This follows a couple of weeks of truly bizarre debate surrounding some "very controversial" new police measures against illegal immigration. The "controversy" involved the police placing men in the subway station and other strategic places performing id-checks. This might not sound like much, but you have to understand that they were not picking people totally at random, but in fact "racially profiling" for people that didn't look like white oppressors! 
The result? 1 out of 10 (!!!) of the subjects they had the chance to control out of the enormous amount of muds roaming around in nord-land checked turned out to be illegal. 1 out of 10! And this with a policy that is by far the most generous per capita at granting citizenship in the whole of muddled Europe. If this is to be seen as representative of the situation at large, it would indicate that the number of illegal immigrants now residing on Swedish land is potentially far bigger than what was previously thought, possibly ranging in the hundreds of thousands (rather than tens of thousands usually estimated).
You would think that the fact that they, on average, only had to spend a measly half hour or so to locate a criminal invader (calculating on ~3 min per check), would redeem and validate this for once laudable, remarkably effective, police-initiative and silence the screechers, but no. The Swedish media-trust, the jew owned and the state owned in unison, have instead insisted on framing this as an "outrage" - an unacceptable racist screening attack against the 9/10 that was innocently picked out! - with full force, with the twittering leftist nomenclatura not far behind, now resulting in the police apologetically stepping down and for the moment disengaging the controls.
Anyway, with this in mind, with their feelers constantly out to make sure that the nation-wrecking steps is taken at the right pace so as not to frighten and possibly aggrevate the herd, the leading Bonniers newspaper, DN, and chief editor Peter Wolodarski, now ships out this incredible piece. It looks like he might have grossly underestimated the public this time though, because even usually very pussyfooted conservatives have reacted strongly with amazement and uncommon, actual anger at its brazen nationwrecking implications.
Maybe they're now heating the water too fast, and the Swedish frog will realize what is afoot and jump before it's to late? One can always hope.
Who can vote in the shadow society?
In Sweden, as in many other Western countries live large groups of people without voice and influence.
Seldom have so many been so aware of the thousands of people who live in our geographic proximity but in terms of security and prospects belong to a completely different dimension. They are undocumented, they are hidden, they are illegal immigrants, people who do not have permission to reside here but you do it anyway. DN's Niklas Orrenius paints a strong picture of their reality in today's Journal.
The attention recently has been directed at government sectors rejections has stirred up emotions.
Many feel disgust at the idea of how the police lurking outside schools or awakens sleeping families at night to take them to the airport. The longer people have been here, the more they have taken root, the more ties they have to the community, the more remarkable seems the sharp dividing line between the citizens and the others.
One does not advocate free immigration to perceive how the democratic ideals of the rule of Burr against the situation of undocumented immigrants find themselves in. This is because there is an inherent tension between the democratic state, on the other hand, regulated immigration. For since the state can not completely prevent people from getting into or reside within the country's borders without permission will there always be a group without civil and democratic rights.
Refugee Amnesty, suggest some. In some specific situations, it may be the only reasonable and humane. But there is a kind of last resort, a cleaning function in a broken system.
Another way to manage the dissonance is to approach the problem from a theoretical point of democracy. In a recently published scientific article argues political scientist Louis Beckman about the possibility of including people without a residence permit in the democratic system. Should undocumented are given the right to vote? The idea may seem absurd, but does not lack logic.
Democracy can be described as a system where those who are affected by laws and decisions have an influence on the emergence of the same laws and decisions. Even people who are avoiding all kinds of authorities, who did not commit any crime and therefore not busted by the police, have to relate to a variety of laws and regulations. Even undocumented affected by political decisions such as consumption taxes, access to health and education and other public services, funding for law enforcement, housing - yes, a lot of things that shape everyday life for everyone living in the country.
It might not citizenship - and away Change as a gift to the nation - that give the right to democratic participation. Perhaps it is rather the legal relationship that inevitably drawn between a person and the political system that she currently is subject. [color="Blue"]This sentence neatly sums up the jewish position on statehood, nationality and citizenship. For the cosmopolitan, tightly knitted, highly ethnocentric jews that are working towards breaking down all nation states and eventually form a world without borders where they can move to and fro seemlessly; inhibited by rootless, mulatto, idiotic goyish slave cattle - except of course for the jewish state Israel - a "country" is only a strip of goy-land that he's currently residing on and which laws and democratic child-play he's currently "subjected" to. Nothing more.
An implementation would likely associated with insurmountable practical as well as principled obstacles. Nevertheless, it illustrates the reasoning fundamentally wrong in the view of undocumented migrants also right resolve.