the time a timid opposition to it started to pop up around 2015. By then the migrant reality on the ground was almost irreversible – even in Denmark, e.g. in Copenhagen. The numbers can’t be managed, London will be a quasi-Karachi by 2025, Copenhagen 1-2 generations later.

    Denmark was among the countries that were more sober, but they went out with the drunks and the drunks are running Brussels. EU globalist set up the rules and institutions in a way that resistance is futile – you can delay it, but given open borders within EU and given that mass migration only needs a few entry points, how can this be politically influenced within any EU state?

    What we get now is posturing, rhetoric, lying, pretending that ‘things are turning around’ – but what EU doesn’t have is political will to change the rules and institutions. That would have to happen in Brussels, and it would have to address the courts, academia, culture, media, etc… the open borders project took 40-50 years, it can’t be impacted by marginal changes in Denmark, Italy or Hungary. And given the current rules and the blocking power that migration beneficiaries have – businesses, social and government workers, ageing women, migrants themselves – it is not clear that there is a democratic majority to do it.

  45. @Buzz Mohawk

    Fidesz, Viktor Orbán’s party:

    The party was founded in 1988, named simply Fidesz (Fiatal Demokraták Szövetsége, meaning the Alliance of Young Democrats), growing out of an underground liberal student activist movement opposed to the ruling Communist Party. Fidesz was founded by young democrats, mainly students, who were persecuted by the communist party and had to meet in small, clandestine groups. The movement became a major force in many areas of modern Hungarian history.

    — Wikipedia, the font of all knowledge

    It should be clear by now, to all of you who read here, that y’all are in a fight against what we could sum up as “communist” people and interests. Many on both sides themselves might not realize this.

    I will leave it to others to flesh out the ethnic — “HBD” — details, while just stating that they do exist.

    • Replies: @AKAHorace
  46. Whiskey says: • Website

    I expect the Danish lady to out Merkel Frau Merkel.

    Women invite invaders. Men fight them.

    Leftist parties by virtue of being female will always want more immavaders.

  47. @Steve Sailer

    How much are Denmark and Sweden conscious rivals of each other?

    My roommate at a Danish school told me his people called Sweden “Nordens Amerika”. They love big cars and their pop songs are in English. (Danes’ are proudly vernacular. Another Dane told me a German he met was amazed by this. Remember the Emperor in Amadeus? “Opera in German!?“)

    Germans and Swedes are notoriously anal-retentive. Much of the Danish attitude appears to be a reaction to this. The Finns are similarly dismissive of the Swedes, and the Dutch of the Germans.

    When war comes, the Germans invade, the Finns fight, the Swedes stay out of it, and the Danes and Dutch phone in their surrender.

  48. a reader says:
    @Anonymous

    In fact, Germany – always a nation that based citizenship on blood and not birthplace – recently moved, under so called ‘Christian Democrat’ rule to scrap that rule and extend full German citizenship on the descendants of its untold millions of third world citizens.

    “I can’t wait to become a German citizen” says this guy with 3 wives, 13 children (soon to be 14), 3 rent-free condos + €3,800/month stipend.

  49. Svigor says:

    Yeah, precedent is like 99% that a leftist tacking rightward on core issues (national question, immigration) for an election is going right back to the left if he wins. The Lucy strategy (pretty lies from establishment source) works on Charlie Brown (dumb white voters).

  50. J1234 says:

    We were in Copenhagen about a month ago, and I found it a good deal more “Danish” than I’d anticipated (I’d never been there before.) Walking and riding around town, it was my impression that the population was well over 80% white, and every place we went felt safe. I’m guessing that, even among some leftists in Europe, the London of today stands as an example of what not to do with regards to immigration – they just won’t admit it publicly. In the smaller cities whites were an even higher percentage. The people there frequently spoke to us in Danish, presuming we were from the area, but most people we met had a great command of English (though not as good as in Kobenhavn.)

    The Danes aren’t outgoing, but very warm when engaged, with a remarkable inclination towards fairness and conscientiousness. What population in their right mind would want to change or lose that?

  51. @Peter Frost

    The postwar babyboom was largely due to the emergence of the welfare state…Before the “New Deal,” and even before the Great Depression, fertility rates were very low throughout the West.

    Sir, I’m not disputing your premise, but wouldn’t the significant advances in medicine (antibiotics, sterilization, treatment techniques, advances in hospitalization, etc.) and the resultant drop in infant/child mortality over that same time-frame also have a fairly significant effect on fecundity? I looked up the stats at the CDC and the graph showed that childhood deaths (from 0-18 years) in the U.S. went from around 2700/100,ooo in 1900 to something like 400/100,000 by 1946.

    • Replies: @Peter Frost
  52. AKAHorace says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    It should be clear by now, to all of you who read here, that y’all are in a fight against what we could sum up as “communist” people and interests. Many on both sides themselves might not realize this.

    No, our opponents are not communists, just as most of us are not fascists. There are elements on both sides trying to smear the other side as communist or fascist but the conflict is between globalists and nationalists. I support the nationalists because the globalists are extreme, while most of the nationalists are moderate.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
  53. @Reg Cæsar

    When war comes, the Germans invade, the Finns fight, the Swedes stay out of it, and the Danes and Dutch phone in their surrender.

    LOL! But what about the Norwegians?

  54. Lot says:
    @Peter Lund

    That’s kind of negative.

    Denmark has the best migration policy in Western Europe while sitting in the neighborhood of those with the worst: Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Sweden.

    You all are doing something right.

  55. @Thorfinnsson

    “… Peasant peoples like Norwegians ….Greig, Ibsen, Munch? Enough to make you scream!

  56. Lot says:
    @Captain Tripps

    “I’m 2.5% “Scandinavian” but doesn’t distinguish between Norwegian or Swedish (or Danish?)”

    The upgraded 23andme does this now, but you have to have more than 2.5% for it to work.

    There are some English who report 99-100% British Isles / 0% Scandinavian results, so don’t assume your Scandinavian ancestry is just distant vikings.

    • Replies: @Captain Tripps
  57. @AKAHorace

    Intuitively I see a similarity between communists and globalists. (And there is also a heavily consistent ethnic representation in both.)

    Think: Globalism and its people share a sense of “The World as One Community of Blank Slate Humans,” subject to a common smear of so-called equality-that-is-anything-but — led and ordered by an elite who have taken the privilege upon themselves.

    It is un-natural bullshit. You have to be an urban dweeb to believe any of it. Its leaders and proponents are disproportionately urban dweebs who feed on the work of the others who live and toil out in the hinterlands.

  58. @Lot

    Yeah, I checked a couple days ago and noticed they narrowed my German ancestors to Saxony. At 2.5%, my Scandi ancestor could have been a sailor who decided to jump ship and go native in Enlightenment England.

  59. Mette Frederiksen looks like a Kraut.

  60. Danish political leader Pernille Vermund looks like a Scandinavian.

  61. @Almost Missouri

    It’s fair to say Denmark has been a democratic-socialist state since the postwar period. As to the happiest people on earth you’re thinking about Disneyland. Danes have been a very content people because they have lived in a well-governed, homogeneous country. That has been changing in the past few years and the vast majority of Danskers are not happy about it.

  62. @Captain Tripps

    LOL! But what about the Norwegians?

    For Norwegians, add Swedes and Danes, then divide by two. Or throw in Icelanders and divide by three.

  63. @Reg Cæsar

    ” … the Danes and Dutch phone in their surrender.”

    It was either that or have Panzer tanks blast away most of Copenhagen.

  64. @J1234

    “What population in their right mind would want to change or lose that?”

    They don’t. That’s why the Danish political milieu is changing, becoming more interesting and less placid than in the years I lived there.

  65. Peter Frost says: • Website
    @Captain Tripps

    wouldn’t the significant advances in medicine (antibiotics, sterilization, treatment techniques, advances in hospitalization, etc.) and the resultant drop in infant/child mortality over that same time-frame also have a fairly significant effect on fecundity?

    No, in fact there was a slight decrease in fecundity among married couples. The postwar babyboom was driven by an increase in the number of people getting married and a reduction in childlessness within marriage:

    The middle of the twentieth century was marked by a significant and persistent increase in fertility rates in many countries of the world, especially in the West, resulting in the famous baby boomer generation. Although the baby boom traditionally considered to be the post-war phenomenon started immediately after World War II, some demographers place it earlier, at the increase of births during the war or in the late 1930s.

    The boom coincided with the marriage boom, a significant increase in nuptiality.[1] The increase in fertility was driven primarily by decrease in childlessness and increase in parity progression to a second child. In most of the Western countries progression to a third child and beyond declined which, coupled with aforementioned increase in transition to first and second child, resulted in higher homogeneity in family sizes. The baby boom was most prominent among educated and economically active women.[2][3]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-twentieth_century_baby_boom

  66. @Steve Sailer

    “Hamlet” appears to have a little bit of influence of Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe

    There is a lot of swordplay in Hamlet, but I don’t recall anyone losing his nose.


  67. @Peter Frost

    There is a big difference between “welfare system” and “welfare state”. Even if the latter does some good at its inception, it is in the interest of the beast to invite in more and more poor. Better to separate welfare and state than welfare and church.

    There is also a major and deleterious political effect coming from turning charity into a “right”.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  68. My first thought was, wow, a leftist / rightist who recognizes that mass-scale immigration drives wages down for citizens. Then I got to the part about mandatory work for welfare-qualified immigrants who can afford to accept low wages since their major household bills are paid by government to reward womb-productive sex. I realized that the pro-labor, anti-wage-suppression thing was just a decoy, with a neoliberal system of cheap & mandatorty immigrant labor for cheapskate employers being the real deal.

    Then it got even worse, ending in a series of bizarre suggestions for curtailing mass immigration that sound like they belong in an Orwell novel (if not worse).

  69. CJ says:
    @Peter Frost

    Canada had a baby boom in the 1950s when it was absolutely not a welfare state, and in fact had a smaller government with far fewer social programs than most of the United States.

    • Replies: @Peter Frost
  70. @Buzz Mohawk

    I love that “controversial far-right PM” helpfully supplied by CNN. Once again “controversial” means nothing but “we don’t like.” Ever hear a lefty person or proposal labeled “controversial?”

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    , @anon
  71. @AKAHorace

    Too bad none of them ever get the memo.

  72. @Logan

    Race, tribe, “identity”, etc. trump class.

    Class struggle is a luxury of homogeneous societies.

    See, e.g., Steve’s posts on how multitudes of ghetto blacks are more concerned that some swarthy hip-hop millionaire should win all of whitey’s awards than that their own circumstances should improve.

    • Replies: @Logan
  73. @Cagey Beast

    Huh, that’s weird because when Pol Pot and Josef Stalin were doing that stuff, the left press loved it!

    • Agree: jbwilson24
    • Replies: @SFG
  74. @The Alarmist

    A joke sometimes heard when bumping into someone on an elevator is, “That’s rape in Sweden.”

    Now if they’d only punish it with deportation…

  75. @Known Fact

    Ever hear a lefty person or proposal labeled “controversial?”

    Yes. When they’re embarrassing, like Marion Barry. Or get in the way, like Ralph Nader.

  76. @Sean

    The Left always has the capacity to move right on immigration

    The capacity, yes. But the motivation? Hardly.

    Immigration gives the democratic left what it lusts for– a chance to win every election until the end of time.

  77. @Peter Frost

    1) The welfare state has emphatically not been dismantled. It is larger than ever. Clinton (D) enacted laws to curb the welfare state’s growth, but those meager restraints have all washed away now.

    2) The post-war baby “boom” was only a boom relative to the unprecedentedly low birth rates of the Depression years. In historical terms, it was merely a feeble and temporary reach back toward the high population growth rates that had characterized the United States since its founding. Bracketed the by the baby busts of the Depression and the post-industrial malaise, the 1950s and 1960s looks like a “boom”, but it barely reached former historical averages.

    3)

    Before the “New Deal,” and even before the Great Depression, fertility rates were very low throughout the West.

    Maybe in parts of Europe, but not in America. At most, you could say that immigrant fertility was suppressing native fertility (as it does), but aggregate fertility was still high, and even the lowest troughs of native fertility then were never as low as now.

    4)

    I get the impression that some people are reversing cause and effect

    Indeed.

    5)

    certain groups exploit the welfare system, and we blame the welfare system for the social dysfunction of those groups. Bad logic.

    Given that everyone seems to agree that we have “certain groups” embedded in the nation who are too dysfunctional to use the welfare system constructively, is it really “bad logic” to propose ending the opportunity for abuse? We can end the opportunity or end “certain groups”. Ending the opportunity would seem to be the more humane option.

    • Replies: @anon
  78. @Desiderius

    Not enough comments logged to use the buttons, so: LOL!

  79. I’m appalled. A Danish politician, much less one who calls herself a social democrat, proposing policies that would benefit Danes, Danish workers? That’s like Nazi or something. Is that even legal?

  80. @Captain Tripps

    They destroy the heavy water factory.

  81. SFG says:
    @Almost Missouri

    Oh God yes. Remember the fellow-travelers?

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  82. newrouter says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Have you asked Joe Biden’s son or the Clinton Foundation about sticky fingers?

  83. Anon[173] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    Aren’t Swedish women hotter?

  84. MBlanc46 says:
    @J1234

    “In their right minds”. That’s the critical thing.

  85. Anon[173] • Disclaimer says:
    @J1234

    Copenhagen is only 15% non-white/Muslim. Islam is followed by 10% of the population.

    However, due to differential birth rates, Muslims are about 20-25% of the school age population of the city. One source reported that 10% of Copenhagen students spoke Arabic.

    Nationally, Muslims are 5-6% of the population, but 9-10% of youths.

    Denmark may be very White, but even 5-10% Muslim is enough to create massive problems.

  86. anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Cagey Beast

    The Atlantic says: “like Pol Pot or Josef Stalin, Orbán dreams of liquidating the intelligentsia, draining the public of education, and molding a more pliant nation.”

    strange that (((The Atlantic))) didn’t mention (((the bolsheviks)))

  87. anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Almost Missouri

    1) The welfare state has emphatically not been dismantled. It is larger than ever. Clinton (D) enacted laws to curb the welfare state’s growth, but those meager restraints have all washed away

    was it Clinton or Gingrich?

  88. anon[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Known Fact

    I love that “controversial far-right PM” helpfully supplied by CNN. Once again “controversial” means nothing but “we don’t like.”

    agree, also to be more specific its someone (((we))) don’t like

  89. nebulafox says:
    @SFG

    “Indochina without Americans: for most, a better life.”

    When it became clear that most Indochinese weren’t, in fact, having a better life under the new regimes, the press and the intelligentsia tried to deny it. There were a few admirable exceptions who were willing to buck that trend, one of which was, ironically enough, George McGovern. But on the whole, there was a shocking degree of indifference to the fate of the Indochinese on the part of people who ostentatiously boasted about their morality, and their compassion to them. (At least Nixon and Kissinger had the decency to be relatively honest about being the callous realists they were.) This was the Reverse White Man’s Burden that we see today, already being displayed. The 1960s had done its work on a new generation of American progressives.

    Eventually, of course, they couldn’t deny it, not with all the boat people fleeing out of Vietnam, and the Vietnamese booting the Khmer Rouge of power and revealing what they’d been up to in Cambodia to the world. So, Plan B was launched: blame Nixon.

    (The truth of the matter is a fascinating story. Operation FREEDOM DEAL probably did help the Khmer Rouge politically, even if it stopped them militarily, so to say that we were innocent in the tragedy would be inaccurate. But there’s a long, long way between that and saying America was the prime cause-the prime cause was Cambodian politics-leaving aside the ghoulish irony of the people who lauded the Communists in Southeast Asia during the war 180 degrees turning around and blaming the US government for putting them there. Not to mention the whitewashing of the North Vietnamese: even the Vietnamese government itself has admitted to having a non-trivial role in bringing the Khmer Rouge to power. But you’ll still have talking heads and public intellectuals acting as if two psychopaths in the White House somehow made a bunch of Khmer peasants leading a liberation movement into genocidal madmen.

    On top of that, Vietnam has largely gotten past the 1960s. Older Vietnamese want to enjoy having relative peace and prosperity for the first time before they die, and younger ones couldn’t care less about the past with the US, openly wearing the latest Korean and Japanese fashion and creating startups. Whereas a lot of Baby Boomers in the US seem to want to relive the 1960s, and younger people seem to be wanting to give that to them. How messed up is that?)

  90. @Peter Frost

    Before the “New Deal,” and even before the Great Depression, fertility rates were very low throughout the West. Yet the social safety net was very rudimentary at that time.

    False. America was much more rural before the New Deal/Great Depression era. And rural families have always been larger than urban ones (at least up until the last couple of decades). Go back and look at school construction just after WWI. It boomed, because there were too many children to fit in existing schoolhouses.

    International Jew is right.

    • Replies: @Peter Frost
  91. @Thorfinnsson

    2. The woman with the most beautiful chest I’ve ever seen is Danish!

    2. Unfortunately, her spectacular endowment is not typical of Danish (or Scandinavian) women generously.

    Who is this beautiful Danish woman? If you don’t know who she is, how do you know how she “stacks up?’

  92. Peter Frost says: • Website
    @Charles Erwin Wilson 3

    Go back and look at school construction just after WWI. It boomed, because there were too many children to fit in existing schoolhouses.

    That boom was largely immigration-driven. Among native-born white Americans, fertility rates were below replacement during the period from 1920 to 1940.

    … reductions in childbearing appear to have gained momentum among women born in the 1870s and persisted until the Great Depression (cohorts born around 1910).4

    … two thirds of evermarried women in the birth cohort of 1910 bore two or fewer children; a striking 23 percent remained childless. Consequently, U.S. women born in the aughts (1900–1910) are commonly referred to as the “low-fertility cohorts.”

    For native-born white Americans, the baby boom was not a return to pre-1929 fertility. It was a return to the fertility of the late 1800s:

    This remarkable departure from longer-term trends was not a short-lived aberration reflecting postponed births from the Great Depression or World War II. The baby boom stretched over two decades and was driven by increases in completed childbearing (Ryder 1980, Rogers and O’Connell 1984). Between 1940 and 1960, the general and total fertility rates each rose by more than 50 percent, and cohort measures of completed fertility rose by 45 percent. Measured as the number of live births by cohort of women (reported at ages 41 to 70), completed childbearing increased by around one child per woman, from 2.3 to 3.3, between the low-fertility cohorts and the cohort of mothers born a generation later, around 1930. In a remarkable historical twist, women born in the mid-1930s had completed-fertility rates as high as their grandmothers born fifty years earlier

    http://www-personal.umich.edu/~baileymj/OUP_fertility_9_30_15.pdf

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  93. Peter Frost says: • Website
    @CJ

    Canada had a baby boom in the 1950s when it was absolutely not a welfare state

    The Canadian welfare state began in 1944 with the introduction of family allowances (“the baby bonus”). In 1945, in the White Paper on Employment, the government committed itself to full employment. In 1951-1952, it introduced universal old-age pensions for those over 70 and means-tested old-age security for those between 65 and 70. In 1956, the Unemployment Assistance Act was passed to fund social assistance. During the late 1950s, permanent programs for the funding of hospitalization, higher education and vocational rehabilitation were introduced or extended.

    https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/welfare-state

    Universal social programs reached their height in the 1960s. The aim was to create a demographically strong middle class and working class. Since then, “conservative” politicians have reduced the universality of social programs in order to focus spending on the “needy.” The same politicians have also used globalization to do an end run around the working class by relocating employment to low-wage countries and by bringing in low-wage labor for jobs that, by their very nature, cannot be relocated overseas (construction, services, agriculture, etc.).

    The welfare state in its current form is not sustainable, largely because it has degenerated into a crude form of redistributionism. I don’t think this was an inevitable development. It came about because of ideological changes within both the Left and the Right. The Left has become increasingly hostile to the working class. Meanwhile, the Right sees the end of universal programs as a means to cut costs and, cynically, as a means to “starve the beast.” Yes, there are libertarian intellectuals who see open borders as a way to overload the welfare state and make it unsustainable.

  94. From a nationalist/populist perspective the Scandinavians have a pretty good record in turning nationalist/populist sentiments into political action. For example, survey’s indicate that Sweden has one of the lowest levels of nationalist/populist sentiment in Europe, yet the politically savvy Swedish Democrats have already secured over 18 percent of the vote. Compare that with Britain, where just under 50 percent of the population has nationalist populist sentiments, yet nationalist/populist parties can’t even get one percent of the vote.

    • Replies: @LondonBob
  95. @bored identity

    UAE doesn’t have public executions anymore. The last stoning incident I believe was in the early 1990s of some gang rapists.
    Saudis still have public beheadings every Friday .

    • Replies: @bored identity
  96. @ all:

    Just a young Hungarian, who demonstrates against an opressive regime in Budapest. Once

    Nowadays he protests against an oppressive regime in Brussels.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  97. LondonBob says:
    @unpc downunder

    Traditionally the Conservative Party has been a nationalist party of sorts, see Thatcher’s comments and actions on immigration, or the Monday Club. Part of the reason they are collapsing, it is not just failing to implement Brexit, is that they no longer do accommodate nationalist concerns after Cameron’s modernisation program.

    One of my lecturers at university, George Schopflin, is Orban’s right hand man. Orban is very smart and has based his approach on Thatcher’s approach, a coalition of nationalists, social conservatives and free marketeers. Orban is corrupt, like most Eastern European politicians, but he gets the job done.

    Swedish Danish rivalry is above that between Sweden Norway but below that of Sweden Finland. Danes are more extrovert, quite similar to the Dutch really, language sounds similar too. Always liked the flag of Skane, Danish red background with a Swedish yellow cross.

  98. @Dr van nostrand

    You’re right, UAE is more like Sweden.

    • Replies: @Dr Van Nostrand
  99. Mark G. says:
    @Peter Frost

    You mention that the native-born white fertility rate was below replacement from 1921-1940. It was quite high in the nineteen twenties and dropped mostly because of the Great Depression. When the native-born fertility rate was high in the nineteen twenties there was a very small welfare state. Government spending as a percentage of GDP was around ten per cent during that decade. Fertility was high in the nineteen fifties and started to drop in the sixties. Welfare expenditures were increasing in the sixties at the same time fertility rates were dropping. So a larger welfare state would not necessarily lead to increased fertility rates and a smaller welfare state would not necessarily mean low fertility rates.

    • Replies: @Peter Frost
  100. Gordo says:
    @sb

    It was the Trades Union Congress in the 1920s which stopped British capitalists importing Chinese labour to work in the mills of Northern England.

    Changed days indeed.

  101. Peter Frost says: • Website
    @Mark G.

    It was quite high in the nineteen twenties and dropped mostly because of the Great Depression.

    Perhaps you should read the reference I provided. Among native-born white American women, fertility reached below-replacement levels among those born in 1900-1910. This decline had already taken place in the American northeast in the late 19th century. In both cases, the welfare state was not the cause. In fact, one of the initial reasons for creating the welfare state was to counter this decline, and that effort did succeed.

    What happened in the 1960s was that the welfare state shifted from a model of supporting the functional working class and middle class to a crude redistributionist model of helping the “needy.” This was due to a bipartisan shift that encompassed both fiscal conservatives and the New Left.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  102. @bored identity

    It is the Sweden of the GCC with girls going around in tank tops and minis for what its worth not to mention on beaches you can see g strings and the occasional topless chick when they can get away with it. Though ironically the rape rate is much lower than Sweden even with 90%+ Muslim population and less feminism.

  103. Logan says:
    @Almost Missouri

    You are correct about “identity” trumping international class solidarity.

    But the point is that it doing so is not Leftist, or at least not Marxist. Old Karl was all about getting the masses of oppressed workers to identify primarily with their brother oppressed workers around the world rather than with their fellow villagers, or countrymen, etc.

    All I am objecting to is the idea that identity politics is “leftist” in any logical meaning of the word. It is by definition reactionary and tribalistic.

    But then calling American conservatives “right-wing” also makes no historical or etymological sense.

  104. Mark G. says:
    @Peter Frost

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems you are trying to show a relationship between fertility rates and welfare policies. Why are you looking at fertility rates by when they were born and using a multi-year range instead of looking at yearly fertility rates when they were actually having children? Is it because it wouldn’t support that argument? If you take the period 1900-1910, many of the women born near the end of that range would have had their prime child bearing years during a Great Depression that caused birth declines. For example, one of my grandmothers was born in 1898 and had five children in the nineteen twenties. My other grandmother was born in 1908 and only had two children because her husband was one of the thirties unemployed and then got sent off to war. By the time the economy was good and the war was over she was too old to have more children. Their birth decisions had little to do with what kind of working class welfare benefits existed. Of course, this is just an anecdote but it’s possible they were typical of their era. Do you have year by year fertility statistics on native born American women?

  105. Peter Frost says: • Website

    I hope this reply will get to you.

    Do you have year by year fertility statistics on native born American women?

    Such statistics are not provided in U.S. census publications. In fact, at the time there were accusations that government statisticians were deliberately not looking into this issue for fear of political fallout. A number of academic studies, however, were done on fertility among native-born white Americans, and the consensus was that their fertility was already below replacement by 1920. The following is from an article published in The Literary Digest on February 1, 1919:

    THE BIRTH-RATE of the descendants of the Mayflower Pilgrims is not sufficient to maintain their numbers. We are soon to celebrate the three hundredth anniversary of their landing, and if their present birth-rate continues for another three hundred years, they can all then be put into a Mayflower again and shipped back across the Atlantic, if so desired. At least this is the conclusion of S. J. Holmes and C. M. Doud, of the University of California, who adduce evidence to support it in an article entitled “The Approaching Extinction of the Mayflower Descendants,” contributed to The Journal of Heredity (Washington, January). The data upon which this paper is based are stated by the authors to have been obtained partly from a biographical study of Mayflower families and partly from the results of a questionnaire sent to the members of the California branch of the Society of Mayflower Descendants. They write in substance:

    … The evidence indicates that the birth-rate has been falling more or less for the last one hundred years, but the rate of fall has been more rapid in the latter half of this period. This is what one would expect in the light of the general decline of the birth-rate, especially among people of fairly high social status.

    The results we have obtained are quite comparable to those of several other studies on the decline of the birth-rate among people of American birth. The average family of the present Mayflower descendant is comparable in size to the families of the graduates of Harvard, Yale, and other universities and colleges, and to the families of American men of science studied by Cattell.

    These families average somewhere between 2 and 2.5 children per married couple, which is a somewhat better showing than is made by the modern descendants of the Pilgrim Fathers. In fact, the average family of American-born parents, judging from all the data that have been collected on the subject, contains somewhat less than three children. With our present birth-rate and marriage-rate, nearly four children per married couple are required to perpetuate the stock without loss.

    It is evident that the people who are of American lineage for more than two generations are not reproducing with sufficient rapidity to rescue their stock from ultimate extinction.

    The data we have collected on the birth-rate of the Mayflower descendants point to but one conclusion. With the present rate of reproduction there must be going on a rapid diminution in the number of this once rapidly multiplying band.

    http://www.unz.com/print/LiteraryDigest-1919feb01-00027/

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?