181
British widow, 78, told to leave Sweden under Brexit rules after living there for 21 years
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2026
181 points (97.4% liked)
Europe
11868 readers
711 users here now
News and information from Europe ๐ช๐บ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
People getting into trouble because they don't bother with the rules for years does not mean that the rules are wrong.
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.
Well, I'd say not bothering with the ramifications of the largest, most important and influential referendum your home country has ever had for 10 years in is very grave. It is incredibly naive and/or remarkably negligent.
This isn't a 'side effect' from Brexit, but exactly what it was about: we want out, no more membership, no more free movement. To assume that this wouldn't affect her freedom of movement is absurd. You'd even call it arrogant.
I'm sorry, this is entirely on her. To now try to shift the blame on Sweden for implementing what her populace voted for, is absurd.
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.
This isn't about empathy but about responsibility. I have empathy for her situation, but in my eyes, its her responsibility.
As for face-eating leopards: this is exactly such a situation. The British populace was lured into this vote by populist 'promises' and lies. Now, they have their face eaten. And that should be our problem/responsibility now? Imo, the only antidote to populist bullcrap such as Brexit or Trump is inevitably having to bear the consequences of your actions.
It's a nice spin in the Guardian article, but let's not forget that this whole ordeal called Brexit was not brought upon the UK from the outside but they chose so themselves. Including the consequences described in the article. Now trying to blame Sweden instead is exactly a leopard-manoeuvre. And don't worry, should my country be dumb enough to vote the likes of AfD or RN (and it quite looks like it), I'll not ask for special treatment either.
How long had England been a part of the EU before it left? Maybe the whole country should bear the shame of this woman being deported. If they didn't want it to happen, they shouldn't have left the EU.
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.
Would you judge an American doing nothing about their government's actions the same?
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.
Americans not living in America are still required to file American taxes and pay them if they are owed. So, in this case, even an American living abroad may be financing the atrocities at home and abroad using non-US funds.