This one is bottom-up pressure most likely. MAGA already hates vaccines so Trump is throwing them a bone since he can’t actually follow up on any of his non-fascist promises.

I think OOP is thinking of cyberpunk specifically.

Glorious.

when a significant proportion of the country put their kettles on to make tea.

Do you have a source for this? Because that’s amazing.

I didn’t want pitas

I’m sorry but can you just climb that stake over here? No don’t worry about the firewood at the bottom.

Okay guy from the third world here, is it just the rose-tinted glasses or am I correct in thinking this is something emphatically not supposed to happen in developed countries?

What’s the difference?

The perks of not having a large diaspora somewhere: You don’t get slurs tailor-made for you.

I’d say the first Islamophobes were Meccan polytheists. I hear those guys had one hell of a redemption arc though.

No, be as unfriendly towards Britain as you want, but taking that out on people abroad who happen to be British is way out of line. I said this elsewhere, but we’re not in the Middle Ages; the tribe doesn’t get to own the individual in the 21st century. The British people affected by these policies (again effectively only implemented by Sweden in the whole EU) are overwhelmingly likely not to be the people who decided to slap everyone in Europe in the face. Taking this idea to its absurd conclusion, European countries should’ve deported refugees from Nazi Germany because the Nazis were making trouble for everyone. After all, it’s okay to be “unfriendly” to people who are from countries that did bad things to you (setting aside the absurdity of describing uprooting a woman nearly in her 80s from her home of 21 years as just “unfriendly”). The trend today is to be trigger-happy with deportation as if it’s a nothingburger punishment like community service, but it has very real and very significant consequences to the people being deported and is definitely not something to be done out of spite.

Not quite, more that even without religion people need something to identify with and in the modern day that tends to almost always be nationalism.

Sure, but it can’t force Sweden to deport British people living in the EU; that’s a decision they made themselves. This is particularly clear when contrasted with literally every other country in the EU. From the article:

According to the most recent European Commission annual report on implementation of the WA, almost 4,000 applicants for post-Brexit residency status in Sweden were refused, out of 14,200 made.

By contrast, Bulgaria, which has a similar number of applicants at around 16,000, refused just five people, and Belgium, which had 13,000 applicants, refused 605, according to the same report.

According to FCDO analysis, Sweden’s refusal rate of 27.5% is three times higher than any other member state and considerably higher than the EU average of between 3% and 4%.

Bigots in Britain decided to throw British people in the EU under the bus, but that doesn’t absolve authorities in EU countries (in this case Sweden) for running over them with the bus. The Bulgarian example is particularly useful here; they got their excuse to deport the shit out of Britons in Bulgaria but just chose not to do so (presumably due to their center-left government).

Nationalism is probably the big one. This is less obvious in the West where the transition is more or less complete (even religious people in the West tend to be nationalist first and religious second), but in (my corner of) the third world people pushing for secularism tend to basically simultaneously push for nationalism and vice versa.

I’d say anyone living in America who is able to do so should be taking part in some kind of resistance because the atrocities their government commits are funded by their tax dollars. So if that American wasn’t living in America, yes I’d judge them exactly the same way.

I wasn’t talking about Brexit, though. Britain isn’t forcing and can’t force Sweden to deport people; that’s on the Swedish government.

In general immigration enforcement institutions are about as ghoulish as banks so there’s no reason to give them the benefit of the doubt, especially these days, but also as the article notes Sweden is very heavy-handed here. See:

According to the most recent European Commission annual report on implementation of the WA, almost 4,000 applicants for post-Brexit residency status in Sweden were refused, out of 14,200 made.

By contrast, Bulgaria, which has a similar number of applicants at around 16,000, refused just five people, and Belgium, which had 13,000 applicants, refused 605, according to the same report.

According to FCDO analysis, Sweden’s refusal rate of 27.5% is three times higher than any other member state and considerably higher than the EU average of between 3% and 4%

Deporting as many people as possible seems to be a deliberate policy choice—not surprising considering who’s running the show over there, but it does mean there’s no reason to think this woman was shown any flexibility.

That’s a complete non-sequitur, but yes.

Downvoted because you’re not addressing anything I said, but also that’s a complete non-sequitur. It’s not the Middle Ages anymore for us to act like the tribe owns the individual; there’s no reason the life of this woman should be upended by the foolish actions of the British voting public just because she happens to be from Britain. What Britain wants is frankly irrelevant here.

Well clearly we have radically different values when it comes to empathy for our fellow man, so let me just say: I guess some people (i.e. you) do deserve the far-right. I wonder if you’ll change your mind if the AfD or National Rally or what have you leopards eat your face at some point.

Generally, people getting into trouble should have a justification fitting the degree of the trouble. If the rules impose arbitrary trouble on people (say, by uprooting them from their home of 20 years for missing an arbitrary deadline), then that does make the rules wrong. The punishment very clearly does not fit the “crime” here.