Followers of Jesus would never do such a thing
Norway bow-and-arrow attacker who krilled 5 was a Meslem
-
assuming for the sake of argument that most people are anti-immigrant (dubious), anti-immigration is not by definition right-wing. labor activists and politicians of various shapes have long history of wanting to limit immigration to protect jobs and wages and social security. About 15 years ago before the 12 country expansion of the EU, the social democratic swedish prime minister argued that sweden, like a few other EU countries, should have immigration restrictions for citizens from new members countries. Otherwise sweden would be flooded by ”social tourists” reaping social benefits.
Most people in Europe are anti-immigrant, according to polls: https://twitter.com/pewresearch/status/1110095736836898816
By current standards, the immigration views of the social-democratic PM of Sweden in the 1980s would be right-wing. It is no secret that the old views of social-democrats are now considered right-wing or even far-right because these parties moved very far to the left on ethnicity. One of the biggest anti-immigrant figures in Germany is an ex-SPD guy (Thilo Sarrazin). In the past, Democrats were about as anti-immigrant as Republicans: https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/samuels-immigration-0325-2.png
Being motivated by anti-immigrant sentiment when committing a terrorist act would clearly qualify you as a right-wing terrorist. Why then would such sentiment in the absence of a terrorist act not qualify you as right-wing non-terrorist? BTW, a lot of such people don't vote at all.Meaningless data display. No immigrants and fewer immigrants are qualitatively different.
Who has said anything about Swedish PM in 1980s?
old views of social democrats are right wing now but was not so in the past, because...? That just reinforces the point that anti-immigration is not a clearly demarked left-right issue now or in the past. Is Bernie Sanders or has he ever been a member of the commu...been anti-immigrant? If no, go to the left; if yes, go to the right. So, Bernie Sanders at least used to be a right-winger.
"Why then would such sentiment in the absence of a terrorist act not qualify you as right-wing non-terrorist". Because it is not a clearly demarked right-left issue! That statement assumes that, an assumption which has been shown is invalid.Democrats has never been a labor party in any meaningful sense, even less so compared to Europe. That one person is an ex-something proves nothing.
What does voting have to do with anything?
-
Meaningless data display. No immigrants and fewer immigrants are qualitatively different.
Who has said anything about Swedish PM in 1980s?
old views of social democrats are right wing now but was not so in the past, because...? That just reinforces the point that anti-immigration is not a clearly demarked left-right issue now or in the past. Is Bernie Sanders or has he ever been a member of the commu...been anti-immigrant? If no, go to the left; if yes, go to the right. So, Bernie Sanders at least used to be a right-winger.Right-wingers don't necessarily want zero immigration. For instance, they may want some white immigration. In addition, in practice, there isn't much of a difference. About 40% French want zero immigration: https://blazetrends.com/poll-4-out-of-10-french-people-in-favor-of-zero-immigration/
I thought you meant 15 years before the admission of new EU members (15 years before 2004). Upon re-reading the sentence, perhaps you meant the Swedish PM in 2004. Regardless of that, this is old formation SD. Sorry to bring Piketty in, but he discusses it well enough and in an accessible fashion (while Kitschelt and such wander).
Immigration is a defining issue on the social left-right axis, like economic intervention is on the economic left-right axis. It is the reason why we have 'the far right'. You can have a far-right movement that is economically far-left.
In the past, left-wing parties were often against LGBTQ or women's rights. In South Africa, the first Communist uprising was to boost white workers rights over those of blacks. However, nowadays being against these will make you be classified as firmly right-wing, provided that you are white.
"Why then would such sentiment in the absence of a terrorist act not qualify you as right-wing non-terrorist". Because it is not a clearly demarked right-left issue! That statement assumes that, an assumption which has been shown is invalid.
Democrats has never been a labor party in any meaningful sense, even less so compared to Europe. That one person is an ex-something proves nothing.
What does voting have to do with anything?If anti-immigration sentiment is not right-wing, then why should terrorism inspired by anti-immigration sentiment be labelled right-wing? This comprises the bulk of 'right-wing terrorism'. If you exclude it, there isn't much left of it.
Democrats nowadays are a centre-left to far-left party. They are about centrist economically with a lot of variance, quite left-wing socially with less variance.
On account of what are parties like National Front, BNP, Jobbik, and others labelled far-right, if not on account of their ethnic nationalism and anti-immigrant sentiment? They are pretty left-wing economically.
