The Instigator
ChristianC
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
RationalMadman
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The steady growth of the Swedish Democratic party - Indicative of a growing displeasure with society

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/16/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 594 times Debate No: 28283
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

ChristianC

Pro

In recent polls, it is becoming steadily apparent that the xenophobic party "Sverigedemokraterna", henceforth referred to as SD, are here to stay.

In the election of 2010, they won a seat in the Riksdag, the Swedish Parliament to the surprise of many. The party strives for conservative immigration laws and have become an umbrella party for many radicalist right-wing, groups that have often been publicly condemned for what they stand for.

Despite, or perhaps because of long-standing actions in educating their population of equality, fairness and tolerance, Sweden now finds almost 10 per cent of their adult, voting population placing their trust behind a party that by many definitions defy these values.

It is my firm belief that a large group of those who vote for SD do so not because of a specific dislike or mistrust for foreigners, but are rather young adults feeling disenfranchised and abandoned by their government. The vote for SD would therefore be done to show their mistrust and disappointment with the current ruling government.

It is also my belief that with rising unemployment figures amongst the young, it becomes easier to blame this downturn on non-natives and outsiders, an explanation that seems more tangible and easier to grasp than the current global economic situation and its effects.

I'd be happy to debate this with whomever wants to.
RationalMadman

Con

If people have a displeasure with society, they wouldn't vote in the first place.
Debate Round No. 1
ChristianC

Pro

That is apathy, not displeasure. If someone wants a change, democracy gives them the tools to enact that change. If I understand your somewhat bare-boned argument, you're saying that the people who voted for SD did so not because they were displeased but for some other reason that you didn't specify?

Why then would any kind of change occur in a modern society? Why do we vote if we're pleased with how things are?

Why would republicans vote against Obama in the 2012 election? Why not just 'not vote'? I'm quite certain several of them were at least moderately displeased with the changes, as meager as they were, he implemented, not to mention those he intended to implement.

It is my opinion that you have failed to present any sound argument against my theory.
RationalMadman

Con

They vote to oppose voters of opposing parties.
Debate Round No. 2
ChristianC

Pro

ChristianC forfeited this round.
RationalMadman

Con

I destroyed your paragraphs with two lines of wisdom.

quality win.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.