Normally, when it comes to personal freedoms, civil liberties, copyright law and the like, Sweden has historically been the progressive vanguard. And their women are statuesque and beautiful (but have self-esteem problems, I hear).
But I was saying: Sweden has an excellent record on these things in my recollection (and correct me if I’m wrong), but today they made a Bush-administration-esque move to allow warrantless monitoring of web traffic and phonecalls. The vote was incredibly close (143 v 138, 1 abstention) but the Swedish Parliament decided that yes, for once, they should follow America’s example and totally blow it.
Flag from here
Dude, Sweden is a socialist paradise, how canyou be surprised that the goverenment there is tapping phones
Explain that.
Sweden are run by what would be the Republicans in the US ffs.
Not to rant but I think Alx is a bit off about comparative politics or perhaps just has a 2 dimensional view of Republicans. Sweden is a very different (government wise) place from the US, a social democracy has very different goals than a very liberal democracy like the US. And perhaps (flamesuit on for this one) warrantless wiretapping serves some legitimate purpose that these two disparate governments face…I a not saying it is right or wrong but I believe it may be more complex of an issue than “simply blow it” may encompass.
I understand what you’re getting at, but if the government can’t do something within the law, and can’t make a just law that allows what they’re trying to do, then what they are doing is pretty much by definition unjust. I wouldn’t mind wiretaps if they were going through channels that afforded some accountability.
I have a nagging feeling that the thing about sweden girls not having high self esteem is from “In Bruges” Am I right? I just can’t put my finger on it…
I haven’t seen In Bruges… the Swedish low self esteem thing is a kind of urban legend so far as I know. The girls get disappointed that they’re not 10s, even though they’re like 9.5s.
I think I can explain what I mean at least the way I see it. To explain it though I am going to wildly exaggerate and generalize, and at times be downright nasty.
I look at the differnet social/government systems as a continuum that spans from capitalism to communism (leaving dictatorships out of this conversation).
Capitalism —> Socialism —-> Communism
As you move from capitalism to communism the amount of government intervention varies. In a true capitalist society it is all about the rights of the individual to be a free agent, to do whatever he or she feels will benifit themselves the most, survival of the fittest if you will.
On the other end of the spectrum is communism where every individual is expected to give everything they produce for the greater good of the whole.
Darwin’s natural selection is most like capitalism, through mutations and time organism try different things to one-up the other organisms, to arrive at the top of food chain. iPhones for example.
Capitalism I believe is our most natural state, requiring little interference from the state or the whole in fact no interference is best. Communism, and to a lesser extent socialism, takes us away from that more natural state and imposes rules and regulations to make us behave and care about one another. This forcing of everyone working for the good of the whole often requires a more aggressive and meddling government. Why, because people generally don’t want to cooperate. Look at the old USSR for instance, not true communism but full of rules and KGM etc.
A litle bit of every system can be found in any country, Sweden is far more socialist than we are, and that requires a bigger goverenment that gets more in your face if you don’t play nice.
Anyway wildly generalized, mainly because I thnk it take at least three beers to properly discuss.