John Stauffer, the head of Civil Rights Defenders, told AFP: “Research shows that tougher requirements for citizenship do not increase the incentives for integration, but rather contribute to the exclusion of a growing group of people who find themselves in the country for a long time without the basic rights of citizenship.”
I agree. It is also anachronistic for Sweden to hike the time requirement for Citizenship from 5 to 8 years as even Germany, with a notoriously racist and exclusive buerocracy has reduced the time requirements from 8 to 5 or even 3 years for people with particular integration achievements. A major reasoning was that many “tough on immigration” countries actually offer short times.
On the other hand with a looming far right coalition in Germany Sweden might be ahead od the far right policy surge.
Swedens far-right party does not have ministers, but are allowed to participate as part of the government in many ways (speaking as representatives of the government at press conferences, closed door meetings to ensure the far-right policies are being implemented as agreed, etc) and the government parties have adopted their retoric in some ways (“SD has always been correct when it comes to immigration” is an insane statement a government rep. has said, as SD is wellknown for “having been” a neo-nazi party started by actual nazi SS volonteers.). So Sweden is ahead in how close the far-right is to power. SD has been a bit less open about some far-right policies than AfD, I think. But since they are emboldened by how accepted they are by the other rightwing parties they are now more open. Their representatives now often talk about and defend replacement theory stuff, compares pride symbols with pedofilia, and such things.
I agree. It is also anachronistic for Sweden to hike the time requirement for Citizenship from 5 to 8 years as even Germany, with a notoriously racist and exclusive buerocracy has reduced the time requirements from 8 to 5 or even 3 years for people with particular integration achievements. A major reasoning was that many “tough on immigration” countries actually offer short times.
On the other hand with a looming far right coalition in Germany Sweden might be ahead od the far right policy surge.
Swedens far-right party does not have ministers, but are allowed to participate as part of the government in many ways (speaking as representatives of the government at press conferences, closed door meetings to ensure the far-right policies are being implemented as agreed, etc) and the government parties have adopted their retoric in some ways (“SD has always been correct when it comes to immigration” is an insane statement a government rep. has said, as SD is wellknown for “having been” a neo-nazi party started by actual nazi SS volonteers.). So Sweden is ahead in how close the far-right is to power. SD has been a bit less open about some far-right policies than AfD, I think. But since they are emboldened by how accepted they are by the other rightwing parties they are now more open. Their representatives now often talk about and defend replacement theory stuff, compares pride symbols with pedofilia, and such things.