I noted in an anecdotal fashion in an earlier post how things have changed in our American schools.
http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2012/02/us-again-descends-into-third-world-mode.html
-From the above post:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"My oldest, now 21, was probably of the last generation of public school students who learned to appreciate the legacy of George Washington. This man, in giving his support to our independence movement (Unlike the one we praise today, who is honored because he won an election), risked almost certain confiscation of his considerable property and his probable execution for treason to the Crown. He then secured his honored place in history by twice walking away from quite powerful positions of authority (Once when he resigned his commission after the Treaty of Paris and the second after the conclusion of his second term as President).In doing so he truly became the American Cincinnatus, the man of the early Roman Republic who, after holding the Senate-ordered Office of Dictator and leading his people out of the crisis that necessitated his rule, resigned and returned to his small farm after a mere fifteen days of his allotted six-month tenure.
Washington certainly deserved the song that my oldest sang in school for his birthday. It was a treasure to watch the five and six year-olds sing this on the stage.
Unfortunately, I can't find the entire text.
'George Washington, George Washington,
We honor you today
George Washington, George Washington,
Father of the USA'
When my youngest, now fifteen, came home from school as a first-grader after Washington's birthday, I asked him what he learned about our first President. He replied "He owned slaves".
I did not make that up.
There it is - a man is remembered for a fault, the guilt for which can certainly be, at least in part, mitigated by the facts that he was born into a particular time period, that he is not known to have been cruel to those in bondage, and that he also freed his slaves after his death. We must also note that he did not have the legal authority to free the slaves who were the property of his wife, the amount of which were considerable."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Sweden however, our dilemma would be considered small potatoes in comparison. There, the national and cultural heritage are both denied and demonized; this in a nation with no real colonial history to provide a source for blame and zero slavery for a thousand years. Yes, I get the irony - How can something that is purported not to exist be also ridiculed and severely criticized? Well, the Left never lets logical thought dictate its actions. If they did, after all, they would no longer be Leftists.
The following are excerpts from the recent comments by Swedish politicians and academic made around Sweden's national Day. Conspicuously absent are any references either to anything that would cause ethnic Swedes to be proud of their heritage and any mention of the enormous crime problem with its ever-increasing Muslim immigrant community. Swedes can't even have one day to be proud to be Swedish.
Bolding is mine:
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2012/06/swedens-national-day-of-self-loathing.html
"In the case of Sweden, there are many past examples of a type of dislike and critique of being Swedish. The former leader of the Social Democrats, Mona Sahlin, expressed this at a conference, stating that she could ‘not think of anything resembling Swedish culture.’ And that this further ‘makes Swedes jealous of immigrants who have a culture, identity and a history which unite them.’ This, ‘whilst Swedes only have midsummer celebration and such ridiculous things.’
The current prime minister of Sweden, Fredrik Reinfeldt of the Moderate Party (‘Conservatives’ in Sweden), stated in 2006 that ‘the only feature of Swedish culture is barbarism, whilst everything else is thanks to immigration’.
On National Day the media did not make us wait for this criticism. On the early morning news, Channel 4 launched a ‘discussion’, on the topic ‘What is Swedishness? Is there such a thing?’. There were three participants in the discussion — None of whom viewed themselves as ‘ Swedish’. The TV show’s host asked whether if they felt the day meant anything special to them, resulting in their bursting into laughter. One of them, Qaizar Mahmood, said that he ‘wished it might mean something, but it really didn’t.’ Mahmood then went on to describe Swedishness as an onion, made out of different layers. One of these layers, was ‘the passivity (read cowardice) of the Swedes, which was shown during WWII,’ when Sweden did not take a stand against the Germans. [ But the Nazis enjoyed tremendous moral support from Muslims] He continued, asserting that ‘There are new layers constantly added to this onion, but if you peel these off, there is no core of Swedishness or of being a Swede.’ In other words, there is nothing to celebrate as there is nothing or no one who is Swedish in the end.
This line of thinking finds expression in every source of journalism during this day. The journalist Jan Anders Olsson called for using the National Day as a ground for fighting ‘hate-crimes’. ‘The terms ‘Swede’ and ‘Swedishness’ in principle now refer to everyone,’ he argued. Therefore, ‘the National Day serves the function to remind us that all who hold a Swedish citizenship are de facto Swedes’. Christian Fernandez and Anders Hellström, researchers at Malmö University, called for making the National Day the ‘Day of Citizenship’. They meant we need to construct and celebrate an ‘Us’ which rejects the current, narrow understanding of ‘Swedishness’. In a chronicle in one of Sweden’s major evening papers,Aftonbladet, Elisabeth Höglund criticised the use of Sweden’s national anthem. Höglund meant the song expressed imperialism and brutal colonialism [What is she talking about?] , as the song illustrates 17th century Sweden. She therefore meant that the anthem should be ‘re-written’, so that it would more correctly reflect ‘contemporary Sweden’.
This madness did not stop with journalists and academics; it also came from a more official level. I suppose The Royal Family of Sweden simply does not have much choice but to follow the political line of the establishment. For them to appear in the media celebrating being Swedish is no longer acceptable. At the National Day, parts of the Royal Family instead visited multicultural Malmö in the South of Sweden, where around 40% of the habitants are ‘non-Swedish’. In a highly covered presentation at the city’s Opera, Swedish Crown Prince Daniel welcomed the 300 so-called ‘New Swedes’ who were invited as guests. He introduced his speech stating that ‘being Swedish does not refer to skin or hair colour, nor accents’. To be Swedish, ‘is to share a place on the earth and to share a commonality and responsibility’. In the city which has recently seen an unprecedented murder-wave in Scandinavia, the Prince of course also emphasised how ‘Sweden has been enriched socially and culturally through immigration’.
In summary, the Swedish establishment, together with its branches in the media and academia, propagates a view of the country which ferociously attacks the notions of ethnic Swedes and of Swedishness. The day the population is supposed to celebrate this otherwise fantastic country, has been hijacked to serve as a political tool."
There is more in the link.
The current prime minister of Sweden, Fredrik Reinfeldt of the Moderate Party (‘Conservatives’ in Sweden), stated in 2006 that ‘the only feature of Swedish culture is barbarism, whilst everything else is thanks to immigration’.
On National Day the media did not make us wait for this criticism. On the early morning news, Channel 4 launched a ‘discussion’, on the topic ‘What is Swedishness? Is there such a thing?’. There were three participants in the discussion — None of whom viewed themselves as ‘ Swedish’. The TV show’s host asked whether if they felt the day meant anything special to them, resulting in their bursting into laughter. One of them, Qaizar Mahmood, said that he ‘wished it might mean something, but it really didn’t.’ Mahmood then went on to describe Swedishness as an onion, made out of different layers. One of these layers, was ‘the passivity (read cowardice) of the Swedes, which was shown during WWII,’ when Sweden did not take a stand against the Germans. [ But the Nazis enjoyed tremendous moral support from Muslims] He continued, asserting that ‘There are new layers constantly added to this onion, but if you peel these off, there is no core of Swedishness or of being a Swede.’ In other words, there is nothing to celebrate as there is nothing or no one who is Swedish in the end.
This line of thinking finds expression in every source of journalism during this day. The journalist Jan Anders Olsson called for using the National Day as a ground for fighting ‘hate-crimes’. ‘The terms ‘Swede’ and ‘Swedishness’ in principle now refer to everyone,’ he argued. Therefore, ‘the National Day serves the function to remind us that all who hold a Swedish citizenship are de facto Swedes’. Christian Fernandez and Anders Hellström, researchers at Malmö University, called for making the National Day the ‘Day of Citizenship’. They meant we need to construct and celebrate an ‘Us’ which rejects the current, narrow understanding of ‘Swedishness’. In a chronicle in one of Sweden’s major evening papers,Aftonbladet, Elisabeth Höglund criticised the use of Sweden’s national anthem. Höglund meant the song expressed imperialism and brutal colonialism [What is she talking about?] , as the song illustrates 17th century Sweden. She therefore meant that the anthem should be ‘re-written’, so that it would more correctly reflect ‘contemporary Sweden’.
This madness did not stop with journalists and academics; it also came from a more official level. I suppose The Royal Family of Sweden simply does not have much choice but to follow the political line of the establishment. For them to appear in the media celebrating being Swedish is no longer acceptable. At the National Day, parts of the Royal Family instead visited multicultural Malmö in the South of Sweden, where around 40% of the habitants are ‘non-Swedish’. In a highly covered presentation at the city’s Opera, Swedish Crown Prince Daniel welcomed the 300 so-called ‘New Swedes’ who were invited as guests. He introduced his speech stating that ‘being Swedish does not refer to skin or hair colour, nor accents’. To be Swedish, ‘is to share a place on the earth and to share a commonality and responsibility’. In the city which has recently seen an unprecedented murder-wave in Scandinavia, the Prince of course also emphasised how ‘Sweden has been enriched socially and culturally through immigration’.
In summary, the Swedish establishment, together with its branches in the media and academia, propagates a view of the country which ferociously attacks the notions of ethnic Swedes and of Swedishness. The day the population is supposed to celebrate this otherwise fantastic country, has been hijacked to serve as a political tool."
There is more in the link.
- Another example of Year Zero, the complete erasing of a people's past to prepare them for a new Leftist Dawn.
No comments:
Post a Comment