Template talk:Swedish far-right

Split

This template should be split in two, because of the fundamental differences in ideology of the people and movements listed.

For instance, the overtly neo-Nazi People's Front is what you could call an extremist party of the far right, while the national conservative Sweden Democrats stand for nationalism and democracy. The ideology of the Sweden Democrats isn't even remotely close to what one would call fascist.

83.250.141.98 (talk) 06:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree, it looks a bit like trying some sort of "guilt by association" by combining clearly Nazi and Fascist movements/people and current/recent parties of a more nationalist-populist type. That looks like POV to me. And if it's about "nationalism" where is the 19th century? Not that the nationalism of that era should be bundled with Nazism, but anyway. Tomas e (talk) 03:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

There are many other templates of this kind, and all of them seems to have this structure. Why should the swedish far right have a two templates when other countries far right dont have that? There is not a big difference between Brittish National Party and Swedish Democrats. Both are far right parties, both are called nazis by some and national democrats by some.--Pjaha (talk) 23:20, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I think too that this template could be split in two : Template:Swedish nationalism and fascism / Template:Swedish national populism Jeromemoreno

According to this discussion, I created a new template Template:Swedish national populism where I put Sweden Democrats, Sweden Democratic Youth for active groups and Jimmie Åkesson, Mikael Jansson for people. So I removed these four items (Sweden Democrats, Swedish democratic youth, Jimme Åkesson, Mikael Jansson) from this category Template:Swedish nationalism and fascism which should be more coherent from now. Jeromemoreno

I have the same meaning, that "it looks a bit like trying some sort of "guilt by association" by combining clearly Nazi and Fascist movements/people and current/recent parties of a more nationalist-populist type." I have tried to remove SD and Jimmie Åkesson but gets reverted with the argument "Bad faith edit. Nationalism & Fascism still includes Fascism. If we had an infobox called Socialism & Communism, we'd still include the SocDems"[1]. I think this template should be either split og deleted. Christian75 (talk) 15:25, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

The Sweden Democrats are an integral part of the "nationalist and fascist" scene in Sweden. They evolved from Bevara Sverige Svenskt and the Sweden Party. The National Democrats were a split from them. Their members and political representatives are constantly found to hold far-right positions, and often associate with the Neo-Nazi movement. With the exception of Grästorp, the only Neo-Nazis to ever have been elected in Sweden have all been elected on Sweden Democratic tickets. Their ideology is firmly rooted in nationalism. Etc. etc. The Sweden Democrats fit perfectly into this template, and the only issue here is your attempts to whitewash them. Cease your bad faith edits. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Stamboliyski (talk) 15:31, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Hear hear. Leaving the out of this template is silly. There's no way to argue that they aren't at least nationalist. Keresaspa (talk) 00:03, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Good that you mention soapboxing, because this template is exactly that. While all fascists are nationalists, not all nationalists are fascist and this template inappropriately constructs that kind of grouping, influenced by a fringe point-of-view. Similarly, a template about "Socialism and Stalinism in Sweden" would be inappropriate. Also, this template does not include any other non-fascist Swedish nationalists than the Swedish Democrats, so apparently the only motive for that grouping is to include SD in it. Indeed, Rydgren 2006 mentions that Sweden Democrats' have roots in Swedish fascism, but Bevara Sverige Svenskt is separately listed here (those roots) so why SD (that itself is not considered fascist) needs to be here? --Pudeo' 18:52, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

I've changed the title of this template just to "Swedish fascism" because it did not include other non-fascist nationalists than the SD and nationalism and fascism are separate ideologies. Feel free to start a template about Swedish nationalism. --Pudeo' 19:01, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Dannis243 reverted my change because "there is no consensus and the move is also pov". Yes, indeed the terribly fringe point-of-view behind the move was that fascism and nationalism are separate ideologies. I'm fairly certain that a RfC would support separate templates because there is no literature presented that thinks of Swedish nationalism and Swedish fascism as the same phenomenon (modern Swedish nationalism existed since the 19th Century). It is also a WP:BLP violation to add living persons like Jimmie Åkesson to a fascism template without a heavy-weight source that classifies him as such. --Pudeo' 18:02, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Modern Swedish nationalism has its roots firmly in the rich soil of Nazism, unlike for example contemporary SD-like groups in Denmark and Norway. Dannis243 was indeed correct. Jimmie Åkesson was the leader of the largest Nazi-rooted party in Sweden. He therefore automatically qualifies for this template. Stop pushing your POV, especially when there is no consensus. Had I seen your edit on the 24th, I would have done the same. Stamboliyski (talk) 21:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Why this template does not have any non-fascist nationalists as per the name then? If Jimmie Åkesson is a neo-Nazi or a fascist, a very solid source is needed per WP:BLP, not just talkpage opinions. Before this, I was not aware considering nationalism and fascism different thoughts is a "POV". --Pudeo' 22:43, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I created a template for the UK, "Far-right politics in the United Kingdom". I think a similar name would be better, because "far right" includes not just fascism, but successor groups that may have long distanced themselves from historical fascism. The founders of the Sweden Democrats for example had experience in neo-fascist groups and recruited former members to the new party and co-operated with other far right groups abroad. While that may not be sufficient to call them neo-fascists, it does make sense that some readers may wish to navigate to articles about other groups that were.

Also, nationalism is not necessarily fascist or far right, for example in Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, Canada, Quebec and many developing nations. But if there are no nationalist groups in Sweden that are not also far right, it might not be necessary to have a navigation template for it.

TFD (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I think re-titling to "Far-right in Sweden" could be a good compromise. That avoids unnecessary synthesis, and far-right must be the most common subject term for the post-1945 movements in any case. That's also a more fitting term, because as previously explained, this article completely lacks non-extreme nationalism like mainstream Swedish late 19th Century and early 20th Century nationalism (after all, the union between Sweden and Norway was abolished due to nationalism in 1905!). --Pudeo' 00:15, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I created this template back in 2007 (FYI TFD the UK template was my creation too, but never mind) and did so under the title "Swedish far right". However it was moved a few months later by User:Slarre to Swedish nationalism due to "NPOV". "Far right" was definitely my preference, hence why I chose that name when I created it (and the current name with the double "Template:" is horrible) but even with consensus for a far-right based name I know it will be moved again in the future by somebody who objects. For what it's worth I would go with User:Pudeo's proposal but fully expect it to be unilaterally overturned if it is implemented. To be honest this template has been nothing but a headache since I created it. Keresaspa (talk) 02:43, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, my memory was poor - I created the category. The term "far right" is widely used and the most common term for these groups.[2] Unfortunately, unlike liberals, socialists, and other ideological families, they do not have a term that they call themselves, so social scientists invented one for them. The alternative is to call them, "Swedish groups that are normally considered to be on the right end of the political spectrum, and are distinguished by fervent nationalism, opposition to non-Nordic immigration, and have historical origins in inter-war fascism and ties with similar groups outside Sweden. TFD (talk) 02:51, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I changed the title to "Far-right politics in Sweden" per the discussion above. As noted by Keresaspa, this template was originally about the far-right, so it is a return to that as well. --Pudeo' 22:08, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Regarding libel on Wikipedia

I request the cessation of the unverified use of my name Ulf Sandmark on the list of "Nationalism or fascism in Sweden" in the template Template:Swedish nationalism and fascism It is reference from Philip Rees, Biographical Dictionary of the Extreme Right Since 1890, which means that my name appears at the bottom of most the 29 pages of the worst fascist organizations and leaders in Swedish history, like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_People%27s_Party_of_Sweden, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Aryan_Resistance_%28Sweden%29, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Reich_Party, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birger_Furug%C3%A5rd, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sven_Olov_Lindholm,etc. etc.

First of all it is not a truthful reporting, as I have been fighting politically against fascism all my life. Because of that it is the worst libel that can be invented about me. For all the people who know anything about me, and the movements I have worked with, it brings distrust over the whole Wikipedia project.

There is is no documentation whatsoever supporting this outrageous libel. The original reference, Philip Rees, Biographical Dictionary of the Extreme Right Since 1890, has not my name on his list of fascists on the link. It is simply added on the reference to Philip Rees which appears on most of the 29 home pages of the Swedish fascists on the template.

My name appears on the "post-1945" list together with three other persons. They are Jackie Arklöv, Hampus Hellekant and Klas Lund. These three persons have personal pages listing the neonazi organizations they have worked with. Furthermore, all three are convicted murderers sentenced to long imprisonments. These three persons' murderous activities have represented some of the worst crimes neonazi organizations have perpetrated in Swedish history. In connection with my name, the only reference is a link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulf_Sandmark) to a libelous page about the "European Workers Party" (which allegedly describes the European Labor Party - EAP). Even this page has only one reference to fascism. A government report is cited, saying that "it became increasingly common in the media to characterize the party as 'fascist' or 'right-wing extremist' ". However, such a reference means that this government report has found no proof of such a characterization and can only report about such media statements. The quote also falsely claims that the EAP has an "anti-Semitic jargon", but even this libelous statement is far from claiming that I or the EAP have made any fascist or anti-Semitic statements .

The allegations, on the page of "European Workers Party", that I or the EAP should have gone underground after the unfortunate and tragic murder of Olof Palme, is also a libelous insinuation of complicity or criminal behavior, as I have continued non stop open political organizing from 1969 until today. I have participated in all national parliamentary elections from 1976 until today, regularly participating in very public street organizing in Sweden also directly after the murder of Palme and further on. The party has continuously since 1975 maintained one or more offices in Stockholm. I have never gone underground but maintained a position as a public political person.

This libel of me will go down in history as one of the most outrageous libels in Swedish political history and has already stained the reputation of Wikipedia. [3]

This "debate" is best done on the main page. Norvegia suecica (talk) 20:24, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Ulf Sandmark is not a notable person and should not be included in this template. EAP is notable. --OpenFuture (talk) 19:42, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Continued summary

@Lommaren:, while I fully understand your point, to add a division between elected far-right people and parties and non-elected such will drastically mess with the pre-/post-1945 timeline used in the template. As for SD being far-right, we developed consensus - as you can see two sections up - on this matter in 2014.. Stamboliyski (talk) 10:03, 5 August 2015 (UTC)