Sweden

Case notes

New Democracy

New Democracy (Ny Demokrati, ND) was founded in 1991 by author Ian Wachtmeister and amusement park director Bernt Karlsson, both of whom were established media personalities (Betz n.d., 7). ND’s populism originally had a festive, parody quality (A. Widfeldt 2000, 494) that argued that “life must be more fun” (Betz n.d., 7). The party had a strong opposition to the political class (built in part on Wachmeister's books ridiculing politicians and bureaucrats) and its anti-establishment credentials were evidently a significant part of its appeal to voters (Rydgren 2008, 137) (OTH_POLCLASS = 3). It was quite dependent on the leadership of Wachtmaister and Karlsson (Taggart 1995, 41; Wörlund 1992, 138) (CHARISMA = 3), and collapsed electorally after their leadership splintered.

While ND’s ideology was somewhat ambiguous (leading to splits in its eventual caucus) it should generally be regarded as right wing during campaigns (A. Widfeldt 2000, 495; Klein 2013, 116) (LR_POSITION = R). This included campaigning against immigration and for liberal economic reforms (Rydgren 2002, 34). Several of its candidates gained media attention for saying racist things through the campaign, and the party platform linked immigration to crime (A. Widfeldt 2000, 495). However according to Betz, the party’s immigration rhetoric was both moderate (in terms of policy proposals) and economically based (as opposed to culturally or racially based) (Betz n.d., 121). We’ve coded it 2 on OTH_IMMIGRANTS and 1 on OTH_ETHNIC. We’ve seen no evidence of anything on the OTH_ECONOMIC, OTH_FOREIGN or OTH_MILITARY variables (all = 1). Neither leader had been involved in previous governments (INSIDER = 1), and the party did not violate liberal democratic norms as far as we can tell (LIBDEMNORMS = 1).

Sweden Democrats

Sweden Democrats (Sverigedemokraterna, SD) is a nativist anti-immigration and anti-Islam party, founded in the late 1980s. The party has a legacy in the neo-Nazi movement, with several of its founders being previous members of far-right parties (Anders Widfeldt 2008; Klein 2013, 117). From the mid-1990s the SD sought to detoxify its image and associate itself with other populist right parties in Europe rather than the anti-democratic and violent fringe (Rydgren 2008, 146; Anders Widfeldt 2008; Klein 2013, 117) – although not to the degree that it should be considered less than far-right on LRPOSITION. The party first passed 5% of the vote in 2010 (5.7%) under the leadership of Jimmie Åkesson. Its vote share has consistently increased since then, peaking at 17.5 in the 2017 election.

SD’s stated aim is to protect Sweden’s culture and welfare state from uncontrolled immigration, in particular from Muslim immigrants (Hellström and Hervik 2014). The party has a history of advocating repatriation of some immigrants (Anders Widfeldt 2008, 272), and in one 2010 election advertisement it showed a Swedish pensioner being overtaken by women in Burqas in the line to get to the social security office, with the tagline “Pensions or immigration: the choice is yours” (Klein 2013, 121) (OTH_IMMIGRANT = 3, OTH_ETHNIC = 3). In this sense, the party is a textbook case of welfare chauvinism (Norocel 2016), claiming to be the ideological air of the original social democratic tradition that Swedes are proud of (Hellström, Nilsson, and Stoltz 2012, 196). This nativist ideology has always been presented in an overtly anti-establishment attitude (Rydgren 2008, 147), with the party claiming to represent the views of common people over a privileged political elite in which all other parties are essentially homogenous (Rydgren 2008, 148; Hellström, Nilsson, and Stoltz 2012, 201). In Hellström et al’s words, “the SD portrays Swedish politics as an elite consensual affair with a distorted link to the people, arguing that the democratic system is bureaucratized and only serves the interests of the political elite” (Hellström, Nilsson, and Stoltz 2012, 201) (OTH_POLCLASS = 3). The SD is also hostile to the influence of the EU, and the cultural influence of the USA (Rydgren 2008, 147), although not quite to the point that these are principle “others” of its populism (OTH_FOREIGN = 2). We’ve seen no evidence to code above 1 for OTH_ECONOMIC or OTH_MILITARY.

Åkesson has led the party since 2005, and while he seems to have been an effective re-brander of the party in its continued moderation (Anders Widfeldt 2008, 271), his leadership does not seem to be relevant to the point of our CHARISMA variable (= 1). According to Widfeldt the party has always pledged its loyalty to the procedures of liberal democracy (Anders Widfeldt 2008, 272–73). This could be debated given the party’s fascist pedigree (see Rydgren 2008, 148–49 for a sceptical view) but for now we’ve left LIBDEMNORMS at 1. The party and its leaders have never been in government (INSIDER = 1).

References

Betz, Hans-Georg. n.d. Radical Right-Wing Populism in Western Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. Accessed 6 July 2019. https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9780312083908.

Hellström, Anders, and Peter Hervik. 2014. ‘Feeding the Beast: Nourishing Nativist Appeals in Sweden and in Denmark’. Journal of International Migration and Integration 15 (3): 449–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-013-0293-5.

Hellström, Anders, Tom Nilsson, and Pauline Stoltz. 2012. ‘Nationalism vs. Nationalism: The Challenge of the Sweden Democrats in the Swedish Public Debate’. Government and Opposition 47 (2): 186–205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2011.01357.x.

Klein, Andreas. 2013. ‘The End of Solidarity? On the Developement of Right-Wing Populist Parties in Denmark and Sweden’. In Exposing the Demagogues: Right Wing and National Populist Parties in Europe., edited by Karsten Grabow and Florian Hartleb, 105-131. Bruessels and Berlin, Centre for European Studies and the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung.

Norocel, Ov Cristian. 2016. ‘Populist Radical Right Protectors of the Folkhem: Welfare Chauvinism in Sweden’. Critical Social Policy 36 (3): 371–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018315621991.

Rydgren, Jens. 2002. ‘Radical Right Populism in Sweden: Still a Failure, But For How Long?’ Scandinavian Political Studies 25 (December): 27–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.00062.

———. 2008. ‘Sweden: The Scandanavian Exception’. In Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy, edited by Daniele Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell, 135–50. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Taggart, Paul. 1995. ‘New Populist Parties in Western Europe’. West European Politics 18 (1): 34–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402389508425056.

Widfeldt, A. 2000. ‘Scandinavia: Mixed Success for the Populist Right’. Parliamentary Affairs 53 (3): 486–500. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/53.3.486.

Widfeldt, Anders. 2008. ‘Party Change as a Necessity – the Case of the Sweden Democrats’. Representation 44 (3): 265–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344890802237031.

Wörlund, Ingemar. 1992. ‘The Swedish Parliamentary Election of September 1991’. Scandinavian Political Studies 15 (2): 135–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9477.1992.tb00135.x.