That parts of Swedish cities are turning into something that almost resembles Detroit is a new phenomenon with which the countries’ lax law enforcement struggles to cope. In the third-largest city, Malmö, the majority of the population has immigrant background. There the situation is, in many ways, even worse. Recently, criminal gangs have begun using grenades as weapons in the city. Middle-class families have moved away from parts of Malmö, to distance themselves from crime and violence. Even in the smaller Swedish cities there are immigrant neighborhoods in which violence and shootings have become commonplace. Often these crimes are carried out by young men who either themselves have migrated to Sweden, or are the descendants of immigrants.
In February 2016 the Australian edition of 60 Minutes sent a crew to film a segment on the European refugee crisis in a suburb of Stockholm. The Washington Times reported that the crew was protected by six police officers. When the police escort left, the crew was attacked by locals.10 These kinds of attacks are unfortunately not uncommon. Public servants, bus drivers, and journalists have numerously been targeted by gangs in immigrant neighborhoods. Sometimes police and ambulance staff have been lured by alarms and ambushed by violent gangs.
Welfare policies do not make the country immune to high rates of social exclusion and crime among immigrants.
A part of the explanation might be that Sweden has lax criminal laws and gives too little resources and power to the policy. More important, what we are seeing is a normalization of Sweden compared to the rest of the world. Foreign admirers of Nordic-style social democracy often believe that Nordic policies somehow have eliminated crime. The reality is that Nordic culture has. People who lack the unusual ethics related to individual responsibility, social cohesion, and abiding by the rules that predominated Swedish culture are more likely to turn out on the wrong side of the law. The issue is made worse by the fact that the welfare model makes it difficult for immigrants to get a job, trapping many in a welfare dependency that creates hopelessness. Of course, a question that begs answering is: if Swedish welfare policies do not make the country immune to high rates of social exclusion and crime among immigrants, why should the same policies be expected to solve the social problems of America?
Previously, Sweden had a regulated migration. During the 1990s and the early 2000s the country received around 100 immigrants a week. This is a fairly high number for a small country with a population fewer than 10 million, situated in the cold Nordics, far from the countries from which immigrants come. The brutal civil war in Syria increased migration across Europe, and a growing realization among refugees that Sweden is the most welcoming country for them on the continent combined to increase the inflow substantially. By the end of 2015, around 10,000 immigrants were coming into the country each week.
The Swedish population has shown great openness to this wave of immigrants. Many have volunteered to welcome them and help them reside in the country; many more have donated clothing and other necessities. Almost all municipalities in the country have accepted migrants. However, even meeting the basic needs of refugees soon proved a major constraint on the Swedish welfare system. A survey from late 2015 found that 40 percent of municipalities feel that immigration is putting severe pressure on social services and schools in the short term; 74 percent of municipalities believe that the pressure will also be severe in the long term.11 In southern Sweden, the refugee influx was so high that all available mattresses were reportedly sold out.12 Tents have been set up in the freezing Swedish winter to accommodate immigrants.
No one really knows how Sweden, where restrictions on building permits have created a major housing crisis, will deal with the massive immigration inflows. What is apparent is that many immigrant families are sharing the same small apartments. In some neighborhoods overcrowding seems to have reached Third World levels. Adding to all this is that Sweden has also seen immigration of thousands of beggars from Eastern Europe. In nearly all, if not all, Swedish cities, beggars are easy to spot on the streets. Since they are not given (much) welfare support, the beggars have created a number of shantytowns across the country. Shantytowns, grenades thrown in the streets, slums, and rampant gangs is hardly what you would traditionally associate with Sweden. Yet there can be little doubt that these are very real social concerns in today’s Sweden, largely as a result of the recent immigration inflows.
The majority of the immigrants are not actually coming from Syria, but from other parts of the world. Sweden accepts most children who come unaccompanied by adults. Contrary to its Nordic neighbors, which are reluctant to accept a large influx of migrants, Swedish authorities have typically accepted the age given by the migrants themselves. Therefore, many Afghan families (many of them living in Iran) have sold their belongings, or borrowed money, to send their oldest child to Sweden in hopes that once one child has been granted asylum, the rest can then follow as family migrants. This make sense, since even if nobody in the family were to find work, the welfare support provided in Sweden creates a much higher standard of living than that to which Afghan families are typically accustomed. The newly arrived are almost exclusively men, and often seem to be much older than actually claimed. As an extreme example, local media reports that a man from Afghanistan accused of raping a child was not fifteen, as he reported, but rather, as evident in his own Facebook profile, forty-five.13
On top of this, Sweden offers a special form of government benefit to children who have lost their parents. An administrative court has decided that this benefit should be given to all refugee children who claim to have lost one or both parents, if only they promise to be telling the truth. The benefit can also be given retroactively for the past two years. Thus, a refugee child who simply claims to have lost both of his parents can be given around 70,000 Swedish kronor (close to $9,000) in retroactive support and an additional 35,000 kronor (close to $4,500) each year until he turns eighteen. This may not seem like a huge sum for an American or a Swede, but it is a small fortune in a country such as Afghanistan. As knowledge of this benefit is spreading, an increasing number of refugee children are claiming it. In 2015 around ten thousand children in Sweden, including those born in the country, received government support for having lost their parents. By 2019 this is expected to have mushroomed to thirty thousand children.14
These sums are, of course, only a drop in the ocean compared to the total money spent by the Swedish welfare state, but they do illustrate the difficulty of combining extremely progressive ideals with open borders. They also show that immigrants are given huge economic incentives for claiming various government benefits. What do you think happens when a Nordic-style labor market, where high taxes and high entry-level wages make it difficult for immigrants to get a job, is combined with extremely generous benefits? Should we be surprised that many are trapped in dependency and that some even start cheating the system? Is it the immigrants that are to blame or the ill-designed system?
Much of the news relating to immigration and integration in Sweden sounds quite absurd, since the situation is rather unusual. The Swedish system is experiencing a crash from which it is trying to recover. The government that came to power in 2014, a coalition between the Social Democrats and the Environmental Party, were initially nearly paralyzed by the situation. At first, the government expressed support for open borders. In mid-2015 Social Democrat prime minister Stefan Löfven explained that there was “no limit” on the number of refugees that the country could take in.15 As frustration grew, the Social Democrats fell in the polls, and the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats surged ahead, Löfven suddenly reversed policies. Or, as a headline in the UK’s left-leaning Guardian read, “Sweden slams shut its open-door policy towards refugees.” “We simply can’t do any more,” the prime minister explained to the nation. When announcing this policy, Åsa Romson – the environment and previous ceremonial deputy prime minister of Sweden, who was one of the two leaders of the Environmental Party – burst into tears.16 The Environmentalist Party, which believ
es in free immigration, is struggling to find its way in the new political landscape that has formed following the immigration crises.17
Sweden is in a ditch because many politicians, intellectuals and journalists – on both the left and the right – have claimed that refugee immigration is a boon to the country’s economy and that large-scale immigration is the only way of sustaining the welfare state. For long, those who criticized this consensus were accused of being narrow-minded and challenge the findings of research. But of course, serious research has never shown that refugee immigrants boost the Swedish economy. The truth is quite the opposite. In May of 2016 Mats Hammarstedt, one of the leading economists in Sweden who has looked at the issue of migration, wrote a report together with Lina Aldén. The paper was published by the prestigious Swedish Fiscal Policy Council, an independent public body that scrutinizes the economic policies of the government. The findings of the report were quite harsh. After the first year of migration, the average refugee creates a net cost of 190,000 Swedish Kronors (over $23,000). As immigrants slowly find work and start contributing to the system, this net loss is reduced five years later, but still stands at the substantial rate of 120,000 Swedish Kronors per year (over $14,500). If there was ever any doubt, there can be none now: refugee immigration to the generous Nordic welfare state creates substantial costs.
I am sure that Sweden will dig itself out of this recent crisis, at least partially. Some challenges, such as crime and poverty in marginalized neighborhoods, are harder to meet. It comes as no surprise that Sweden has moved toward a much higher degree of economic inequality following the influx of immigrants. Sadly, I would wager that this will continue, as many immigrants are simply struggling to find a job, a house, and a meaningful place in society. Perhaps worst of all is the future of children of immigrant origin. Sure, there are those – like my brother and me – who succeed although growing up in immigrant neighborhoods with welfare support. After all, the Swedish welfare state generously funded our education up to doctorate level. However, Sweden’s school system has gradually moved from a conservative system, where teachers held power, to a very progressive system where students’ liberty is valued highly and teacher authority is frowned upon. This has coincided with a rapid fall in school performance. The PISA global survey has shown that Swedish students’ performance went from being close to the average of developed countries in 2000 to significantly below the average in 2012. No other country has experienced such a steep fall. For example, while 13 percent of students in 2000 were low performers in reading, the share had risen to 23 percent in 2012.18
Researcher Gabriel Heller Sahlgren has shown that a higher share of immigrant students has contributed to the fall, since many come from families where the parents have little education themselves.19 However, this is only part of the explanation. Most likely the shift toward progressive teaching methods has led to a gradual fall, which has been ongoing for decades.20
The Swedish School Inspectorate has written about the situation of the numerous failing schools where many students of immigrant origin are studying. Its conclusions are quite sad, and clearly show how the lack of teacher authority is destroying the future prospects of many pupils by taking away their chance of getting a good education. A report about Ross Tensta gymnasium, situated in an immigrant neighborhood in Stockholm, reads:
Very severe flaws exist when it comes to safety and a calm study environment. The teachers describe many lessons as chaotic, which the class inspectors of the of the School Inspection can confirm. The School Inspection has observed classes where it is nearly impossible to follow and understand the content of what the teacher is going through. The reason is the inability of the school to deal with students’ lack of respect for their teacher and respect for their own and their classmates’ learning. Teachers often wind up in conflict with students when they tell students to behave, which leads to a situation where some teachers have given up the ambition to create a calm study environment. Teachers describe situations where teachers can be threatened by students when the latter are told to behave, which leads to teachers in some situations not telling students to stop with negative behavior. This has also led to students being offended by other students without teachers intervening.21
School systems without teacher authority where students can harass one another and disturb classes with impunity, where those who wish to study cannot follow the teacher due to a chaotic situation, and where teachers are even afraid of students – haven’t we heard this before? Isn’t this almost exactly the situation that many public schools in marginalized American neighborhoods, where many children come from marginalized minorities, struggle with? In fact, much of the challenges facing Sweden after the influx of large numbers of immigrants are very much like the situations in such American neighborhoods. As in America, the situation can certainly be turned to the better – by preventing and combating crime, boosting job growth, and turning failing schools around. But the challenges are great. When we take the unique Nordic culture of success out of the equation, by looking at the prospects of immigrant communities, suddenly the Swedish system doesn’t seem to be able to solve all social problems. Perhaps this tells us something about the limit of policy, and about the importance of culture for social success?
It remains to be seen if the positive parts of Swedish culture, such as emphasis on individual responsibility, strong social cohesion, and high levels of trust, can be transmitted to the wide immigrant community. I myself believe this to be quite possible with time, at least if the school system, the job market, and crime prevention are all improved. After all, most newcomers to Sweden have a desire to succeed and a genuine interest in the positive parts of Swedish culture (as opposed to the less positive parts, such as the norm of not befriending your neighbors). But it will take time: the Swedish welfare state does not magically transmit social success to all who enter Sweden, Rather, as shown in detail in chapter 9, it is in many ways restricting upward social mobility as compared to the American system. Admirers of Nordic-style social democracy should take a closer look at Sweden’s immigration crisis. Only then will they understand that there is a limit on the abilities of social democracy, even in the Nordics, to create social good.
11
WHERE ARE NORDIC SOCIETIES HEADING?
WHERE ARE THE POLICIES IN Nordic societies heading? Certainly, Sweden is engulfed by the immigration crisis we read about in the last chapter. The previously dominant view, that free immigration could be combined with a generous welfare state, is out the window. Swedes might seem a bit strange to Americans, since their society is based on the idea that a consensus should be reached on important social issues. This explains why the only socially acceptable view a few years ago was that borders ought to be open, and why most of the political elite has overnight shifted to the view that immigration should be limited. But of course, the challenge of integrating those immigrants who have already come to Sweden remains. Not only many of the recently arrived immigrants, but also many of the children of immigrants born and raised in Sweden, are struggling to find work and housing. The realization is growing that the Swedish model needs to be changed to allow for greater upward mobility. One big topic is how regulations can be simplified so that more houses can be built. Another is how the entry-level wages can be lowered so that more immigrants can get a job. It is broadly accepted today that the generosity of the welfare system needs to be reduced so that fewer people are trapped in welfare dependency.
A few years ago, admirers of Nordic-style social democracy would often use Sweden as their prime role model. Today, those like Bernie Sanders are increasingly talking about Denmark. The obvious reason is that Sweden has changed. The workfare policies, where taxes and welfare benefits were both reduced, have benefited economic development in Sweden, but also made the country less of a leftist ideal society. The influx of immigrants has led to significant increase in income inequality, poverty, and various other social challenges. Suddenly, the image of an
ideal social democratic society is difficult to apply to Sweden. No surprise, then, that Sanders and others on the left are increasingly pointing to Denmark, where taxes and benefits have not been reformed to the same extent as in Sweden, and where governments on both the right and left have favored limited immigration. But change is happening in Denmark too. As we explored previously in this book, even the social democrats in the country openly challenge the idea of an overly generous welfare system.
“Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.” – DANISH PRIME MINISTER LARS LØKKE RASMUSSEN
After seeing his country held up as an example in the American presidential debate, the current Danish prime minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, objected to the skewed image of socialism in his country. In a speech given at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government in late 2015, he told students that he had “absolutely no wish to interfere [with] the presidential debate in the US,” but wanted to point out a simple fact: “I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.”1 The remark comes as no surprise. While liberal ideologues in the United States believe that democratic socialism is a flattering label, in the Nordics many object to this. Even the social democrats in the region are distancing themselves from socialist ideas, often pointing out that they, too, embrace the market.
Debunking Utopia Page 14