SWEDEN - September 14, 2014 - GUIDE and THREAD

[Heimdal]

So how is Löfven managing his reconversion from unionist to politician ? It strikes me as a bit odd he was for years leader of a large union and in SAP's executive board, I guess you don't have a "charte d'Amiens"...

Thats actually the classical Scandinavian SD combo. Its not so common anymore, but still viewed as an ideal by many traditional SDs.

The Norwegian Labour Party hasn’t had a leader with background from the trade unions since Trygve Bratteli (1965-1975), but that has hardly affected their influence with the party.
But it looks like the Alliance is really in a bad shape, with both the Christian Democrats and the Agrarians below 4 %. What surprises me most is the low support for the Moderates. Is there any reason for their (apparent) downward trend? Are people just tired of them, or have they done anything to alienate their voters?

[Heimdal]

I have a few questions about the Sweden Democrats and the center-right.
First of all. How is the relationship between the SD and the Alliance? I know the SD isn’t a part of the government, but is the Alliance relying on the SD for support in the Riksdag?

Second of all. How radical is the SD perceived to be among the public? I have read somewhere that the SD used to contain a lot of very extreme groups, like BootBoys and Nazis. I assume that is mostly a thing of the past?

[Heimdal]

 As for your second question it depends which part of the public you ask. Some Hipster area in Stockholm, they're considered worse than Hitler himself, while in rural Skåne, they're not seen as especially controversial.
But they've gotten rid of their most openly racist policies and the Nazis, who've moved on to the National Democrats (ND) and The Swedes' Party (SvP)

That is very interesting. I guess that SD have moved toward the center (to some extent at least), which has enabled them to gain far more voters than other rightwing populist parties in Sweden. Their level of support as of today resembles FrP and Dansk Folkeparti.

Could you explain what sorts of parties the National Democrats and The Swedes Party are? Are they just a more radical/extreme version of the SD?

[Heimdal]

Is there a chance FI gains enough traction to reach the 4% threshold? It would be wonderful to see that happen.

Another left-wing party is the last thing the Swedish left needs, at least in the long run (particularly with regards to the 4% treshold).

Indeed. Just look at the parliamentary election in Norway last fall. The socialist left (SV), the communists (RV) and the Green Party (MdG) got far fewer seats than their combined amount of votes would suggest. A new leftwing fringe party would most likely benefit the right far more than the left. 

[Heimdal]

 As for your second question it depends which part of the public you ask. Some Hipster area in Stockholm, they're considered worse than Hitler himself, while in rural Skåne, they're not seen as especially controversial.
But they've gotten rid of their most openly racist policies and the Nazis, who've moved on to the National Democrats (ND) and The Swedes' Party (SvP)

That is very interesting. I guess that SD have moved toward the center (to some extent at least), which has enabled them to gain far more voters than other rightwing populist parties in Sweden. Their level of support as of today resembles FrP and Dansk Folkeparti.

Could you explain what sorts of parties the National Democrats and The Swedes Party are? Are they just a more radical/extreme version of the SD?

The National Democrats are openly racist, they oppose race-mixing and wants Sweden to return to some idyllic nineteenth century farmer society. They're complete nutjobs.

However, they are nowhere near as scary as SvP which is a Nazi party. SvP used to be called National Socialist Front when I was in high school. They're exactly what that sounds like.

All of the non-SD far-right groups are very tiny fringe groups. And all totally insane. SD has done a good job of cleaning up their image, which is why they get so much support now.

The Swedish mainstream right is not at a place where they can cooperate with SD and if they did a large chunk of their support would join the left. I know plenty of activists for the government who would prefer a left-wing government over one with SD in it. Long term I guess we will go down the Danish/Norwegian route though.

That must be a blessing for the SD. I think a lot of Swedes would want to vote for a party that wants to restrict immigration to Sweden.  However, they don’t want to vote for a party whose members idolize the Third Reich. I think the SD leadership is happy that those people have disappeared.

In a way I am not surprised that SD and the Moderates are having a hard time finding together. My view of the SD is that the party is mostly about restricting immigration, and preserving different sorts of social services. Correct me if I am wrong, but it appears like tax cuts and privatization of public services isn’t a big priority for them. I don’t know that much about Swedish politics, but the Moderates at least used to campaign on tax cuts and privatization of public services. So immigration probably isn’t the only obstacle.

[Heimdal]

Is there a chance FI gains enough traction to reach the 4% threshold? It would be wonderful to see that happen.

Another left-wing party is the last thing the Swedish left needs, at least in the long run (particularly with regards to the 4% treshold).

Indeed. Just look at the parliamentary election in Norway last fall. The socialist left (SV), the communists (RV) and the Green Party (MdG) got far fewer seats than their combined amount of votes would suggest. A new leftwing fringe party would most likely benefit the right far more than the left.  

Yep. One of the reasons why I think it will be difficult for the centre-left to gain a majority, in the 2017 Norwegian election. It's possible that 1/6, or more, of its vote will be wasted, if both MdG and SV barely fail to pass the treshold (not that MdG aligns with any "bloc", but I would suspect 90% of their voters are from the left (and yes, I'm very much getting ahead of myself here)).

I am quite sure that the center-left will be back in office by 2017. First of all because they don’t need to assemble the sort of alliance that they did in 2005. I think a minority government from the Labour party is the most likely outcome at this point. They will be able to cooperate with a lot of parties in Stortinget, from issue to issue. 

That is assuming that SV doesn’t rebound to the level of support they enjoyed in 2001-2005. But even if they do, they might be hesitant to join the Labor party in government. 

[Heimdal]

A core problem for KD is that the natural tack for them is to become a modern conservative party. They've made moves in this direction, like when Hägglund talked about "the people of reality" or when Ebba Busch talked about limiting the state's powers and being like a watchdog towards the government. But a large part of their supporters are religious conservatives who sort of want government intervention in both the economy and on social issues. So they're a bit trapped in contradiction.

Wouldn't this make the completely superfluous though? A better way to stay relevant could be to adopt a profile more like their Norwegian sister party. Though the market for "social conservatism" in Sweden may be even smaller than here,  I suppose.

I don’t think that would solve any of their problems. KrF is tied to a dying demographic (old religious people in rural areas). I think it is just a matter of time before they disappear.
Their challenge is probably the same as the one facing the Swedish Christian Democrats. They can’t turn into a normal Scandinavian conservative party. Then there will be no point in voting for them (as you mentioned). They can’t turn into a party opposing “islamization” and standing up for Christian values, since that part of the field is already occupied by SD/FrP.

I think it is fair to say that the Christian Democrats in Sweden and Norway will end up like their sister party in Denmark; as a marginalized party clinging on to a continually diminishing group of voters.