Post

The Swedish 🇸🇪 Parliament just approved a law that would create a tiered citizenship scheme, with a 1st class (mostly for the native born) that cannot be revoked and a 2nd class (mostly for the naturalized) that can: www.svt.se/nyheter/inri... Only two parties (Left and Green) voted against.

svt.seMedborgarskap ska kunna återkallasPersoner med dubbla medborgarskap ska kunna fråntas sitt svenska medborgarskap om de döms för brott som allvarligt skadar Sveriges vitala intressen, enligt ett beslut som nu fattats i riksdagen. Då de...

302 reposts693 likes

We absolutely do have moral standing - for all of America’s flaws we have A. No difference in the rights between native-born and naturalized citizenship EXCEPT the right to run for president. B. Birthright citizenship on jus soli principles. All babies born on U.S. soil are native-born citizens.

If you had accused Swedish politicians of wanting a 2nd class citizenship scheme for immigrants just a few years ago, they would have all but sued you for libel. Now almost everybody is for.

Because the proposal requires a change to the Constitution, it won't take effect until there's a second vote with an intervening parliamentary election.

This will probably also happen in Iceland within the span of the next 3 years (before the next election). No one will vote against it because there are no longer any left wing parties in the Icelandic parliament. (Samfylkingin/The social democrats is IMO a center party now)

Unfortunately it seems like all the "center" "left" parties almost globally have been captured by those of the more national socialist workers' party tendencies.

Sort of already is like that, just haven’t been any bills proposed to allow for it. Won’t need a constitutional change imo (regarding double citizenship).

Citizenship shld be inalienable, a core/foundational right. Hannah Arendt—who knew something abt being stateless & a refugee—wrote eloquently abt this. Scandinavian countries are admirable in many ways—but I guess not immune to nativism. I imagine Sweden sadly has the standard bigots inciting this.

The political scalpel hasn’t been forged yet which targets Muslims only. But it will come and will be seen as normal just like this destruction of the sense of citizenship.

It's unfortunate that they chose to be racist just because they wanted a high trust society, safe to walk streets at night, no ethnic tension, and no ethnic outbidding. Countries with liberal universalism might be extremely polarized and parlayzed by gridlock but at least we can't be called racist.

People were mistaken to believe post-War Europe absorbed the lessons of fascism and WWII. The first moment of substantial non-European immigration to a country turns into this, or Greek border guards shooting across border at refugees, or frontex letting boats sink in the Med.

i keep telling people that the only reason scandinavian countries have such generous benefits for their citizens is because they were ~90% majority white when those systems were established now that they’re only ~70% majority white they’re coming after full citizenship for brown people

I don’t think you’ve represented this accurately. It applies to dual citizens convicted of crimes which seriously harm Sweden’s vital interests, and naturalised who obtained citizenship fraudulently. This is hardly unusual. To be clear, I personally oppose removal of citizenship on any grounds.

They aren't. On the contrary, the Sweden Democrats (SD), the furthest-right party and the main culprit in Sweden's ethnonationalistic politics, have had connections to Orbán and Russian money. They're deporting brown people and conspiring with Russia as usual.

@erikangner.com Will denaturalisation be just for wartime-treason-level offences, or will naturalised Swedes have to be sure to meticulously adhere to Jantelagen and remember which songs/pastries go with the time of year, just in case someone reports them?

They already deport families, children (alone), old sick people who don't have anyone to care for them, people who have no connection to the country they are sent to, and none of them have done any harm. People who have done everything right gets deported. It's inhumane and racist. Fascism.

Sweden going down the drain at breathtaking speed. It's bizarre to begin with to connect rights to circumstances of one's birth. And how more and more parties fall over their feet trying to please the fascists makes me sick.

Long past time to admit the immigrant hatred is fully present in these mainstream parties in their own rights. Can quibble over definitions of fascist all day but the hardline nativism is broad and deeply incorporated. Not just in Sweden either.

"And how more and more parties fall over their feet trying to please the fascists makes me sick." Yep. It really is a nauseating feeling.

This isn't at all about a tiered citizenship. It's merely about whether some serious crimes can cost a person its citizenship provided it has another one. I see nothing wrong with that. We may not make anyone stateless, but if they have something to fall back on? Why not?

I mean, I don't think I will be, but never say never. In any case, I am quite a fan of how it is in my country, Germany, where you can lose citizenship, provided you have a second citizenship, if you fight in a hostile country's armed forces or commit treason. I'm quite fine with that. Only 1/

addition I would make is to exclude people from that who have a second citizenship they cannot lose and can make a case that they tried in good faith to do so (e.g. North Korea or others). Obviously they should be excluded. But if someone with german & russian citizenship decides to join e.g. 2/

Here's the thing though. I don't trust the same people who would pass such a policy to define what a "serious crime" is. Also note that many people are born with other citizenships too, and these policies are designed to disproportionately affect some demographics vs. others.

One of the most disheartening aspects of Trump’s attempts to weaken the 14th amendment is that the US’s (actually written in the constitution) citizenship guarantees were a moral example for other countries to aspire to. You literally cannot be stripped of your citizenship if born there.

I can accept that, especially given that the Sverigedemokrater are needed for supporting the minority coalition. Not a good situation to be in. But still, I cannot help but feel confused about the fact that so many on here argue that dual citizenship is almost something accidental that people 1/

accidentally come by. Dual citizenship in most cases is a conscious choice, and I don't think it is overly dramatic to respect that choice and say "You have somewhere else to go, so go". In Germany, by comparison, we have a similar law that means that someone who e.g. engages in warfare for a 2/

The German constitution: "No German may be deprived of his citizenship. Loss of citizenship may occur only pursuant to a law and, if it occurs against the will of the person affected, only if he does not become stateless as a result." The law is currently very restrictive but this might change...

The two circumstances are 1) if the citizenship was acquired fraudulently and 2) if you have been convicted of a crime that “seriously hurt Swedish vital interests” (definition pending)

Ughh 🥺 makes me think of “children of Men” film. This is where we are. There’s a huge global network of hard right wing ethnic nationalism utilising fear & systemic issues such as global environmental crisis & wars creating emigration & immigration, & the Overton window has shifted. It’s not good 😳

Det är mitt intryck. Men sen måste man förvänta sig betydelseglidningar över tid, så det kommer sannolikt påverka fler än vad det ser ut just nu

It’s already the case most places, certainly most of the EU. Citizenship by naturalization is more privilege than right. And I mean, more realistically, it’s the case everywhere. citizenship is bestowed by the state and the state can change its mind at any time, independent of what the law says.

yes, there is often considerable discretion in naturalisation procedures (though nowadays much less than in the past) but this ('the state can change its mind at any time') is definitely *not* the case in rule of law-based democracies like Sweden and ...

The characterization of different “tiers” is at best disingenuous. But the majority of EU countries have provisions for revoking citizenship from naturalized citizens. The Netherlands for a start.

The only way someone should be able to lose citizenship anywhere is if they themself voluntarily surrender it under no duress or coercion (such as a dual citizen relinquishing one). But even then, nah. Once a citizen, always. Even if it was granted by fraud, the remedy should not be revocation.

So much fucking cope in that thread, assuming OP's healthcare problems must be because they want a facelift at public expense or assuming they don't understand what funding a common good is because they mentioned a lot of their high taxes go to benefits they can't use