88 racism reports. Zero action. Racism in Sweden isn’t a glitch—it’s a system. Lovette Jallow, anti-racism strategist, breaks down how 88 reports were ignored by the Swedish Ombudsman.
You’re misreading the point. I’m not underestimating them I’m naming the fact that whiteness is still treated as default competence in Sweden. The issue isn’t just personal ignorance; it’s structural design. These investigators are untrained in racial literacy, lack accountability, and operate in systems that rarely penalize anti-Black discrimination. That’s how companies get away with it.
Demanding more isn’t the issue many of us have demanded more for years. 13 years and several cases some won. The issue is that those tasked with investigating discrimination are the very products of the systems they’re supposed to critique. Now more companies and cases have this week been sued for your information by afrosvenskarnas riskforbund.
This is the part everyone forgets when they tout this country or that about being better on racism than America(looking at you, white leftists). It's no less present anywhere else.
“Let me be clear: DO is not a broken system. It functions precisely as intended—for the people by whom and for whom it was originally designed."
As for the oft-repeated line, ‘See, we have systems in place to prevent this, so it’s not happening’ such assurances are hollow. These initiatives offer little to those actually harmed, as they are largely driven by predominantly white individuals who neither understand nor can experience the realities of racism. How can one effectively challenge something they insist does not exist? 😖
Exactly this!!!. The DO isn’t failing it’s functioning as designed within a framework that was never built to recognize racialized harm, let alone address it. It offers the illusion of accountability while protecting institutions from structural scrutiny.
When white-led bodies insist racism is “unprovable” or “anecdotal,” what they’re really doing is reasserting control over the definition of harm while leaving those most affected to navigate violence without recourse. You can’t solve what you refuse to name.
“ These investigators don’t understand structural anti-Blackness.”
You’re underestimating them AND giving them too much credit. If you don’t demand more nothing is going to change.
You’re misreading the point. I’m not underestimating them I’m naming the fact that whiteness is still treated as default competence in Sweden. The issue isn’t just personal ignorance; it’s structural design. These investigators are untrained in racial literacy, lack accountability, and operate in systems that rarely penalize anti-Black discrimination. That’s how companies get away with it.
Demanding more isn’t the issue many of us have demanded more for years. 13 years and several cases some won. The issue is that those tasked with investigating discrimination are the very products of the systems they’re supposed to critique. Now more companies and cases have this week been sued for your information by afrosvenskarnas riskforbund.
When I said “you” I didn’t mean you personally. As far as anything goes….. I wish you the best.🙏🏾
This is the part everyone forgets when they tout this country or that about being better on racism than America(looking at you, white leftists). It's no less present anywhere else.
“Let me be clear: DO is not a broken system. It functions precisely as intended—for the people by whom and for whom it was originally designed."
As for the oft-repeated line, ‘See, we have systems in place to prevent this, so it’s not happening’ such assurances are hollow. These initiatives offer little to those actually harmed, as they are largely driven by predominantly white individuals who neither understand nor can experience the realities of racism. How can one effectively challenge something they insist does not exist? 😖
Exactement!!!
Exactly this!!!. The DO isn’t failing it’s functioning as designed within a framework that was never built to recognize racialized harm, let alone address it. It offers the illusion of accountability while protecting institutions from structural scrutiny.
When white-led bodies insist racism is “unprovable” or “anecdotal,” what they’re really doing is reasserting control over the definition of harm while leaving those most affected to navigate violence without recourse. You can’t solve what you refuse to name.