Det är mycket intressant att läsa hur The Economist beskriver situationen i Sverige:
Rosengard was once one of the programme’s proudest achievements: a high-rise development that was close to the centre of Malmö, one of Sweden’s industrial powerhouses, but surrounded by open space. Today over 80% of its population of 24,000 are immigrants. The local shops have names such as Babylon and Lebanon. Women in hijabs and headscarves cart their shopping through the freezing rain. Men sit in cafés drinking strong coffee and keeping dry. A truck sells falafel sandwiches.
Matz Dahlberg citeras:
High immigration is threatening the principle of redistribution that is at the heart of the welfare state. Income inequalities in the Nordic countries are generally lower than elsewhere (see chart), but Matz Dahlberg, of Uppsala University, reckons that immigration is making people less willing to support redistribution.
Här kan dock noteras att Per Pettersson-Lidbom gjort invändningar (länk)
Även följande är tämligen träffande:
The biggest battle is within the Nordic mind. Is it more progressive to open the door to refugees and risk overextending the welfare state, or to close the door and leave them to languish in danger zones? Is it more enlightened to impose secular values on devout Muslims or to dilute liberal values in the name of multiculturalism? Trying to reconcile these contradictions can lead to strange results. Alarmed by reports of female genital mutilation, Nyamko Sabuni, a Swedish cabinet minister, suggested compulsory gynaecological examinations for all young girls in Sweden.