Many readers of this blog will be aware of the existence of the independent journalist Peter Sweden. However, for those who don’t know him, his recent work, that which I’ve seen, fairly and honestly speaks of the problems that have been brought to the Nordic countries, especially to Sweden, by many of the Islamic migrants that the Swedish government has allowed to settle there.
Peter Sweden is becoming more well known for some of his videos and he has also recently attracted the attention of Britain’s ever more zealous and intrusive ‘hate crime’ police. It’s pretty obvious to me from viewing the Peter Sweden video about police harassment that the censorious state wants to stop this man from speaking. Unfortunately, as I’ve also discovered from doing a little research on him, I find that Peter Sweden does have a somewhat challenging recent political past which includes Holocaust denial. This puts me in the somewhat difficult position of having defend the right to free speech of a person who has held views with which I completely and utterly disagree.
I cannot under any circumstances defend many of the troublesome things that Peter Sweden is alleged to have said in the past (you can find them if you search), but I should, if I’m to be morally consistent, defend his right to speak his opinions, without fear of arrest or of police harassment, even if I find his opinions distasteful, lunatic, counter-factual or offensive (pick one and it will probably apply in this case).
But, being distasteful or spouting tin foil hattery or offensive bollocks should not warrant police or criminal action. What I’ve seen of his current work, which is not all of what he’s produced recently, he appears to act as somewhat of a counter blast to the narrative put out by the Swedish press and government, that everything is rosy in Sweden’s multicultural garden, which is not the case. Sweden along with other Nordic and European countries are suffering from the Muslim migrant invasion. Of the recent stuff from Peter Sweden that I’ve come across, which is mostly reportage, I have not picked up anything that I could consider troublesome, although I have not reviewed this man’s entire output. But, we have to be aware that Peter Sweden does hold and has held views in the recent past that would make me nervous in future about using his material without some form of disclaimer if that is I used it at all.
Peter Sweden is a man of Swedish extraction although one with a British passport, he has family that resides in the United Kingdom, including parents and siblings. There is some controversy about the correct story concerning when and why the family came to the UK, although that is not relevant to this particular article. What is relevant is the fact that no matter how objectionable you or I may find another person’s views or opinions, they should be free to speak them without fear of being arrested for having the ‘wrong’ opinion. I truly believe that the best way to deal with those with individuals who espouse such views, views that for many people are beyond the pale, is to debate with such people and convince them of their errors. Failing that, open debate with those who hold troubling, or politically extreme points of view, helps to hand the person with the extreme views enough rope to hang themselves. Debating those with troubling views also helps to expose to the public gaze those who hold them; sensible and logical people will see plainly that there is no evidence to support whatever lunacy is being promoted by the extremist, whether that be Holocaust denial, Flat Earth theories or the political extremes of Left and Right. Censorship by the State is not the answer to bad speech, the answer to bad speech is always more free speech.
Recently, while Peter Sweden was working away from the UK, his family had a series of visits from a police ‘hate crime’ unit. Although Peter Sweden tells the whole story in the video below, the activities of this police hate crime unit deserve to be especially highlighted. These activities are sinister and the sort of things that we used to see in East Germany, but which we should not be seeing in today’s UK. Going after journalists and the families of journalists is the sort of stuff that totalitarian regimes do, not mature democratic constitutional monarchies such as the UK. To tell part of the tale, first of all Mr Sweden’s family was visited by a ‘hate crime’ officer who spun the family a tale that Peter Sweden and the rest of the family were ‘at risk’. These officers, according to Peter Sweden, went out of their way to state that the family and Peter Sweden were in some sort of danger. However it seems the tone and direction of the police questioning, over a total of three visits to the home of Peter Sweden’s family, quite quickly changed to questions regarding Peter Sweden’s whereabouts. Peter Sweden speculates, and I tend to agree with him, that the idea that the ‘hate crime police’ were there to protect Peter Sweden and his family was merely a pretence on the part of the police. The primary aim of these visits really do seem to have been to harass the Sweden family into coughing up Peter Sweden’s location.
As Peter Sweden said ominously at one point in the video ‘If I had been in the UK I would probably be in a police cell now’. I have to say that I agree with him on this.
Now it would be unwise to continue with this piece without addressing some of the criticisms levelled by Hope Not Hate (HnH) and by others at Peter Sweden. I’d also like to take into consideration the views of the blogger Concrete Milkshake, who has produced an excellent piece on the Peter Sweden story.
Without a doubt, Peter Sweden does seem to have had some past and maybe even some present views on race, Jews and women with which I vehemently disagree and which I find personally disgusting. He also has a record for Holocaust denial, which although not illegal in Britain, is plainly an extremely fraggly view to hold and one which needs to be called out and challenged.
However, in his defence, Peter Sweden has claimed that he has disavowed some of his previous views and I have not caught sight of any element of such views in his more recent video reports that I’ve viewed on the migrant crisis or on his coverage of recent patriot demonstrations. To be quite frank, I think that the counterjihad movement needs the ‘Zionist plot’ and conspiracy theory nutters like it needs a hole in the head. Sadly, in the all too recent past Peter Sweden has been one of those ‘Zionist plot’ and tin foil hat conspiracy theory types, that damage the movement and give the Left and various Islamic grievance mongers ammunition.
The existence and toleration of ‘Zionist plot’ Jew hating types and tin foil hatters by those opposed to the ideology of Islam, can all too easily become spears that they, the Left etc, can hurl at those who are opposed to Islam as an ideology. This political spear chucking is in spite of there being many of us in the counterjihad field who can plainly see the problem is far less to do with race or a problem coming from individual blameless Muslims, but it is more to do with the way that Islam as a system oppresses both Muslim and non-Muslim alike.
Also, which is something that should concern us all, as Islam is a violent ideology, it also has a striking propensity to create violent people, who are a threat to all peoples, no matter what our skin colour or religion. As Concrete Milkshake says so rightly, Islam is primarily a threat to ordinary Muslims, especially women, along with Islamic and non-Islamic religious minorities in the lands where Islam rules. Concrete Milkshake also says that it is difficult to refute accusations of groundless bigotry if people holding views like Peter Sweden has held are not called out. Concrete Milkshake is correct on these points. I believe that we should criticise any of Peter Sweden’s previous or current views whilst at the same time defending his right to speak his views. Nobody, not even neo-Nazi fraggles or their equally fraggly counterparts on the Left should, unless they are genuinely and credibly calling for a specific act of violence to be committed on a particular target, have to fear arrest for mere words. In a free society, any citizen should be able to live without worrying about UK police harassing their family or seeking to arrest them for an alleged and probably dubious,’hate crime’.
As a former Left winger myself, who has gone from Leftist internationalist to Centre Right patriot, I understand the compelling necessity for the disavowal of previously held views and the abandonment of strongly held opinions when confronted with contrary evidence. Eventually, in my case, I saw enough evidence that socialism is a crock of shit, that identity politics doesn’t bring about togetherness or create a sense of community and that multiculturalism is an abject failure. I look back at my Leftism with a distinct cringe. Maybe, hopefully, Peter Sweden cringes at his past views on some issues, as I do at my previous socialist ones? I was once a know-nothing leftie twat mouthing empty slogans and regurgitating the approved opinions of the collective, opinions passing through the ears and straight out of the mouth without touching the brain.
Because of that past left-wingery and my current disgust at the Left and all its works, I’m in no strong moral position to judge someone too harshly for their previous dodgy opinions and I accept that people’s views can change over time. But, it must be stated most clearly, I never went as far towards complete moonbattery as Peter Sweden appears to have done. I was never part of the ‘Bombs Not Jobs’ ‘brew crew’ nor did I, as Peter Sweden has done in the past, promote dishonest and counter-factual ideas like Holocaust denial.
As an aside, there is a lesson to be gained from this case and that is what goes into the digital world, stays in the digital world and can be dredged up later by those with whom you may have disagreed. Peter Sweden has found out that the internet has a very long memory, especially for stupidity and disgrace.
Although I made a political journey myself away from left wing knobwittery I did it over a longer timespan and one which is much further in the past than last year, as is the case with Peter Sweden’s far right knobwittery. It is because there is so short amount of time between Peter Sweden talking bollocks and his alleged change of heart, that I don’t think I can wholly trust Peter Sweden’s output. He needs to prove to me that he’s had a genuine change of heart about certain issues before I can look at his work without some sense of caution and suspicion.
On the subject of how Hope Not Hate put together their expose of some of Peter Sweden’s views, then it needs to be said that much of the information obtained about Peter Sweden’s background that made up the hit piece on him published by Hope Not Hate, appears to have been found by doxing. Therefore because this information was obtained by this method which is one I feel uncomfortable about, I will not post a direct link to that page. But, for a more nuanced and intelligent view of the Peter Sweden extremism allegations, I would urge people to read Concrete Milkshake’s article on Peter Sweden. Their piece, about extremists that need to be called out and who are hiding into plain sight, is a good one and can be found here.
But, whatever Peter Sweden’s past or current views, whether you agree with them or not, or if you think he’s a wanker or not, provided that he is not directly and credibly promoting a specific act of violence, then the police should be nowhere near either Peter Sweden or his family. I strongly oppose, as would many other reasonable people, many of the views ascribed to Peter Sweden in the Hope Not Hate report and elsewhere, but neither he nor his family nor anybody else for that matter, should be harassed by the police for holding these views.
The way to treat views that are distasteful, lacking in evidential foundation or even offensive is to argue against such opinions with counter-evidence of your own. I must admit that I was disappointed to find out, not just from HnH but from other published sources, that the Peter Sweden who has recently put forward a reasonable face to the world, is or has been, just as much of a Jew hating arsehole as some of Britain’s more fundamentalist Islamic preachers out there. But despite that, his right to speak freely without fear of arrest should be defended.
It’s come to something that I, a non Orthodox Jew find myself having to defend the rights of a person whose worryingly recent spoutings I can only describe as being beyond the pale. But, if I don’t defend the rights of those with whom I disagree or whose views disgust me, then who will defend my rights in the future? Today the uniformed censors of the state, in the form of ‘hate crime’ police, are targeting Peter Sweden, but tomorrow it could be anyone who says anything negative about Islam, race, religion, sexuality gender status, or whatever else is considered a ‘hate crime’ priority for those who stand upon the shifting moral sands that the temples of the progressives and the Left are built upon? The target of these censorious authoritarians tomorrow could be you or even a member of your family and could even for saying something that many people would consider innocuous.
Because of the danger posed to all of us by this sort of censorship, this is a frightening unfree future that needs to be resisted. Freedom is better than slavery, even if freedom allows the most despicable a voice to spout their obscenities.
Links
Peter Sweden Video detailing the police harassment that his family in the UK have been getting by the ‘hate speech’ goons working for British police
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxE2D3ysdYg
The great piece by Concrete Milkshake about the Peter Sweden case and how we must be aware of those who would exploit the counterjihad cause
