I'm Done with Mullvad(moonwriting.blog)
moonwriting.blog
I'm Done with Mullvad
https://moonwriting.blog/i-m-done-with-mullvad
22 comments
The immigration policies (or mass-deportations) that Mullvad co-CEO is supporting with political donations cannot be achieved without mass surveillance and secret police.
It is really not difficult to draw this line to spot contradiction between co-CEO's personal stance and the company's mission.
It is really not difficult to draw this line to spot contradiction between co-CEO's personal stance and the company's mission.
>nothing can be done
are you sure you don't just hate the victims of all that crime?
are you sure you don't just hate the victims of all that crime?
> cannot be achieved without mass surveillance and secret police.
That doesn't apply to countries with a working personal-id system.
There it's just a matter of cancelling the banking account.
Some sieving at the borders, airports, harbors.
Maybe asking around the neighbours, former work where that sucker has gone.
Grabbing, and expedite. And that's it.
Bye, bye!
That doesn't apply to countries with a working personal-id system.
There it's just a matter of cancelling the banking account.
Some sieving at the borders, airports, harbors.
Maybe asking around the neighbours, former work where that sucker has gone.
Grabbing, and expedite. And that's it.
Bye, bye!
Well that party wants to enact mass surveillance to protect the country from immigrants
> Making murder illegal doesn't imply that the government stalks you 24/7 to make sure you don't murder someone
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48967592
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48967592
If a party says they wanted to stalk you 24/7 to make sure you don't murder someone, don't support that party.
When someone shows you who they are, believe them.
When someone shows you who they are, believe them.
I just checked. They haven't published their political standpoints yet so it's too early to say. They claim they will soon, ahead of the elections.
Lots of discussion surrounding what ethnonationism is...
Ethnonationalism: Defined by shared ancestry, lineage, and cultural heritage. Membership is exclusive and inherited by birth, focusing on preserving a specific ethnic identity.
Civic Nationalism: Defined by shared political principles, values, and laws. Membership is inclusive and open to anyone who adheres to the state's legal framework, regardless of background.
Does the party call for remigration or a lower status for immigrants who have committed no crimes, found jobs and are not a disproportionate drain on the welfare state? To be ethnonationist, I believe they must call for that on the basis of us vs them. Perhaps someone can provide evidence of this. I haven't seen any. Seems like they are very upset about crime and welfare drain. Also they have a bunch other non immigration related positions that some might label as extreme.
Ethnonationalism: Defined by shared ancestry, lineage, and cultural heritage. Membership is exclusive and inherited by birth, focusing on preserving a specific ethnic identity.
Civic Nationalism: Defined by shared political principles, values, and laws. Membership is inclusive and open to anyone who adheres to the state's legal framework, regardless of background.
Does the party call for remigration or a lower status for immigrants who have committed no crimes, found jobs and are not a disproportionate drain on the welfare state? To be ethnonationist, I believe they must call for that on the basis of us vs them. Perhaps someone can provide evidence of this. I haven't seen any. Seems like they are very upset about crime and welfare drain. Also they have a bunch other non immigration related positions that some might label as extreme.
"They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish"
I don't see any mention of crimes, having jobs or "being a disproportionate drain" (however you define that).
I don't see any mention of crimes, having jobs or "being a disproportionate drain" (however you define that).
What is Swedish? Their own royalty is a forever soup with Danish, German and French ingredients, with Norman umami added before and after. They could just say tall/white/Caucasian and stop being polite Swedish about it. But they won't, because. Not my country, not my problem, but it's just so glaring. Do police work, educate, integrate. What's done is done, move on.
Maybe they don't fancy the idea of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submission_(novel) ?
I know I don't.
I know I don't.
My sentiment was is that what’s must be happening but is unpalatable to be plated as such. Forgive me, I’m speaking out of school, I have never been to Sweden or its neighboring countries.
If you don't fancy it, maybe, don't obsess on it either, given that it's bs?
Is it? Funny you're saying that, since there exists a guy called Yasha Mounk, who stated very similar things in public TV multiple times, about performing an experiment regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Replacement_conspiracy_t...
Which wiki calls as debunked, and 'conspiracy theory'. Fkn rturds!
Which wiki calls as debunked, and 'conspiracy theory'. Fkn rturds!
I do not speak Swedish, but I looked into this via machine translation.
My understanding is that the discussion can be found around this timestamp link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4goynP4mHYI&t=1h18m43s
According to the machine translation, Allard explicitly frames his argument around cultural assimilation, economic contribution, and behavior rather than biological ethnicity or skin color alone.
In public statements, he has routinely asserted that an individual's racial background or skin color is irrelevant to his politics.
Look, I'm not some Allard supporter. Don't know the guy, not even Swedish. Easily found some stuff on their platform which I quickly disagree with. I really doubt he's literally out there just calling for mass deportation of folks based on ethnicity. That is actual ethnonationism. Swedish people are from a nice free society and are accustomed to low crime and low problems. They've got this 2nd generation migrant issue that lots of Europe is dealing with.
The definition of ethnonationist is being used so flipantly throughout this thread.
Do your really think this guy is just standing up saying 'remigrate all dark skinned folks who got here recently'?
Even if that were his true political goals, it would be pretty self defeating to just charge onto the stage going full Nazi. He wouldn't have this much movement.
My understanding is that the discussion can be found around this timestamp link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4goynP4mHYI&t=1h18m43s
According to the machine translation, Allard explicitly frames his argument around cultural assimilation, economic contribution, and behavior rather than biological ethnicity or skin color alone.
In public statements, he has routinely asserted that an individual's racial background or skin color is irrelevant to his politics.
Look, I'm not some Allard supporter. Don't know the guy, not even Swedish. Easily found some stuff on their platform which I quickly disagree with. I really doubt he's literally out there just calling for mass deportation of folks based on ethnicity. That is actual ethnonationism. Swedish people are from a nice free society and are accustomed to low crime and low problems. They've got this 2nd generation migrant issue that lots of Europe is dealing with.
The definition of ethnonationist is being used so flipantly throughout this thread.
Do your really think this guy is just standing up saying 'remigrate all dark skinned folks who got here recently'?
Even if that were his true political goals, it would be pretty self defeating to just charge onto the stage going full Nazi. He wouldn't have this much movement.
> it would be pretty self defeating to just charge onto the stage going full Nazi
Sadly no, in 2026 going full Nazi genocidal maniac mass murderer in waiting seems to be broadly acceptable for a politician, in the next few years we can expect the "in waiting" part will be dropped somewhere.
Sadly no, in 2026 going full Nazi genocidal maniac mass murderer in waiting seems to be broadly acceptable for a politician, in the next few years we can expect the "in waiting" part will be dropped somewhere.
Ok, however,
> I really doubt he's literally out there just calling for mass deportation of folks based on ethnicity. That is actual ethnonationism. Swedish people are from a nice free society
If you meant that they wouldn't support racist policies, a party with neo-nazi roots is currently the second largest one; calling for mass deportation based on ethnicity might not be that unpopular.
Actually, the Swedish Democrats themselves in 2003 adopted “the idea of "open Swedishness”, meaning that Swedish identity is not biologically exclusive and that assimilation is – theoretically – possible”.
And their ideas about immigration don't seem very different to those of Örebro, at a quick glance.
The SD are described in the intersting scholarly article at https://direct.mit.edu/euso/article/21/4/583/127125/Frames-o... as ethno-nationalists.
> I really doubt he's literally out there just calling for mass deportation of folks based on ethnicity. That is actual ethnonationism. Swedish people are from a nice free society
If you meant that they wouldn't support racist policies, a party with neo-nazi roots is currently the second largest one; calling for mass deportation based on ethnicity might not be that unpopular.
Actually, the Swedish Democrats themselves in 2003 adopted “the idea of "open Swedishness”, meaning that Swedish identity is not biologically exclusive and that assimilation is – theoretically – possible”.
And their ideas about immigration don't seem very different to those of Örebro, at a quick glance.
The SD are described in the intersting scholarly article at https://direct.mit.edu/euso/article/21/4/583/127125/Frames-o... as ethno-nationalists.
Other comments about that at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48977236
Swedish politics aside(!), I'd love to have other VPN services as exit points for Tailscale. More choice is good, and hopefully that becomes an option one day.
People who look at this from a US political perspective is going to get a lot of misunderstanding unless one look into the specifics that are the Swedish political system and laws.
The party in question is a small local government party looking to primary get seats in their local government, but with aspiration to get into national politics under a special rule that provide a single seat (1 out of 349) in parliament if the party get enough votes in a local election. The politician in question has made some comments about national immigration policy during debates, which local government has no power over, and which is what the label ethnonationalist is exclusively based on. Last election they got 7 700 votes, and they would need around 20 000 votes to get that one parliament seat.
The specific quote in question has a bunch of context. The background was a parliamentary proposition that suggest that immigrants that are on subsidy programs should be required to do some social work as part of the integration process. The opposition disagreed, arguing that this would enable the government to exploit immigrants as free labor, and that is when this politician commented that if they want subsidy but refuse to work then they should return back to their home country (often translated as deported, which is not completely wrong translation but lacks context).
The discussion around deportation from Sweden is also very different from the political discussion in US. Sweden has been deporting people for about 100 years if a person lacks permission to stay in the country, and there is no party that is advocating to stop this. What is debated is the definition used in the exception for unsafe home country, and a bit about what specific circumstances a permission to stay in the country can be withdrawn. Except for the above mentioned parliamentary proposition, I do not know of any political statements that Örebro party or their leader has said on those issues.
The party in question is a small local government party looking to primary get seats in their local government, but with aspiration to get into national politics under a special rule that provide a single seat (1 out of 349) in parliament if the party get enough votes in a local election. The politician in question has made some comments about national immigration policy during debates, which local government has no power over, and which is what the label ethnonationalist is exclusively based on. Last election they got 7 700 votes, and they would need around 20 000 votes to get that one parliament seat.
The specific quote in question has a bunch of context. The background was a parliamentary proposition that suggest that immigrants that are on subsidy programs should be required to do some social work as part of the integration process. The opposition disagreed, arguing that this would enable the government to exploit immigrants as free labor, and that is when this politician commented that if they want subsidy but refuse to work then they should return back to their home country (often translated as deported, which is not completely wrong translation but lacks context).
The discussion around deportation from Sweden is also very different from the political discussion in US. Sweden has been deporting people for about 100 years if a person lacks permission to stay in the country, and there is no party that is advocating to stop this. What is debated is the definition used in the exception for unsafe home country, and a bit about what specific circumstances a permission to stay in the country can be withdrawn. Except for the above mentioned parliamentary proposition, I do not know of any political statements that Örebro party or their leader has said on those issues.
> People who look at this from a US political perspective is going to get a lot of misunderstanding
Honestly you’ve summed up 90% of social media outrage.
Honestly you’ve summed up 90% of social media outrage.
> The opposition disagreed, arguing that this would enable the government to exploit immigrants as free labor, and that is when this politician commented that if they want subsidy but refuse to work then they should return back to their home country.
If the opposition parties disagreed, why did this politician assume that unemployed people "refuse to work"? like what type of argument that is? He sounds like an ignorant populist repeating sound bites to spread hatred honestly. Or maybe he thinks of them as pawns with no agency, and not people.
If the opposition parties disagreed, why did this politician assume that unemployed people "refuse to work"? like what type of argument that is? He sounds like an ignorant populist repeating sound bites to spread hatred honestly. Or maybe he thinks of them as pawns with no agency, and not people.
On the topic of privacy, the reason to use an LLM to write is stylometry. If I use my own voice to write anything of significant length, enough personal mannerisms will come through, so that I can be identified by my writing. If someone were to do something subversive, and wanted to be anonymous, that's one more thing to do to hide your tracks.
Just make sure to use a local model if you're really serious about this since there is no guarantee the cloud models can't not won't add watermarks to the output.
Previous discussion: The CEO of Mullvad is the main financer of the Swedish Örebro party 695 points | 1784 comments (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48717469)
It also has a comment from the other founder: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48696800
It also has a comment from the other founder: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48696800
Welp I'll be moving from Mullvad. Shame they have a no friction service.
it would be impressive if even 5% of the people loudly claiming they will move on will have done so.
It's not like consumers aren't spoiled for choice of VPNs.
Why? Just because you believe some political blog post?
Because a percentage of the money you pay to Mullvad goes to support racial purity drives? It's the same reason you don't buy Bud Light.
Now hold on, there's plenty of reasons to not buy Bud Light.
Plenty of people were buying it before it has a marketing association with transgenderism, and then they suddenly stopped because they didn't want to give any money to transgender causes.
Yes I don't support racism in anyway.
Racism?
Neither do I, but I hate authoritarianism (and hypocrisy) even more. People are free to have different opinions than mine, and I will defend their right to do so.
I remain a happy Mullvad user.
I remain a happy Mullvad user.
People are free to have their opinions, that doesn't mean you need to fund them. If you don't at least on some level agree with the politics, why are you giving them your money?
I fear you're hopelessly blind to your hypocrisy, there is no way you are only giving your money to people you agree with politically.
And there is more to life than politics, even though I feel it's hard to understand in the current hysterical climate of social media echo chambers and US politics. It is honestly terrifying to live in a world where most hope everyone else would conform and have the exact same perspective of the world as them, else they get accused of wrongthink.
And there is more to life than politics, even though I feel it's hard to understand in the current hysterical climate of social media echo chambers and US politics. It is honestly terrifying to live in a world where most hope everyone else would conform and have the exact same perspective of the world as them, else they get accused of wrongthink.
LOL.
> there is no way you are only giving your money to people you agree with politically
Obviously not. And?
> And there is more to life than politics
Obviously. And?
> have the exact same perspective of the world as them, else they get accused of wrongthink
Who am I accusing of wrongthink? Who am I requiring to conform to my exact perspective? Am I not free to chose who to give my money to? Is it not my choice to base my decision on whatever I want? Is it somehow unethical to base that choice on public information?
> People are free to have different opinions than mine, and I will defend their right to do so.
You don't seem very eager to defend my right to the opinion that giving money to Mullvad is bad. You seem to consider that specific opinion to be "authoritarian". Why?
For the record, I don't use a VPN because they are (all) useless snake oil.
> there is no way you are only giving your money to people you agree with politically
Obviously not. And?
> And there is more to life than politics
Obviously. And?
> have the exact same perspective of the world as them, else they get accused of wrongthink
Who am I accusing of wrongthink? Who am I requiring to conform to my exact perspective? Am I not free to chose who to give my money to? Is it not my choice to base my decision on whatever I want? Is it somehow unethical to base that choice on public information?
> People are free to have different opinions than mine, and I will defend their right to do so.
You don't seem very eager to defend my right to the opinion that giving money to Mullvad is bad. You seem to consider that specific opinion to be "authoritarian". Why?
For the record, I don't use a VPN because they are (all) useless snake oil.
>Mullvad discusses its ideals of “a free and open society,”
A free and open society does not mean that law and order cannot exist. Nor does it mean that immigration laws cannot be created or enforced.
A free and open society does not mean that law and order cannot exist. Nor does it mean that immigration laws cannot be created or enforced.
Free and open society means others doing things that I don't agree with. Including private CEO donations or leaving service because of politics. By definition, it is attribute of democracy.
There's a huge difference between enforcing reasonable immigration laws and what some right-wing parties are proposing. I don't know enough about this specific party, but you'll find similar ones in other countries. And remigration is in the end about deporting even legal and well integrated immigrants.
Freedom doesn't mean just what you think is acceptable. If a society feels like they let too many people into the country they have the freedom to undo it.
I guess we're all just using our own definition of freedom. It'll make reasonable discussions incredibly difficult however.
To make things clear my definition of a free society is one where the society itself governs how it is run. The opposite of this is when another country, organization, or person is dictating how it is run overriding how the society wants to do things.
Do you consider governance of majority to minority as a part of free society?
>Do you consider [giving] governance of [the] majority to [the] minority as a part of free society?
I do not consider that as a requirement free society. While representational democracies give governance to a small amount of people compared to the overall populace theoretical you could have a society where everyone was on equal footing and all contributed to decisions being made.
I do not consider that as a requirement free society. While representational democracies give governance to a small amount of people compared to the overall populace theoretical you could have a society where everyone was on equal footing and all contributed to decisions being made.
Equal to what?
I'm supporting your position elsewhere: mentioning to avoid being dismissed as right-wing/ethno-nationalist.
However, support for migration is not a left or right issue. Accepting refugees might be (and I fully support that), but non-refugee immigration (the vast majority of it) is not an unalloyed good.
Immigration has a number of negative effects, on housing, employment and wages, inequalities, social cohesion, political direction.
Being a radical leftist and against immigration is not contradictory.
However, support for migration is not a left or right issue. Accepting refugees might be (and I fully support that), but non-refugee immigration (the vast majority of it) is not an unalloyed good.
Immigration has a number of negative effects, on housing, employment and wages, inequalities, social cohesion, political direction.
Being a radical leftist and against immigration is not contradictory.
vitalyan8184(1)
So what does a political blogpost have to do with HN or tech?
What a blogpost about Mullvad has to do with tech? When easily half of all HN submissions have no relation whatsoever to tech?
It's about a popular security tech product! Sure there's a political angle as to _why_ the person has ditched it, but loads of HN news posts do. Not sure why it's flagged
Nothing except for the link with the well-known and -regarded VPN provider Mullvad. The ban on political articles here is not complete nor unbiased.
I don’t use VPNs anymore. They feel pointless now since almost every website has antibot systems, and VPN IP ranges are much easier to flag than residential proxies.
I use a VPN because I still seed 10s of thousands of torrents and have a static IP address. I don't want the swarm to see that. Most of them are from private sites I trust, but some from private sites that have a huge membership I'm not sure about. I have a lot of movies and music that isn't available anywhere else and archiving that is important to me. Kept my music collection from what.cd and a lot of that you can't even buy on discogs.
It's not great as a Mullvad user: YouTube constantly complains and also shadowbans some of my livestreaming functionality, and my X account has now been flagged as a bot, which requires me to download the app and verify myself in ways that they won't explain. And X is practically useless without a user, much like Instagram. TikTok also shadowbans you with reduced functionality.
Twitch and Discord meanwhile feel remarkably unaffected compared to their counterparts.
VPNs in the aftermath of FireSheep[1] before we got proper HTTPS, but it's not likely to be the ban or censorship circumvention tool we think they are.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firesheep
Twitch and Discord meanwhile feel remarkably unaffected compared to their counterparts.
VPNs in the aftermath of FireSheep[1] before we got proper HTTPS, but it's not likely to be the ban or censorship circumvention tool we think they are.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firesheep
I've been recommended https://airvpn.org. Any opinions?
Not audited. IVPN is what I would use if I didn't use Mullvad.
Personally I welcome more parties in the Swedish Riksdag.
It is also interesting how they may get their seat.
Örebropartiet is a local party to Örebro, but because they are getting a lot of votes in the local district election they may end up in a seat in the Riksdag, which is highly unusual.
It is also interesting how they may get their seat.
Örebropartiet is a local party to Örebro, but because they are getting a lot of votes in the local district election they may end up in a seat in the Riksdag, which is highly unusual.
> because they are getting a lot of votes in the local district election
Or because they're getting a lot of money through Mullvad subscriptions
Or because they're getting a lot of money through Mullvad subscriptions
> Some key issues for the Örebro Party locally include strong secularism, a 30-hour workweek with retained pay, lowered wages for politicians, expanded social housing, abolishing preschool-fees, making public transport free of charge, ending taxpayer funding of what it sees as wasteful sculptures, monuments and art and introducing free dental care. Nationally the party has set out large-scale remigration, closing the Swedish borders to immigration, a stricter assimilation policy and ending taxes on energy and fuel as some of its key issues.
Seems very sensible.
Seems very sensible.
Every populist party works that way, by promising very "sensible" thing. They work like an echo chamber for trendy political ideas.
Whether or not they are actually capable or even plan do any of that it's a different matter. Typically, they only end up being a coverup for political extremism. In then other cases they fumble and somehow mess up the situation even more.
Whether or not they are actually capable or even plan do any of that it's a different matter. Typically, they only end up being a coverup for political extremism. In then other cases they fumble and somehow mess up the situation even more.
Conversely, the "serious" political parties work by claiming all sensible reforms are in one way or another impossible and sitting on their behinds for the duration of their terms. See Mamdani for an example of a "populist" who somehow managed to push through many sensible, "impossible", "extremist" policies without too much effort.
That sounds "We're for everything good and against everything bad so vote for us pls"
Uh, isn't that exactly what you'd want out of a political party? I wouldn't vote for them because I disagree with a few of their points, but if you think all of their policies are good and you trust them to uphold them, then go vote for them?
You want them to know what they can actually achieve and promise that, not promise the world.
> know what they can actually achieve and promise that
Show me a single party that actually keeps their (concrete) promises and I'll show you a flying pig.
In any case, you're somehow confusing a list of "key issues" with a list of actual promises. A 30-hour workweek being a key issue, doesn't mean that the party promises they'll achieve that the next term, even if they magically would get 100% of the votes. It means it's a long term goal that they believe in and are working towards. Isn't that obvious to anyone with even a passing issue in politics?
Show me a single party that actually keeps their (concrete) promises and I'll show you a flying pig.
In any case, you're somehow confusing a list of "key issues" with a list of actual promises. A 30-hour workweek being a key issue, doesn't mean that the party promises they'll achieve that the next term, even if they magically would get 100% of the votes. It means it's a long term goal that they believe in and are working towards. Isn't that obvious to anyone with even a passing issue in politics?
seems very populist.
Personally I welcome more parties in the Swedish Riksdag.
It is also interesting how they may get their seat.
Örebropartiet is a local party to Örebro, but because they are getting a lot of votes in the local district election they may end up in a seat in the Riksdag, which is highly unusual.
Örebro has huge issues with segregation.
It is also interesting how they may get their seat.
Örebropartiet is a local party to Örebro, but because they are getting a lot of votes in the local district election they may end up in a seat in the Riksdag, which is highly unusual.
Örebro has huge issues with segregation.
This post seems like an overreaction to me.
Being this sensitive to company leadership political activity is going to exhaust a person and time would be better spent being careful to buy products with minimal value added from authoritarian nations with a history of gross human rights issues.
Lots of counties don't want immigration, especially after they let a large group in and deal with integration challenges. The CCP forcefully places ethnic Han into minority homes to function as de facto informants. The Russians broke up Finnish/Ukrainian families en masse, moving them to the other end of Russia to minimize the likelihood of dissent in occupied areas.
There are a lot worse ideas at play in the world than some of the more extreme suggestions that this very infant-sized Swedish party flirt with. On a scale of 1-10 heinousness, barely registers on the global stage.
My thinking goes more like this:
This product I bought from this nation... Does that Nation tend to value human rights, freedom of expression and liberal values? Sweden... Check.
I can buy Swedish products all day. They make nice jets and mobile artillery that push back on the really bad ideas. One CEO's affiliation with an anti immigration populist party which honestly doesn't seem that serious... They've got some Marxist ideas in there. I really doubt these guys go much of anywhere in their current form. It's a capitalist society. Some of their ideas will stick but the party is immature. I wouldn't worry so much.
Being this sensitive to company leadership political activity is going to exhaust a person and time would be better spent being careful to buy products with minimal value added from authoritarian nations with a history of gross human rights issues.
Lots of counties don't want immigration, especially after they let a large group in and deal with integration challenges. The CCP forcefully places ethnic Han into minority homes to function as de facto informants. The Russians broke up Finnish/Ukrainian families en masse, moving them to the other end of Russia to minimize the likelihood of dissent in occupied areas.
There are a lot worse ideas at play in the world than some of the more extreme suggestions that this very infant-sized Swedish party flirt with. On a scale of 1-10 heinousness, barely registers on the global stage.
My thinking goes more like this:
This product I bought from this nation... Does that Nation tend to value human rights, freedom of expression and liberal values? Sweden... Check.
I can buy Swedish products all day. They make nice jets and mobile artillery that push back on the really bad ideas. One CEO's affiliation with an anti immigration populist party which honestly doesn't seem that serious... They've got some Marxist ideas in there. I really doubt these guys go much of anywhere in their current form. It's a capitalist society. Some of their ideas will stick but the party is immature. I wouldn't worry so much.
It's not a minor political activity, they're literally the main funding source of Sweden's Nazi party.
You are telling me that this party's platform is literally that Swedish decent people are superior... Full stop... Because that is the ethnofascist(Nazi) position.
If so, I'd be keen to see clear evidence of that.
If so, I'd be keen to see clear evidence of that.
You really don't have to look far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party#Immigration_...
Most of the current comments here are in favor of Örebro, when did tech become so disgusting?
There are social forces that are shifting the collective mindset to be more sympathetic to anti immigration sentiments. We see it in Australia recently, but the political analysis of this phenomenon is still lagging from my perspective (I am not endorsing these sentiments).
> sympathetic to anti immigration sentiments
To be clear, did or did not the party leader say he would like to deport people born in Sweden to legal immigrant parents because they are not "naturally Swedish"?
whatever you're referring to, "nebulous refugee loopholes" are a legal way to reside in a country, to be clear.
why are you rhetorically laundering the reputation of legal immigration through illegal immigration?
I think we can call most of these social forces Putin (although there are real problems with immigration).
Ok, in Australia they can probably be called Murdoch
Ok, in Australia they can probably be called Murdoch
The mainstream media plays into this for sure. But I think there is a lot more to it. I think most of us on this platform have cosmopolitan leanings. We're educated and have some job mobility. I've worked overseas because I got an engineering education and did well in it. But wage stagnation, job insecurity, housing costs, low rental vacancy all play into this dynamic. There are a lot of people who don't like seeing their country change in its demographics. That is partly racism, but its also fear of change. I don't like it but I can understand it. When material conditions devolve, there will be a lot of people who blame the "other", even if its misidentifying the cause. I think Australia is lagging behind the right wing populist movement of the UK and US but we are on the same trajectory, and the major party policitians still don't understand how to address it. And most left wing people won't attempt to understand it because they at stuck using rationality and ethics as their rhetoric, and don't understand that emotion and grievance are going to trump that in politics.
I largely agree
If you have any disagreements I'm keen to hear them. These are just my own observations so I want inputs from others outside my own echo chamber. If you CBF that's fine too though.
It's a complex issue, but in short, I think that some of the concerns about immigration are often legitimate.
Progressive people, being more keen on altruism, tend to think that the good reasons immigrants have to migrate should overshadow the problems that immigration can cause.
And sometimes there's maybe also a view that a strongly multi-ethnic society is something to aspire for, because of the increased understanding of different people and hopefully a reduction of racism that it can lead to.
Progressives tend to think that everyone should be as tolerant as them, and that can lead to only looking into the problems, and finding solutions, up to a degree.
I saw that in the shift from arguing for integration to arguing for tolerance and a multi-cultural society, for example, where inadeguate integration efforts faiiled.
---
On the other hand, right wing/conservative parties often enact policies that compound the immigration problems, rather than improving them.
In part that's due to a preference for securitarian policies, rather than looking for the root causes.
And in part that's because immigration problems most often lead to increased votes for them, so it's in their interest to not actually solve them.
All this, in the end, can create a space for parties standing for drastic solutions such as mass deportations; however immoral, dangerous for everyone and hard to realize they may be.
---
The way forward, in my opinion, should be for progressive parties to stop dismissing the problems that immigration can lead to, and to do their utmost to improve them all, rather than pretending for everyone to be as tolerant as them.
The actual middle/long term solution would probably be ensuring that the new potential immigrants are willing to integrate to a sufficient degree, and most of all to look into what pushes them to migrate in the first place, and work for improving the causes of that.
The latter can seem utopic, but it's better than the alternatives, in my opinion.
Ok, that wasn't so brief xD
Progressive people, being more keen on altruism, tend to think that the good reasons immigrants have to migrate should overshadow the problems that immigration can cause.
And sometimes there's maybe also a view that a strongly multi-ethnic society is something to aspire for, because of the increased understanding of different people and hopefully a reduction of racism that it can lead to.
Progressives tend to think that everyone should be as tolerant as them, and that can lead to only looking into the problems, and finding solutions, up to a degree.
I saw that in the shift from arguing for integration to arguing for tolerance and a multi-cultural society, for example, where inadeguate integration efforts faiiled.
---
On the other hand, right wing/conservative parties often enact policies that compound the immigration problems, rather than improving them.
In part that's due to a preference for securitarian policies, rather than looking for the root causes.
And in part that's because immigration problems most often lead to increased votes for them, so it's in their interest to not actually solve them.
All this, in the end, can create a space for parties standing for drastic solutions such as mass deportations; however immoral, dangerous for everyone and hard to realize they may be.
---
The way forward, in my opinion, should be for progressive parties to stop dismissing the problems that immigration can lead to, and to do their utmost to improve them all, rather than pretending for everyone to be as tolerant as them.
The actual middle/long term solution would probably be ensuring that the new potential immigrants are willing to integrate to a sufficient degree, and most of all to look into what pushes them to migrate in the first place, and work for improving the causes of that.
The latter can seem utopic, but it's better than the alternatives, in my opinion.
Ok, that wasn't so brief xD
The true hackers have long left this site, I'm afraid.
What's left is an audience devoted to power, money, and being the boot that stamps on a human face.
What's left is an audience devoted to power, money, and being the boot that stamps on a human face.
It's reactionary:
Immigration isn't just sunshine and roses, and the negatives are coming to light. Especially when we're allowing Sharia-espousing people, exposing people who, by definition, can't integrate with our own values: FGM, abusing women, and child brides are not acceptable to me.Why the monospace?
I used to think that people in tech would have the brain to react in a sensible way, anyhow.
And I don't see how you could think that someone "by definition, can't integrate with our own values" without resorting to racism.
I used to think that people in tech would have the brain to react in a sensible way, anyhow.
And I don't see how you could think that someone "by definition, can't integrate with our own values" without resorting to racism.
Islam isn't a race. Try again.
Oh, so Muslims by definition can't integrate with our own values, that's so much better...
You have the right to do what you want with your money.
In general though, I’m more likely to trust people who have strong opinions, especially if they’re dissenting opinions.
We often immolate people for not being perfect enough while letting people like Trump capture huge parts of their respective market.
Your ire isn’t useful.
I believe that this is handwringing from people who want to take Mullvad down.
In general though, I’m more likely to trust people who have strong opinions, especially if they’re dissenting opinions.
We often immolate people for not being perfect enough while letting people like Trump capture huge parts of their respective market.
Your ire isn’t useful.
I believe that this is handwringing from people who want to take Mullvad down.
You tend to trust people because they have strong opinions even if those opinions are completely psychotic? Does that mean you would have trusted the German dictator if you were alive back then?
1) I wasn't alive.
2) My parents weren't alive
3) my grandparents weren't alive.
4) he was running a country, not a company thats entire purpose was to protect peoples privacy
5) had people taken privacy seriously, there would be a lot less dead people in Europe, famously the dutch kept meticulous records of their populations which is part of why the Nazi's were so effective.
2) My parents weren't alive
3) my grandparents weren't alive.
4) he was running a country, not a company thats entire purpose was to protect peoples privacy
5) had people taken privacy seriously, there would be a lot less dead people in Europe, famously the dutch kept meticulous records of their populations which is part of why the Nazi's were so effective.
If you care about privacy why do you support the political party that wants to use mass surveillance and AI processing to find the "imposter" non-Swedish people in Sweden?
I assume you're talking about the co-founder, because while I live in Sweden (and hold a Swedish passport, despite not being born here) - I do not support populist parties such as the Örebro party. (They aren't even a thing as far as I can tell in Malmö, where I live.)
I am one of the imposter people you reference.
That said, I don't actually see much to corroborate what you're saying either, they don't seem to be implying use of AI and mass surveillance.
I think you've decided something you don't like is bad and now are trying to tie other things you don't like to it?
I am one of the imposter people you reference.
That said, I don't actually see much to corroborate what you're saying either, they don't seem to be implying use of AI and mass surveillance.
I think you've decided something you don't like is bad and now are trying to tie other things you don't like to it?
You strongly implied you supported the Örebro party because they have strong opinions and you support people with strong opinions even when they are bad opinions. (Which is populism, by the way - it's another way of saying you're a populist.)
If you give money to Mullvad you're giving a percentage of it through to Örebro. That's why people are boycotting Mullvad.
No I don't think it's a honeypot, unless it's a total lie to begin with. If it's true, it's an unforced error by Mullvad. There are other VPNs you can use that allow port forwarding.
> I think you've decided something you don't like is bad and now are trying to tie other things you don't like to it?
This is against guidelines.
If you give money to Mullvad you're giving a percentage of it through to Örebro. That's why people are boycotting Mullvad.
No I don't think it's a honeypot, unless it's a total lie to begin with. If it's true, it's an unforced error by Mullvad. There are other VPNs you can use that allow port forwarding.
> I think you've decided something you don't like is bad and now are trying to tie other things you don't like to it?
This is against guidelines.
I support the co-founder - I believe that he would defend my views that he would disagree with more now that I know he has disagreeable views himself and runs a platform based on free speech -- it gives him "skin in the game" for privacy; and the more I see people screaming about how everything that isn't 100% globalism is actually a Nazi is making me even more sympathetic to him.
Can you show me where you got the idea of mass surveillance and AI (since you're claiming you didn't make it up)
Can you show me where you got the idea of mass surveillance and AI (since you're claiming you didn't make it up)
> everything that isn't 100% globalism
My dude, he wants to expel all non-Swedes from Sweden.
My dude, he wants to expel all non-Swedes from Sweden.
From what I've learned (from these threads) the leader of the Orebro party said he wanted to expel those who commit crimes, even if they were born here (if they have no "natural" connection to Sweden).
It's an extreme position.
Yet it's also now two degrees moved from the founder of Mullvad; who has not expressed these opinions nor issued direct support for them specifically, nor do they imply all non-Swedes as you imply.
I'm not sure how you go from "Mullvad founder gave money to a party" to "that party leader said something extreme about criminals and welfare-abuse" to "the mullvad founder wants all non-Swedes deported".
It's an extreme position.
Yet it's also now two degrees moved from the founder of Mullvad; who has not expressed these opinions nor issued direct support for them specifically, nor do they imply all non-Swedes as you imply.
I'm not sure how you go from "Mullvad founder gave money to a party" to "that party leader said something extreme about criminals and welfare-abuse" to "the mullvad founder wants all non-Swedes deported".
My guy, he contributed 70% of the party's funds. That's pretty strong support. And he's smart enough to keep an apparent firewall between him and the party to deflect criticism.
What is a "natural connection to Sweden"?
What is a "natural connection to Sweden"?
Having a home, kids, a pet, a job and being part of a community that is integrated into the social fabric of the country.
"Values" get thrown around a lot, but equality of women and acceptance of homosexuality is a big deal to Swedes, so if you shun those things then I wouldn't expect acceptance.
"Values" get thrown around a lot, but equality of women and acceptance of homosexuality is a big deal to Swedes, so if you shun those things then I wouldn't expect acceptance.
"They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish"
I listened to it, because of these threads. (My Swedish is passive rather than spoken, understanding it isn't the problem.)
That quote is his answer to a question about people born here who commit crimes and live long-term on welfare; whether they can also be made to leave. It's not a freestanding statement about everyone born in Sweden to immigrant parents.
And the passage continues past where your excerpt stops:
"They have not become Swedes. It says Sweden in the passport, but they haven't been interested in becoming part of Sweden. That's a qualitative difference." "Have not become" only works if becoming is possible. So the criterion he's stating is failed assimilation, not ancestry; and the write-ups of the same interview describe his programme the same way: remigration for criminals and the long-term welfare-dependent.
To be fair: that's still a subjective judgement about people's inner attitudes, which I've said elsewhere in this thread is arbitrary and I'd oppose. He also says he's prepared to "walk over corpses" on this, so I'm not selling him as a moderate. Extreme, yes. Ancestry-based, no. Those are different accusations, and only one of them survives contact with sources.
Podcast (Swedish): https://aljosja.substack.com/p/satter-orebropartiet-sverige-...
I feel like people are looking for a reason to be outraged and not the shape of the actual situation. It makes me skittish.
That quote is his answer to a question about people born here who commit crimes and live long-term on welfare; whether they can also be made to leave. It's not a freestanding statement about everyone born in Sweden to immigrant parents.
And the passage continues past where your excerpt stops:
"They have not become Swedes. It says Sweden in the passport, but they haven't been interested in becoming part of Sweden. That's a qualitative difference." "Have not become" only works if becoming is possible. So the criterion he's stating is failed assimilation, not ancestry; and the write-ups of the same interview describe his programme the same way: remigration for criminals and the long-term welfare-dependent.
To be fair: that's still a subjective judgement about people's inner attitudes, which I've said elsewhere in this thread is arbitrary and I'd oppose. He also says he's prepared to "walk over corpses" on this, so I'm not selling him as a moderate. Extreme, yes. Ancestry-based, no. Those are different accusations, and only one of them survives contact with sources.
Podcast (Swedish): https://aljosja.substack.com/p/satter-orebropartiet-sverige-...
I feel like people are looking for a reason to be outraged and not the shape of the actual situation. It makes me skittish.
Ok, do fix the Wikipedia article.
But, born here? Or not born here?
Anyhow, "criminals" is a way too vague concept for expelling someone from a country, especially when your party could come to power and criminalize anything you want.
And, Show me the man and I'll show you the crime: most people commit something illegal relatively frequently, sometimes without even realizing that it could be (e.g. copyright violations, libel, slight violations of obscure little-known laws...).
They'll typically never face consequences for that; but if you target them, or if it becomes more interesting for law enforcement to find any violation of the law on the part of someone, more often than not something will be found.
But, born here? Or not born here?
Anyhow, "criminals" is a way too vague concept for expelling someone from a country, especially when your party could come to power and criminalize anything you want.
And, Show me the man and I'll show you the crime: most people commit something illegal relatively frequently, sometimes without even realizing that it could be (e.g. copyright violations, libel, slight violations of obscure little-known laws...).
They'll typically never face consequences for that; but if you target them, or if it becomes more interesting for law enforcement to find any violation of the law on the part of someone, more often than not something will be found.
Has any ruling party with this kind of view ever not significantly expanded their definition of "not ${country}ish" while in power?
> I wasn't alive
How would you feel if you hadn't eaten breakfast today?
How would you feel if you hadn't eaten breakfast today?
I'd feel hungry and on the way to work I might grab something from one of the many Espresso Houses in Malmö, I know this because I've skipped breakfast many times and it's just one aspect to my environment.
A better question might be:
A) How does it feel to have the president of the galactic federation of planets outlaw cybernetic implants because they are used to harvest cloned Mycinian DNA illegally - despite such a law preventing the commercial use of home based medical technology.
or
B) How did it feel to be Plato, during the ostraca.
--
My point is: I know that the environment my great-granfather lived in is quite literally unknowable to me, despite a living person being able to talk to me about his experiences - it was also barely knowable for him.. "you had to be there".
The same way trying to explain to someone about our upbringing (no cell phones, paper maps, you had to stick to your arrangements because once out of the home there was no communication possible) is very difficult, imagine not having cars, air travel, all news being via the paper (which not everyone purchased) and everyone you know is a labourer.
In that context, with a global political landscape, and a local-first community of folks who could only articulate ideas amongst themselves... Man, I have no fucking clue how I would feel. Just like they'd have no clue about the concept of Espresso House or what would be possible in 2026.
History is really really easy in hindsight. If I have conservative opinions of any sort it's because I prefer to choose options personally that leave us with more choices later.
If this level ethnic replacement happens to be wrong, then it's already too late to do anything about it. That's just true, 15% of a country is already here and there's nothing anyone can do about this humanely.
Asking me how I'd feel if I was born 100 years ago is extremely uncompelling, because I could ask you how my family from then would think about things are today and I can guarantee that they're not going to agree with your perspective on the right approach.
A better question might be:
A) How does it feel to have the president of the galactic federation of planets outlaw cybernetic implants because they are used to harvest cloned Mycinian DNA illegally - despite such a law preventing the commercial use of home based medical technology.
or
B) How did it feel to be Plato, during the ostraca.
--
My point is: I know that the environment my great-granfather lived in is quite literally unknowable to me, despite a living person being able to talk to me about his experiences - it was also barely knowable for him.. "you had to be there".
The same way trying to explain to someone about our upbringing (no cell phones, paper maps, you had to stick to your arrangements because once out of the home there was no communication possible) is very difficult, imagine not having cars, air travel, all news being via the paper (which not everyone purchased) and everyone you know is a labourer.
In that context, with a global political landscape, and a local-first community of folks who could only articulate ideas amongst themselves... Man, I have no fucking clue how I would feel. Just like they'd have no clue about the concept of Espresso House or what would be possible in 2026.
History is really really easy in hindsight. If I have conservative opinions of any sort it's because I prefer to choose options personally that leave us with more choices later.
If this level ethnic replacement happens to be wrong, then it's already too late to do anything about it. That's just true, 15% of a country is already here and there's nothing anyone can do about this humanely.
Asking me how I'd feel if I was born 100 years ago is extremely uncompelling, because I could ask you how my family from then would think about things are today and I can guarantee that they're not going to agree with your perspective on the right approach.
You're comparing something that happened 100 years ago with something that happened 2400 years ago (also, what does "during the pottery (ostraca)" refer to?) and some science fiction scenario? Does Sweden not include WWII in the history education anymore, or are students just not recommended to try to insert themselves in the stories at all?
> the environment my great-granfather lived in is quite literally unknowable to me
Okay, not many things seem to be knowable to you then.
> the environment my great-granfather lived in is quite literally unknowable to me
Okay, not many things seem to be knowable to you then.
Yeah, I am literally telling you that I am aware of my ignorance.
That you are not aware of yours reflects poorly on one of us, certainly.
That you are not aware of yours reflects poorly on one of us, certainly.
Why not just admit that last week is unknowable to you? Then it'd reflect poorly on me dishonestly claiming that I could recall last week, surely.
I can’t recall things my ancestors experienced. Even when they tell me: just like I will have a difficult time conveying how it felt to live during COVID (the uncertainty, the different countries behaving the way they thought best, why Sweden didn’t lock down and Italy did- the death of it) and why anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers are a thing.
Just like explaining how nobody could see the 2008 financial crisis, just like explaining to my children (or great grandchildren, remember that its many generations removed for me and you)- how it felt to fly by air before 9/11.
How can you explain it, you would reach for lossy comparisons like coach travel (will coaches even be a thing? not like they are today, not like they were in 1980 already)
This intellectual dishonesty is maddeningly stupid or an expertly crafted troll, neither are making me think you are engaging seriously.
Just like explaining how nobody could see the 2008 financial crisis, just like explaining to my children (or great grandchildren, remember that its many generations removed for me and you)- how it felt to fly by air before 9/11.
How can you explain it, you would reach for lossy comparisons like coach travel (will coaches even be a thing? not like they are today, not like they were in 1980 already)
This intellectual dishonesty is maddeningly stupid or an expertly crafted troll, neither are making me think you are engaging seriously.
> This intellectual dishonesty is maddeningly stupid or an expertly crafted troll, neither are making me think you are engaging seriously.
Well, I could say the same about refusing to even imagine what life was like 100 years ago. It seems simply absurd to me to not be capable of imagining a simple hypothetical scenario. Most people are capable of answering hypotheticals such as "if you got a million dollars, what would you do?" or "if you lived in the USA, would you vote for Trump?"
Well, I could say the same about refusing to even imagine what life was like 100 years ago. It seems simply absurd to me to not be capable of imagining a simple hypothetical scenario. Most people are capable of answering hypotheticals such as "if you got a million dollars, what would you do?" or "if you lived in the USA, would you vote for Trump?"
How can you know? Its quite literally impossible, psychologists believe you can hold approximately 8 competing facts in your head at once, and we are mentally scarred with spoilers, every decision is known and has been talked about to death.
My great grandfather was 17, had to flee Poland (never to return), fought for a brigade in exile in Scotland against the Nazis.
He was also the most racist man I know, prejudiced against people from the next town over in his adoptive home.
He eventually forgot his own native language some time after marrying a woman born in scotland to a predominantly irish migrant family.
So, clearly not a nazi, clearly in support of some kind of migration- but his whole thing is that he made painful efforts to be a great guest in his home, but he never put down his prejudicial mindset. How can this be?
I don’t really know what thats like, even the simple warmth of being able to Video call my mum at a moments notice gives such a significant respite to the crippling loneliness you experience living in another country, its enough salve to keep you going. I can call anyone on earth, summon practically any facet of known human history in seconds, calculate complex mathematics and I have barely felt hunger, scarcity, famine or displacement in my life.
I have his perspective, as barely digestible as it is, and his is one perspective among millions- people who never saw a car until they were already on the other side of a continent- people for whom a job was a lifelong affair, who had tiny close-knit and isolated communities that were forced open by famine or war.
Man, I understand the details, but I can’t put myself in his shoes, theres too many variables and too many perspectives.
And, even though this man fought Nazi’s and assuredly killed people: he did so not knowing about the atrocities being committed- this fact came out very late into the war by his word.
It matters a lot because we can judge easily in hindsight, and because we won.
I’m not a nazi, I don’t agree with their philosophy in hindsight, but lets take the Bolsheviks- who slaughtered people too, who’s values I sort of still believe in.
Would I have been part of the coup in Russia during that time? Would you? How could you fucking know?!?
My great grandfather was 17, had to flee Poland (never to return), fought for a brigade in exile in Scotland against the Nazis.
He was also the most racist man I know, prejudiced against people from the next town over in his adoptive home.
He eventually forgot his own native language some time after marrying a woman born in scotland to a predominantly irish migrant family.
So, clearly not a nazi, clearly in support of some kind of migration- but his whole thing is that he made painful efforts to be a great guest in his home, but he never put down his prejudicial mindset. How can this be?
I don’t really know what thats like, even the simple warmth of being able to Video call my mum at a moments notice gives such a significant respite to the crippling loneliness you experience living in another country, its enough salve to keep you going. I can call anyone on earth, summon practically any facet of known human history in seconds, calculate complex mathematics and I have barely felt hunger, scarcity, famine or displacement in my life.
I have his perspective, as barely digestible as it is, and his is one perspective among millions- people who never saw a car until they were already on the other side of a continent- people for whom a job was a lifelong affair, who had tiny close-knit and isolated communities that were forced open by famine or war.
Man, I understand the details, but I can’t put myself in his shoes, theres too many variables and too many perspectives.
And, even though this man fought Nazi’s and assuredly killed people: he did so not knowing about the atrocities being committed- this fact came out very late into the war by his word.
It matters a lot because we can judge easily in hindsight, and because we won.
I’m not a nazi, I don’t agree with their philosophy in hindsight, but lets take the Bolsheviks- who slaughtered people too, who’s values I sort of still believe in.
Would I have been part of the coup in Russia during that time? Would you? How could you fucking know?!?
> Would I have been part of the coup in Russia during that time?
Well, let's just think logically. Do I today have the time, energy and inclination to be a part of a group of radicals plotting a coup? No. If I lived in Russia in the early 1900s would I have had that? No.
Sure, it's possible to say that if "I" lived then I would have had an entirely different childhood, but that's not how hypothetical scenarios work. What would the concept of "I" even mean? Would I have to account for different genes as well? Would I have to account for "me" being an entirely different person? You quickly get into a meaningless philosophical conundrum where nothing means anything and the only thing you can know is "cogito ergo sum" .
Well, let's just think logically. Do I today have the time, energy and inclination to be a part of a group of radicals plotting a coup? No. If I lived in Russia in the early 1900s would I have had that? No.
Sure, it's possible to say that if "I" lived then I would have had an entirely different childhood, but that's not how hypothetical scenarios work. What would the concept of "I" even mean? Would I have to account for different genes as well? Would I have to account for "me" being an entirely different person? You quickly get into a meaningless philosophical conundrum where nothing means anything and the only thing you can know is "cogito ergo sum" .
This is how we get psychos like Alex Karp running the world.
Of course his ire is useful. You just don’t want it to be.
Of course his ire is useful. You just don’t want it to be.
You lose one of the largest advocates of a free internet, and what you gain is... more people knowing that it's not acceptable to be anti-immigrant under any cicumstances
... While, Elon Musk still owns everything and in my opinion he's worse.
It's also very easy to sympathise with Mullvads co-founder here, so you help make the conditions for the next 2016 "surprise, an actual Fascist gains power!" election, which is what's happening in Sweden right now as SD (founded by dyed in the wool actual Nazi's) has become the second largest party in Sweden.
But yeah, go off king! You got this, show them who's boss! We'll all be better for it! (/s)
... While, Elon Musk still owns everything and in my opinion he's worse.
It's also very easy to sympathise with Mullvads co-founder here, so you help make the conditions for the next 2016 "surprise, an actual Fascist gains power!" election, which is what's happening in Sweden right now as SD (founded by dyed in the wool actual Nazi's) has become the second largest party in Sweden.
But yeah, go off king! You got this, show them who's boss! We'll all be better for it! (/s)
“Ignoring this bit of gutter racism is the only way to move forward.”
No fucking thanks. Not an inch. Here’s a politically savvy idea: maybe somebody should make an immigration-skeptical party that’s not frothing at the mouth about ethnic cleansing.
Also, it’s just one VPN out of hundreds. The free internet will somehow survive, I’m sure.
No fucking thanks. Not an inch. Here’s a politically savvy idea: maybe somebody should make an immigration-skeptical party that’s not frothing at the mouth about ethnic cleansing.
Also, it’s just one VPN out of hundreds. The free internet will somehow survive, I’m sure.
it's always funny how the hardline advocates of the free internet (especially outside of the US) are subject to this kind of unpersoning.
It's enough to consider that there's something malicious going on.
But I guess we should use one of the VPN providers that aren't pushing for systems transparency[0] and are dubiously everywhere across all of youtube advertising despite that being provably the place where the scummiest of companies go.[1].
[0]: https://mullvad.net/media/system-transparency-rev5.pdf
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVDQEoe6ZWY & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3t1d1zzu54
Not wanting unfettered and uncontrolled migration (when it has proven to massively increase crime - which was the context) is not racism, that's stupid.
If 15% of the population of Japan had moved from the UK in the last 10 years and committed a disproportionate amount of crime, it would cause racism, but talking about it as a problem that needs to be solved is not itself racism.
It's enough to consider that there's something malicious going on.
But I guess we should use one of the VPN providers that aren't pushing for systems transparency[0] and are dubiously everywhere across all of youtube advertising despite that being provably the place where the scummiest of companies go.[1].
[0]: https://mullvad.net/media/system-transparency-rev5.pdf
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVDQEoe6ZWY & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3t1d1zzu54
Not wanting unfettered and uncontrolled migration (when it has proven to massively increase crime - which was the context) is not racism, that's stupid.
If 15% of the population of Japan had moved from the UK in the last 10 years and committed a disproportionate amount of crime, it would cause racism, but talking about it as a problem that needs to be solved is not itself racism.
No conspiracy, just someone who loathes white supremacy with every fiber of my being. And yes, this is exactly the core platform of any Western party pushing for ethnic cleansing and “remigration.” (Deportation of anyone considered not Swedish/British/etc. enough even if they’re squeaky clean and integrated into local culture.)
Sorry, but we’re all in this together. Anyone who disagrees won’t get a cent from me.
Also:
> unfettered and uncontrolled migration
Bullshit, immigration is already massively down: https://archive.ph/20260720101017/https://www.economist.com/...
Same lie far-right parties around the world use to enact their sick agendas.
Sorry, but we’re all in this together. Anyone who disagrees won’t get a cent from me.
Also:
> unfettered and uncontrolled migration
Bullshit, immigration is already massively down: https://archive.ph/20260720101017/https://www.economist.com/...
Same lie far-right parties around the world use to enact their sick agendas.
lillecarl(3)
jb1991(5)
kaxu-64(2)
GlacierFox(1)
Mullvads mission is about privacy and against mass surveillance. That mission has nothing to do with their co-CEOs personal stance on immigration. I don't necessarily see the conflict of interest that the blog talks about?