A Guardian journalist recently interviewed Swedes opposed to increases in immigration from Muslim refugees, and she apparently found what she regarded as incontrovertible proof of their malevolence: they were well dressed. Says Dalrymple at Salisbury Review, for the journalist…

…any kind of formality in dress was symbolic of elitist or exclusivist political sympathies, whereas casual dress, the prevailing any-old-howism of the majority of the population, was symbolic of democratic and egalitarian sympathies, a demonstration of solidarity with the poor of the world. Whether poor people in Africa actually benefit from rich people dressing in expensively-torn jeans and T-shirts is not important: as with presents, it is the thought that counts.