In this episode we go trans-scandinavian and talk to Harald Eia – creator, producer, and host of Hjernevask, whom I spoke to earlier this summer. That’s the summer of 2017 according to the Gregorian calendar for any future historians who might be interested in anecdotes about collective insanity.
But first a not so quick recap for you who haven’t been able to listen to the previous episodes on this subject because they were in Swedish. Maybe you don’t even know who or what Hjernevask is? Hold on because if you’re not even Scandinavian this is going to sound unbelievable.
I have mentioned before, and been critized for, saying that Sweden is the Doctor Mengele of social engineering.
I have good reasons for making the comparison and we’ll get even more into that in later episodes, but for now, suffice to say that we in Sweden since the early 90’s live under what cannot be called anything else than a gender paradigm.
Sweden has always been leading in women’s rights. Women got the vote in Sweden as early as 1919 and could first exercise it in the election of 1921, whereas men got the full vote in 1922, and ability to exercise it in 1924. Before that men who wouldn’t serve in the army were denied the vote.
I don’t know how much Shulamith Firestone professor of history at Stockholm university Yvonne Hirdman, had read when she authored her pamphlet in 1987 – but it bares a lot of similarities to The Dialectic of Sex.
Yvonne Hirdman’s was called “The gender system : theoretical reflections on the social subordination of women” – and as radical feminist manifestoes go – it had everything.
The Marxist model of the class system – but with class thrown out and gender put in its place. The denial of female biology. At the same time as it acknowledges male biology as toxic.
In short, the same irrationaly conspiratorial view of the world as Marx, but with the significant difference that class is a social circumstance. It is something that you can easily change. Biology is harder to change. As if the interplay of the sexes weren’t complicated enough already.
Yvonne Hirdman’s theory made it into a Government Public Investigation – and that in turn made it into policy, since nobody objects to anything in Sweden of fear of hurting someone’s feelings.
And conflict. Mostly conflict.
And so, in 1990, it got made into official policy.
The effect being that the gender perspective, and later on intersectionality, has to be applied within all processes in the Swedish public system, which is to say, pretty much every aspect of society.
We have a Swedish Secretariat For Gender Research – which is basically a government funded propaganda machine for gender research application – which is putting it mildly since we’re talking about actually trying to apply these rather crazy theories in practice usually ending in such disasters as gender neutral snow removal, where the theory was that more men drive cars and that’s why roads where cleared before walkways and bicycle paths, which apparently women use more often because of patriarchy and not because they want to have a nice walk or enjoy nature. No one objected to say that actually we clear roads first so that police, fire brigade, or ambulances can get through in case of an accident.
Hilarity obviously ensued.
This week a dog-owner in Stockholm put in a motion to have gender separated dog kennels, not for the owners, for the dogs! So that female dogs didn’t have to be subjected to the male dogs gaze or some other lunatic rambling about a canine patriarchy.
I did a special about these things a long time ago called GROIN, it’s in Swedish but there’s a version with English subs on my youtube channel.
The reason I published my special about gender on youtube is because no Swedish channel would take it. I offered it to Swedish state television who said no. And then to all others and they said no. If you go and see it and say – “well – that’s because it’s very meek and not edgy” – you have to understand that in Swedish culture that special is seen partly as having an aggressive tone and a subject so taboo you shouldn’t even talk about it.
I had earlier in my research wanted to make a tv-show, on SVT, about the gender paradigm madness, and in that research I stumbled upon Harald Eias Hjernevask. Which had the same idea that I had. Which isn’t strange since Norway and Sweden influence each other – Sweden in Norway’s direction more than the other way around historically but lately it’s been changing. But mostly it isn’t strange because we had both read Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate and come to the conclusion to make a series based on the chapter he had written on taboos.
When I first found out that Harald had already done it I became dismayed and a bit envious. Partly because of professional jealousy, and the disappointment over what a hack I was but mostly because I had plowed so much energy into it already. But when I watched it I was glad I wasn’t first. Because Harald is utterly brilliant. And no one could have done a better job. Not only because Harald is a much nicer person than I am but also because he himself is a trained sociologist. This is also according to himself why he was granted so much access to the leaders of the gender movement in Norway.
In his hands the show became as comprehensible as it was damning. If you haven’t seen it I suggest you do. Links to it with English subs will also be provided in the description of this episode on Patreon. You don’t have to pay anything to see it there – it’s still free – but do contribute if you feel like it.
Hjernevask became the most debated show in Norway in 2010. Harald became very hated – and very loved. And sued for libel by one of the gender studies professor that participated in the show. And acquitted. And less than a year later, the Norwegian government, while ensuring that it had nothing to do with Hjernevask, was cutting funding to gender studies in Norway claiming the reason being that gender studies had now become so advanced that it should be able to compete for grant money the same way all the other subjects do.
Which is to doom it to oblivion since gender research won’t stand a chance in the real world. And before you start yelling sexist pig at me just know that it’s not MY OPINION – that’s the opinion of Marit Aure – leader of the Society for Gender Research in Norway. Unlike the spokes person of the Research Council of Norway she also admitted that Hjernevask – Harald’s show – certainly hadn’t helped their cause.
Regardless if the show really helped Norway rid itself of this crazy social engineering program another difference between Norway and Sweden.
HARALD also had the backing of Norwegian State Television. They produced Hjernevask. A thing like that would never happen in Sweden. I can say that with certainty, as you willunderstand later in the show.
The reason why Swedish state television so ardently opposed a Swedish version of Hjernevask is this.
There are less than hilarious consequences from the Swedish governments gender equality program. We started applying the gender perspective in schools in the early nineties. Boys have always had a slightly lower average than girls in school but the kids used to be treated only as individuals. Suddenly teachers and administrators were supposed to also consider the child’s gender and actively attempt to brake what is seen as traditional gender norms.
We have the second highest grade gap between boys and girls school grades in the world, second only to Finland. Who have also adopted our special brand of gender pedagogy in the school system. Where girls are pushed to behave in a more boyish manner and perfectly normal traits in boys are considered toxic.
The funny thing is that around 2005 a special investigation to the causes of the widening grade gap was launched. It came to the conclusion that although one could clearly see that the gap started widening at the same time as gender perspective was applied the only solution could be more gender perspective was needed. The problem was not that gender science, and I use quotation marks around the word science here, wasn’t working – it was that there was too little of it! It’s like a doctor seeing that the medicine is killing the patient and then upping the dose.
It also caused our version of the American FEMA, The agency for societal readiness to close down an investigation of the Muslim Brotherhoods activities in Sweden and instead devote 10 million crowns to study gender norms in leadership during disaster conditions.
Yeah, I know how that sounds.
It is probably also the reason why two days ago, the seventeenth of September 2017, Swedish State Televisions weekly hour long news program Agenda, and no, they are not named Ironically. They are named Agenda because that show is supposed to set the weekly agenda. It’s just ironic that they also have an Agenda. Which is always the social democratic agenda – or communist – or environmentalist. Over 80 percent of the journalists employed in our state run media are leftists, much more so than the populace which vote slightly over fifty percent for the left.
Agenda devoted one hour and 18 minutes to potential terrorist threats to Sweden. The reason being that more than 2000 swedes, most of immigrant descent, have left Sweden to fight for ISIS, and now, as ISIS seems to have lost their caliphate these lovely individuals are coming home.
As Sweden has a standing army of around 10 000 people two thousand battle trained people is actually a threat. They said on Agenda that only a few of them, unclear how many, had the capacity to commit acts of terror, but somehow, I don’t felt completely reassured.
Especially since the military has been forced to spend it’s time in gender perspective classes. And apparently – that’s what our feminist foreign policy – which is confusing I know – but neither I or Margot Wallström – our Deputy Prime Minister and representative at The Security Council at the UN – who conceived of it can explain what makes it feminist to you. That is unclear. Either way. That’s also what we want our army to provide in international military operations. We will teach your soldiers to be gender conscious even if it kills them, which it probably will since it is pure ideological nonsense. And yes, maybe I’m too harsh on gender theory and it’s promulgators. After all, using gender theory against Islamic terrorists, I’m sorry violence affirming extremists, have never been tried as far as I know. I just wish it was gender studies professors we were sending to Mali instead of soldiers. I’m not saying that they couldn’t deliver as good sermons on gender disparity because they are men, it’s just that Gender studies professors have been preparing for that type of situation their entire lives and well… you get the picture.
It only took Agenda less than twenty years to wake up and do an episode on Islamic terrorism. And funnily enough they managed to broadcast for almost an hour and a half without mentioning the word Islam.
Apart from the absurd fact that every single expert they interviewed had, separately I assume, alone in their chambers, come to the conclusion that the reason must be socioeconomic factors, and that what is needed is more welfare and an expansion of the welfare state.
Which sounds crazy since a big part of the problem is that most of these immigrants already have access to welfare. But we have apparently decided to use the same logic that helped us NOT to solve the grade gap.
If something doesn’t work – apply more of the same.
What the immigrants want, and most of them are born in this Sweden, is jobs.
Which they won’t get!
In part because of the Swedish quasi-socialist model of collective bargaining where negotiators from the unions meet negotiators from the companies and together in a closed room decide what people in a number of fields should be payed. It suits the unions because they get a big cut and it keeps up minimum wages, which in turn keep immigrants out.
The employers are happy because they save time and money not having to individually bargain with every employee and it makes cash flow predictions, at least of employee costs, wonderfully accurate.
And the swedes are happy because they avoid having to deal with something as sensitive as money, it avoids conflict, and it keeps envy of your coworkers or neighbors to a minimum since everybody makes roughly the same.
It would probably benefit women’s salaries in some fields as well since the unions use male dominated industrial jobs as a mark. Which in turn keeps some female dominated fields salaries down but no one ever talks about that and nor shall we because “The Swedish Model” – as it is called – is holy. All parties – left to right – support the welfare state.
I only mention it because Harald and I wander into what causes this situation in our conversation. Although I had contacted Harald to talk about the acquittal and the cessation of funding to gender studies – Harald wanted to talk about his own current project. Which unlike Hjernevask – runs contrary to my current project. Harald’s new project is to promote the Scandinavian model in the world – he’s done a TED-talk about it which I will provide the link to below this episode.
And although I disagree on Harald on almost every point – I urge you to see it. Because it lists perfectly the arguments for the Scandinavian model – which this podcast aims to DECONSTRUCT – hence it’s name – DECONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM, which is both a clever wordplay on the common phrase constructive criticism as well as reference to the post-modernist theory of Jacques Derrida which is this podcast mission to use against the same ideology that conceived of it.
And also because one of the experts on Agenda – using quotation marks again – was our brand new national coordinator against violence affirming extremism – yes, you heard me right – that’s what we’re calling it in Sweden. Violence Affirmative Extremism. Next we’ll start referring to psychopaths as Differently Emotionally Abled People. And she is obviously appointed because of her gender. I’m not saying that because she’s a woman. I’m saying that because her previous position was at the red cross. Which is all well and fine – but that is experience more needed after a terror attack has happened. And she admitted as much. And that whatever we had tried so far had failed.
Add that the we have the worlds first feminist government – at least according to the government – which is run by a straight white middle aged man.
Anyway, the reason I am telling you this is because I know Harald as someone who stands up against stupidity. And because after my initial disappointment of finding my idea for a TV-program had already been done to that by my better, I contacted Harald and asked how much he wanted for the rights to his show, so that I could make a Swedish version.
Harald is such a nice guy he gave it to me for free. But he added a word of caution. He told me he had already tried to get it made in Sweden.
Partly because the Norwegian gender studies professors he had publicly shamed had warned their Swedish counterparts about Harald.
You see, although the Norwegians had managed to kick out this ideological cancer, the NIKK, the Nordic countries cooperation board on gender equality. But even though it was situated in Oslo and funded with a lot of Norwegian money, it didn’t die. It just receded to its source. Sweden.
It now resides at the Secretariat for Gender Research at Gothenburg University.
But mostly because SVT – Swedish state television – had already declined the offer when Harald himself made it to them. But he was willing to give me the chance and see if I fared better.
Which I did not. In fact, I did not fare better several times. Other channels also got the offer but declined. They declined a given success. A sure thing that people would talk about, and rage about. Why, you ask, if Sweden is in such a gigantic mess, do we not address these absurd policies?
Because a lot of people. In politics, media, and government have invested a lot of means, time, and prestige in this. A lot of people are depending on this system. Money, as well as reputations, entire careers, are at stake. All our government funded culture, research in the humanities, every agency of government, most big companies.
Harald is a brilliant man. Funny and smart. And he really believes in the Scandinavian model. He has the best intentions. And that’s what he sees in others.
He is the same in Hjernevask. He doesn’t want to bash gender science. He just happily happens to destroy it while asking innocent questions about their fundamental beliefs.
I personally think that the gender paradigm is connected to the groupthink inherent in the strange marriage between an already collectivist Swedish culture and socialism.
The fact that we now have a former nazi-party the Swedish Democrats, nowadays they are nationalist conservative, and again – conservative in the Swedish context meaning that you want to return to an older form of democratic socialism, on the rise might also have something to do with it. Nowadays their voters are everybody that’s angry – and theirs a lot to be angry about – but their core voters used to be angry young white men who felt passed by and ignored by society. Maybe identity politics – both in the form of socialist feminism and race – fueled the fires of white identity politics in Sweden?
Other links to events and people mentioned in the dialogue:
Difference in employment between ethnic swedes and immigrants:
Skillnad mellan inrikes och utrikes födda: https://www.svd.se/onsketank-om-nyanlanda
Gothenburg university budget: http://www.gu.se/digitalAssets/1615/1615811_1615593_gu_ar16_slutpdf_170217.pdf
Mission of Gothenburg university: http://www.regeringen.se/regeringsuppdrag/2009/12/u20097343uh/
State individualism: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statsindividualism
Lars Trägårdh, Is the Swede human? http://www.larstragardh.se/arsvenskenmanniska/