The Swedish Weekly raises a "key nationalist problem"

By Paul Westman

There is a new English-language nationalist website called The Swedish Weekly, subtitled "The latest absurdities from The Great North," published by Motgift Ltd. in Stockholm. https://www.swedishweekly.com/ 

In their "About Us" section they write:

The Swedish Weekly is a newsletter from the people behind Motgift, Swedens leading alternative media platform.

 All of the former white countries are facing the same threats of mass immigration, liberalism, feminism and the atomization of the family — but Sweden has taken on the leading role regarding these matters. Therefore we find it important to communicate the many times bizarre and almost always frightening development in the country once known for social security, ethnic homogeneity and spirit of work and ingenuity.

We don’t strive to cover all the news from Sweden, instead we cherrypick those we think might be the most interesting to an international audience. https://www.swedishweekly.com/about-us/\

There is not much content on the site right now, though it does carry the video shot by Nordic Youth (a Swedish group) that I mentioned in a May 15 J&E post, showing one of its members confronting Jan Helin, Leftist editor of the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet at his home in a white Stockholm suburb. (Where else would an anti-white member of the Establishment live?)

Interestingly, Helin and other members of the Leftist elite are able to conceal their home addresses from the public so that they appear nowhere on or off-line-- even as they harass Politically Incorrect but socially powerless whites in their own homes. This was only recently arranged; Nordic Youth obtained Helin's address before it was hidden from the public. 

The Swedish Weekly also has an hour-long audio interview with conservative James Edwards, host of the American radio program The Political Cesspool.

So, where are they coming from, politically and ideologically?
 
As noted, the site is published by Motgift, which produces the larger, eponymous Swedish-language website Motgift. https://www.motgift.nu/ (Motgift should probably be translated as "Antidote.") The website appears to have gone online late last year (August 2014). Because that website has much more material, it provides clues about what its subsidiary Swedish Weekly will be like.

Currently Motgift is attempting to develop an online Swedish-language radio show that will be broadcast two hours every day.

Several writers are ex-members of the Party of the Swedes (Svenskarnas parti). I mentioned on May 15 that Nordic Youth identifies with the antiracist Sweden Democrats (Sverigedemokraterna), which is falsely presented to the public (by the media) as pro-white, anti-immigration, etc., while in reality they are multiracialists who seek genetic and cultural "assimilation" along the lines of UKIP in the UK, Marine Le Pen's Front National in France, part-Jew Geert Wilders' fanatically Zionist Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid) in the Netherlands, etc. Nordic Youth explicitly rejected the racialist Party of the Swedes as too extreme.

My J&E post was dated May 15. Now I learn that the Party of the Swedes dissolved itself on May 10, 2015 due to lack of popular support. So that party has gone the way of the National Democrats (Nationaldemokraterna), which dissolved itself the previous year. The National Democrats were characterized as a radical breakaway faction (in 2001) from the Sweden Democrats, though they weren't all that radical. The founders of Nordic Youth are former National Democrats.

Along with mostly original material, Motgift has translated articles into Swedish from TakiMag, VDare, and at least one from TOO.
 
Dan Eriksson, the managing editor of Motgift who lives in Berlin, recently made a video asking whether Motgift had become libertarian. Evidently he, at least, has come to see certain virtues in the antistatist arguments of classical liberal thinkers. He's reassessed his former views, the Swedish paternalistic view, that the State should direct everything because people are essentially children who can't make their own decisions responsibly. He now believes that people make stupid decisions primarily because so much power is concentrated in the state. But Motgift nevertheless views this from a nationalist perspective.

This strikes me as very reasonable as long as Erkisson and Motgift don't drift away from racialism into Establishment-style anti-white libertarianism. Racialist individualism is preferable to national socialism. There's nothing inherent in the idea of freedom, or in the American Revolution, for example, that compels adoption of the view that "Freedom demands the genocide of the white race and Western Civilization, combined with racism for Jews and everybody else." That is patently absurd. It is a contemptible (and totally unprincipled and immoral) crime imposed upon the West after WWII by anti-white racists and totalitarians.

In an article entitled "The Swedish Nation State Is Dead," Eriksson maintains that Sweden, in the dictionary sense of "a geographically defined state whose population is largely the same lineage, language and culture," no longer exists, adding, "Sweden Democrats also want to dismantle the Swedish national state by ignoring the Swedish nation, and just like the other globalists do not believe that those who live in Sweden should have 'essentially the same lineage'." Thus, no party in Parliament favors preserving or restoring the Swedish nation.

A key nationalist problem was raised in the comment thread of this article. A young man asked Eriksson if he would be accepted as Swedish by Eriksson's (and by extension Motgift's) criteria because he happened to be born in Germany to a Swedish mother and a Croatian father. He loves and is proud of "his country" (Sweden), its traditions, customs, and "most importantly" the Swedish language. He speaks and writes Swedish better than most "Swedes" (which he puts in quotation marks, signifying everyone within its borders as defined by the government, no matter their race or hybridity), but also better than most "real Swedes" (not in quotation marks).

His use of such terminology shows that he has a concept in his mind of "real Swedes." Doubtless he means people of unmixed Swedish ancestry going back many generations, a criterion he objectively does not meet. Yet he identifies as Swedish: so, does he belong?

This question of who belongs biologically, is of course, one that white nationalists of all stripes refuse to deal with. They pretend the answer is obvious. After all, it would be unkind to exclude anyone! Intermarried? Hybrid children? Of mixed race or ethnicity yourself? "Don't ask, don't tell!" 

Or, if that fails: "Be inclusive!" It would be a form of intrawhite racism to exclude anybody! And that's a sin

This is wrong on many levels, but demonstrates the state of psychological and moral paralysis and intellectual confusion whites are currently wallowing in. Though not a terribly important question in the past, in the current maelstrom it is essential to explicitly specify biological, ethnic, genetic, racial, and genealogical (or, as Eriksson and his correspondent were implicitly doing, national) boundaries.