The Big Bad Swedish Politics & News Thread

[ingemann]

What's causing the Sweden Democrats surge?
[/quote

I think the answer lies in this comment below.

rural voters who're leaving their traditional choice the Centre party in droves after that party made some very controversial (understatment) policy changes early in December

More details?

Basicly the new platform that the leadership presented took the party in a very Libretairian direction. The three most controversial new positions being:

1) Free-immigration, no regulations or restrictions on immigration at all.
2) No mandatory school, parents who don't want to send their children to school don't have to.
3) Making the federal income-tax flat.

 

[ingemann]

What's causing the Sweden Democrats surge?

They aren't surgeing as much as they're steadily climbing really. They gained a little for every month since the 2010 election. 7,8% is actually down slightly from some previous polls in 2012. Granted they should be down more considering they've had nothing but bad publicity since mid-june, but then they're not called the Teflon-party for nothing.  

Quite logical, when the media have always hated them, and always treated them lkke a pariah, bad publicity becomes almost irrelevant, as it in their potential voters opinion just the "multikulti"(to borrow a term from German) media or elite attempt to bring them down.

[ingemann]

Gothenburg riots? Those happened twelve years ago. I don't really think they have an impact today. ^^

EDIT: Oh wait, now I realise what you mean. You mean the instagram incident. Doubt that has anything to do with the polls. Unless the Sweden Democrats are also anti-teenagers.

The problem with not mention people´s ethnicity in the news, is that people come to their own conclusions.

What do think youth, non-political riots and major city translate into in most people´s minds?

[ingemann]

A full out internal war is basicly happening in the Center party right now. Annie Lööf's attempts to cool down the conflict has not been very effective to say the least. For every day that pass I'm more and more convinced that the party will not survive this.

 

It's hard to not see that as a good thing, any party which has so little connection with reality as a party which adopt the policies of page one, should not be near a parliament to say nothing about sitting in ine.

[ingemann]

From what I know of Swedish politics, the Center Party used to be the most moderate element of the Alliance. It's sad to see them go completely insane, because they have a useful spot to occupy in the political landscape.

The nice thing about Scandinavia, is that there is always someone who place themselves at the centre. But centre parties do have a tendence to go insane this way thanks to part of their voter segment (urban proffesional) and their ideology (liberalism). So it's good to clean out once in a while when they turn too insane. Denmark could also use that the Social Liberals collapsed, someone other took their position instead.

[ingemann]

From what I know of Swedish politics, the Center Party used to be the most moderate element of the Alliance. It's sad to see them go completely insane, because they have a useful spot to occupy in the political landscape.

The nice thing about Scandinavia, is that there is always someone who place themselves at the centre. But centre parties do have a tendence to go insane this way thanks to part of their voter segment (urban proffesional) and their ideology (liberalism). So it's good to clean out once in a while when they turn too insane. Denmark could also use that the Social Liberals collapsed, someone other took their position instead.

Is that indicative or conditional? I've not been following Danish politics since the election, did something happen to Radikale Venstre?

I think it would be healthy if they disappeared, but I don't find it likely as their brand of smug liberalism and arrogant self righteous, sadly play to a specific kind of voter. Through Vestagers arrogance did mean that their rising polls collapse. But right now they lies where they have always laid (7-8%).
In fact their rise and fall followed the traditional pattern, people was tired of the big parties with their wishy-washy opinions and embrace "de Radikale", which come across as principle, the leader of the Social Liberals grow more and more arrogant, piss their allies off, but keep growing until their arrogance also turn off their new voters, and they collapse back to their base. But at least Vestager didn't set herself up as the third PM candidate as Jelved did, through she was close.

[ingemann]

From what I know of Swedish politics, the Center Party used to be the most moderate element of the Alliance. It's sad to see them go completely insane, because they have a useful spot to occupy in the political landscape.

The nice thing about Scandinavia, is that there is always someone who place themselves at the centre. But centre parties do have a tendence to go insane this way thanks to part of their voter segment (urban proffesional) and their ideology (liberalism). So it's good to clean out once in a while when they turn too insane. Denmark could also use that the Social Liberals collapsed, someone other took their position instead.

Is that indicative or conditional? I've not been following Danish politics since the election, did something happen to Radikale Venstre?

Except forcing the goverment to the right on economic issues I haven't heard about them doing anything differently than they did in 2011. In the latest poll I've seen they still poll at 8,9% so they seem pretty stable. 

I'm guessing Ingemann is really professing his personal oppinion of Radikale, rather than the general Danish oppinion. Granted I wouldn't vote for them either, but they don't really seem to be out-of-mainstream compared to other European Green or centre-left leaning social liberals. (Who always seem to be very arrogant) 

They are not green, and I wouldn't call them centre-left anymore, economic they lies to the right of both Venstre and DPP right now. Of course it can change fast, ten years ago, they wanted to abolish all industry (somewhat hyperbole), establish citizen wage and rraise the property tax. Today they want to lower all wages, remove the high income tax, lower the company tax and raise property tax.
Their policy changes often quite fast, but one thing never change, that they are always right and they have never made a mistake.

[ingemann]

From what I know of Swedish politics, the Center Party used to be the most moderate element of the Alliance. It's sad to see them go completely insane, because they have a useful spot to occupy in the political landscape.

The nice thing about Scandinavia, is that there is always someone who place themselves at the centre. But centre parties do have a tendence to go insane this way thanks to part of their voter segment (urban proffesional) and their ideology (liberalism). So it's good to clean out once in a while when they turn too insane. Denmark could also use that the Social Liberals collapsed, someone other took their position instead.

Is that indicative or conditional? I've not been following Danish politics since the election, did something happen to Radikale Venstre?

Except forcing the goverment to the right on economic issues I haven't heard about them doing anything differently than they did in 2011. In the latest poll I've seen they still poll at 8,9% so they seem pretty stable. 

I'm guessing Ingemann is really professing his personal oppinion of Radikale, rather than the general Danish oppinion. Granted I wouldn't vote for them either, but they don't really seem to be out-of-mainstream compared to other European Green or centre-left leaning social liberals. (Who always seem to be very arrogant) 

They are not green, and I wouldn't call them centre-left anymore, economic they lies to the right of both Venstre and DPP right now. Of course it can change fast, ten years ago, they wanted to abolish all industry (somewhat hyperbole), establish citizen wage and rraise the property tax. Today they want to lower all wages, remove the high income tax, lower the company tax and raise property tax.

Why prop up a center-left administration when they could make Rasmussen PM (again)?

Good question, one which I have heard from many members off the party itself. There are several answers.

1: A significant part of their core is more left-wing than the policies the party embrace now. They keep support the party out of habit, non-economic issue and because SocDem do pull them slightly to the left.

2: Rasmussen is a terrible excuse for a human being, the top of the party know, most who have been political active for more than a few years on any level of politic know it. The right are just willing to excuse it, by saying that other politician are just as bad (they aren't, in fact I prefer even the scum from DPP to him) and because the way his political opponents tend to end up.

3: Any government build on the votes of both DPP and RV would collapse fast, DPP need to be bribed with a tough immigration policy to support such a government, while RV think anyone mentioning that there could exist problem with open immigration is racist scums.

[ingemann]

Oh yeah, I know what you mean about rural voters not going to the Centre Party. Just in the past two years I've met 11 Centre Party members who are now former members because they gave up their membership. Most of them are now independent swing voters, but 3 of them, including my great uncle have actually joined the Social Democrats. And he was real Centre Party core voter being a farmer, small business owner and all that. He was even the president of his local CUF (or SLU as it was called then) back in the day! But after going on for years and years about how he didn't recognize his party anymore he finally jumped ship last year and moved over to the other team. I'm not sure how many will switch to the Christian Democrats though. Maybe on a national level since the national party leadership isn't really that crazy or extreme, but on the local level Christian Democrats are the most hyper conservative moralizing people in existence. I don't see Centre voters supporting them on that level. Though sadly the Sweden Democrats are definite possibility, especially in rural communities in southern Sweden. But strangly enough, not up here. For some reason they just don't have much of a presence here...

There are nothing strange about it. There are clear historical reason for why rural South Sweden vote difference from the rural north.
Historical the north have been populated by poor rural worker, who even if they owned land, had to work in non-agricultural work and was often semi-migrating.
In south you could live of agriculture, and if you migrated you usual moved permanent to either  Copenhagen, Malmö or a industry town. This created a population which was richer, as people could live of their land, and ones who couldn't moved to urban areas, where they could live of their new jobs. The result was that the people was less loyal to SAP, than the very poor workers of the north. It simply give a higher degree of party loyalty, when people can still tell stories about ancestors who starved, until the unions and SAP put an end to it. It's also why SocDem have never done as well in Denmark as in Sweden and Norway, Danes was simply to well off, to develop the same degree of party loyalty. 

[ingemann]

3,9% of immigrants prefer Sweden Democrats, I guess those are mostly Finns and Swedish talking Finns.

[ingemann]

Honestly I as a Dane would love to see especially Sweden, but also Finland join NATO, simply because increased military cooperation (mostly in infrastructure) between the Nordic countries would enable us to get more bang for the buck. Also it would also make Denmark and Norway more likely to buy Swedish military products.

[ingemann]

Interview with Renfeldt

You must be logged in to read this quote.

read more http://www.thelocal.se/20141207/no-home-for-swe-dems-on-centre-right-reinfeldt

[ingemann]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/car-bombs-rock-southern-swedens-city-malmo-27735717

[ingemann]

Swedish police: Several people shot, 2 dead, in Goteborg

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/efe5e7704cb441f28933117f5d8f5efb/swedish-police-several-people-shot-some-dead-goteborg

[ingemann]

The Sweden Democrats are rising fast in the polls: 20% in YouGov and 22% in Sentio. Not far behind S and M.

Fuck.

The only way to stop them is to increase immigration levels. What do you think of my plan?

That sound like something the mainstream Swedish parties would suggest.

[ingemann]

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6217312

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[ingemann]

I must admit I really don't get what people see or saw in FI, maybe it's just because while I read Swedish newspapers once in a while, I don't follow the Swedish debate enough. I usual get somewhat what people see in parties, even if I disagre with them, but FI just seemed weird.

[ingemann]

I must admit I really don't get what people see or saw in FI, maybe it's just because while I read Swedish newspapers once in a while, I don't follow the Swedish debate enough. I usual get somewhat what people see in parties, even if I disagre with them, but FI just seemed weird.

Well, you got the wrong gender for starters.

That's a very good point, but.. (see below)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

... but a problem with this as I see it, in my experience most women don't vote after these policies. In my experience the whole gender equality as a primary policy focus are hold by very few women outside a academic elite. The "gender issues" they usual care about seem more like cheap and convenient access to childcare (so that they can work), things which are relative easy to focus on and result in a large improvement of their daily life.

BTW I found your discussion with "Swedish Austerity Creep" interesting. I must admit I find FI more of a feministic version of LA than Alternative. A party which represent already existing political policies, just more extreme.

[ingemann]

I would have thought that the Socialist People's Party would line up pretty neatly with the Dutch Socialist Party and the Swedish Left Party. Are you saying that with the Workerites gone they are a more intersectional-y rump?

I would say FI are like GreenLeft because they both flirt with liberal economics and are very intersectional-y.

I would say the Red-Greens are roughly equivalent to the FI and GreenLeft, minus the economics part. I assume they must still be pretty hardcore because of all the Communists.

but yeah, Radicals are D66, that's pretty dead on.

I still say The Alternative is also basically D66, and therefore totally redundant and unnecessary.

I would say it's the Radical who is redundant and unnecessary. The Alternative is fresh wind into Danish politics, while Radicals are a special interest party caught in a age which have been over since 2001, and which are unlikely to return.

[ingemann]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

... but a problem with this as I see it, in my experience most women don't vote after these policies. In my experience the whole gender equality as a primary policy focus are hold by very few women outside a academic elite. The "gender issues" they usual care about seem more like cheap and convenient access to childcare (so that they can work), things which are relative easy to focus on and result in a large improvement of their daily life.

I get the feeling that you probably substantially underestimate the size of the academic "elite", a sizeable share of the electorate have spent a few years at a university. Not really sure what your point is with regards to gender issues. They can get votes on both types of gender issues in a similar way as green parties might win votes on all sorts of "green issues" etc.

I have spend time at a university, so have many people I know, most of us still doesn't belong to a academic elite.

As for the rest of your post, yes of course you can have both have practical policies and weird ivory tower theorectical discussions about gender equality. But it's rarely a vote winner. Most parties have a limited policies to brand themselves, and it's rare for a party to succeed in branding itself both as a practical pig and a philosopher king at the same time.

[ingemann]

Apparently it's advertisements aimed at tourists (it's written in broken English for one) apologising about the "mess" from beggars and tourists and promising to be the true opposition. It's an intriguing idea - I've never really heard of a political campaign being aimed entirely at people who can't vote.
; but it seems the hippies are really irked by public transport being used to advertise for the SD's.

The target audience is Swedes embarrassed by their country looking "messy" to foreign guests. It probably works well, neatness and order are highly valued by "Middle-Sweden".

And why would Stockholm be messy? Does this alleged "messiness" imply something that can be perceived as racist, or are people angry just because it's SD?

My guess are that it's about "Romanian" beggars. In Scandinavia begging was relative limited until the 00s, it was mostly native homeless. But since Romania became part of EU, there have bee a llarge influx of beggars from Romania (much like in other parts of Europe), who also make up part of a new wave of burglaries, cons and home robberies (through a large part of these in Scandinavia are commited by "Lithuanians" and other "Balts").

Of course I include the inverted commas because the "Romanians" are mostly Romani/Gypsies, while the Lithuanians are largely Lithuanian Russians (often people who are returning after having worked abroad, and lack money because they have send all their earnings home to the family).

As such this is likely a campaign against Romanis, not only the Romanian ones, but also the ones who have residence in Sweden.
... and if people think that Muslims are unpopular in Europe, the opinions about Romanis are much much worse.

[ingemann]

With or without the immigrants, I doubt any European will ever come to Sweden and think "gee, what a messy country!"

It's several difference aspect, one is that Stockholm and other large cities have changed, but it's also people thinking back and telling themselves how much better the world was in old day (when the young was respectful to their olders, the summers warmers, the sky more blue etc.). At last it a wrong comparison, what foreigners think about this doesn't matter, this is a campaign to Swedes disguised as a fake excuse to foreign tourist.

Of course the people pulling down this ad served as the third part of this ad. It fit into their narrative that SD are persecuted by the political establishment and their opponents are a bunch of jackbooted thugs.

So they sold first a message how those thieving Romanis are destroying Stockholm, then the media raised awareness of this to all of Sweden by taking a stand against it, then their opponents made themselves look like arrogants snobs by mocking their English and at last SD could sell their opponents as jackbooted thugs.

Success.

While if this ad had been ignored, only Stockholmers (a group where SD get few voters) would have seen it and SD would just have wasted some money.

[ingemann]

Of course in all fairness it should be said, that while it's in the interest of the Swedish mainstream and far left as collectivse to ignore this ad campaign, as individuals a lot of people acted in their own interest. As this gave them some street creds and maybe even public recognisation, which they can use to sell themselves and their organisations, some which nobody have likely heard about.

[ingemann]

I think that DavidB brings some very good point up, if you look at DF/DPP, the move to a more anti-immigration position of the rest of the political spectum did result in DPP growing very slowly compared to anti-immigration parties in other countries, but also in DPP growing more mellow (they even condemned the Conservative use of the term Nazi-Islamismt) and diversifying. Yes they may end up in a government in the next ten years, but they're quite a distinct party from what they were when they started. Of course it have also had the interesting aspect that the other parties and media hae begun to attack them for their specific policies (like how they will finance them), rather than keep screaming about how they're nazi/fascist/racist, all the world's ill are their fault and their voters are horrible people. Attacking a party for having incoherent politic usual work better than attacking their perceived worldview.

[ingemann]

1.) Why is Stockholm a stronghold of the center-right?

I think this is a better question than most people realise, even if our Swedish posters are tired of answering it.

The answer is as Gustaf say, because Stockholm are rich, but there's a more interesting structural explanation. In most European countries, rural areas was primarily agricultural areas, which mean they was home to mostly farmers. While cities was home to the growing industries, which resulted in a large working class. Sweden on the other hand developed much of their early industry in rural areas, from early copper mining, glass making, pine tar production, iron mining etc, so they developed a rural working class. At the same time any farmers was in many areas extremely poor and often worked as workers in the industry too, so these people had interest in socialist policies. The cities on the other hand was too large extent home to the capitalist class, those who serviced them and richer skilled workers. It's also why when we look at Scania which share similar structures to Denmark, we see much more similar voting pattern to Denmark.

This is unusual in European context, but we spots around Europe which share similar structures, like the rural areas in Westphalia which belong to Prussia before 1789, which was also home to rural industries.