The Big Bad Swedish Politics & News Thread

[politicus]

Ohlson has also been fired from her job in the SD parliamentary party bureau.

She won 44-38 over Tobias Anderson (19) from the moderate wing, so fairly close. Olson has an master of laws from Uppsala, where she also resides.

Some Swedish journos compare it to last time the youth wing of a Swedish party was expelled from their mother party. In 1917 when the Social Democratic youth wing was excluded after later PM Per Albin Hansson from the "loyalist" wing had lost a leadership election and the radicals collided with the revolutionary opposition in SDA against the leadership. The expelled youth wing formed the basis for the Communist Party of Sweden back then..

Ironically the rebellious youth wing back then was also called SDU - for Socialdemokratiska ungdomsförbundet!

(SD should call their new youth wing Sverigedemokratiska ungdomsförbundet to mess things up completely )

[politicus]

And what's the general sentiment as to the repercussions of this? Will this strengthen the SD's position in society because it cut ties with an organization deemed to be too right wing? Or will the narrative be that the party is facing an internal split (which is how the German media would cover it), which could drive away some voters?

Mainstreaming has been a success for the far right all over Scandinavia and cutting off extremists (and "village idiots") is a core element of that. Scandinavians generally dislike radicals and extremists and prefer a calm, rational and moderate appearance.

I think this will only be a problem if the expelled SDUs manage to create a viable party that can pressure SD from the right and prevent them from moderating (or at least rhetorically moderating - there is always a double standard with these parties) as much as the leadership would want in order to become more competitive.

[politicus]

So, what will the cast aside youth-wing do? Is Ohlson some Malema-esque rabble raiser?

They're going to start by suing the mother party. At least according to one of the few interviews Ohlsson has given. SDU is listed as an associated organisation in the party's by-laws, and those can only be changed if supported by 75% of delegates at the party conference. So unless the party manages to get the sufficient 75% at this year's conference there will be a legal battle if they can actually cut their ties to the youth wing.

So SDU is going to fight to remain part of the party, and if they succeed they have said their aim is to defeat and replace the current leadership.

If they fail, they have indicated that they'll form a new party however.

Interesting situation. When is the party conference?

[politicus]

So, what will the cast aside youth-wing do? Is Ohlson some Malema-esque rabble raiser?

They're going to start by suing the mother party. At least according to one of the few interviews Ohlsson has given. SDU is listed as an associated organisation in the party's by-laws, and those can only be changed if supported by 75% of delegates at the party conference. So unless the party manages to get the sufficient 75% at this year's conference there will be a legal battle if they can actually cut their ties to the youth wing.

So SDU is going to fight to remain part of the party, and if they succeed they have said their aim is to defeat and replace the current leadership.

If they fail, they have indicated that they'll form a new party however.

Interesting situation. When is the party conference?

November

Any polls of the electoral potential for a "to the right of SD" party?

[politicus]

The question we need to ask when we ask these kind of question is; why would people vote for a party to the right of SD?

Yes there will always be people who think anything less than death camps are too liberal, but those people are too little group to count. Instead people can choose between a party, which have proven it can come in parliament, have proven it doesn't collapse, have proven that it's competent and have broad appeal or you can choose wild eyed lunatics. There's likely a large number of people who think that SD is too liberals, but what else do these people agree with each other about, some may be nazi, other xenophobics greens, other national conservatives etc, these people can not agree to unite, and for them SD may look like the best compromise.

Kasselstrand, Hahne and Ohlson do not appear to be "wild eyed lunatics".

Presumably it would be the National Conservative segment that might make up 3% and then could get in with a few floating voters - or may even be bigger. That was what I was curious about.

The purpose of voting "SD Classic" would be the same as voting for Danish Unity in DK (or SPP to influence SD in the old days). To keep the bigger party from drifting towards the center by posing a potential threat on the flank.

[politicus]

New YouGov poll has SD at the highest ever and with a solid margin to the Moderates and SAP. Fokpartiet below the threshold, so an M + SD majority.

SD 27.3
Social Democrats 21.8
Moderates 20.0

Centre 7.5
KD 4.9
Folkpartiet 3.7

Left Party 6.5
Mp (Greens) 5.0

Others 3.2


53% thinks refugees and immigration is the most important political issue right now.

http://www.metro.se/nyheter/yougov-flyktingfragan-viktigast-bland-svenskar-sd-storsta-parti/EVHoip!9x7k81NHsgoEM/

[politicus]

We have another one of those stories that fuel the rise of SD. Asylum seekers refuse to accept being housed in flats from the 50s (build to house workers at a now closed paper mill, but recently renovated) in a small town in Dalarna because they aren't modern enough and the place is too remote (it is northern Sweden after all), some also feel cheated because they thought they were going to a bigger place.

http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/dalarna/missnoje-bland-asylsokande-i-fredriksberg

"There are 30 minutes walk to the nearest food store, and 45 minutes by car to the hospital and there are no schools", says asylum seeker Mohammad Khalaf.

Reporter: But there is a school in Fredriksberg.

– No, I don't think so. We havent seen any.


Mohammad Khaled (different guy) about the authorities:

– When we came here, we realize that it is a long way from civilization, shops, hospital and school. We need a place to study and have a good life. We came to Sweden because it should be "the freedom country". We believe they have lied for us"

http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/dalarna/vi-trodde-vi-skulle-komma-till-frihetslandet

(and yes, the traffickers likely have.. but not the Swedish authorities)

[politicus]

People missed my question, so I'll ask again: is Sweden likely to join NATO in the near future?

Both Centre and KD have recently changed their position to being pro. So all four mainstream centre-right parties (old Alliance) support it. SAP is deeply divided

[politicus]

Minister of Defence Thomas Hultkvist talks about increased cooperation about military exercises, research and international operations, while Foreign Minister Margot Wallström refuses any change in the alliance free foreign policy.

In an interview Tomas Ries, who is a researcher at Försvarshögskolan (the Defence Academy), describes the situation in SAP as a divide between business "sosser", who are focused on a strong defence and jobs in the armament industry vs. the leftist anti-militarist, "peace through diplomacy"-types, who are supported by the women's federation, Broderskabsbevægelsen (the Brotherhood Movement - Christian SocDems) and the remains of the peace movement + their antimilitarist partner Mp is against it. So not happening during the current government.

Two years ago defence chief Sverker Göransson said Sweden could only be partially defended and only for a week with the current defence! And that sent shock waves through the establishment + everything about the Swedish military is already NATO-standard since 1992 (as Ries says, even the underwear..); Link 16 and the Gripen fighter planes are adapted to NATO standards and they allow NATO exercises on Swedish territory. As he points out: The Russians already consider Sweden and Finland secret NATO members, so the change would be mostly symbolic.

Ries thinks they are close to membership, but that it requires a compromise between the centre-right and SAP + clarification of whether the parties want a referendum on the issue or not.

[politicus]

SD is against NATO-membership (but pro Partnership for Peace), but they want a formal military alliance with Finland "too make neutrality more credible". Most of their voters are pro-NATO.

(needless to say the Left Party is against..)

[politicus]

Using the YuGov poll:

Parties above threshold

Pro membership:
Moderates 20.0
Centre 7.5
KD 4.9

Total 32.4

Divided:
Social Democrats 21.8

Against:
SD 27.3
Left Party 6.5
Mp (Greens) 5.0

Total: 38.8

[politicus]

The Russians already consider Sweden and Finland secret NATO members.

That's because we are secret NATO members. As you point out, it's not even that secret. It is only in name that we aren't members.

Yeah, that was Ries' point.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In this interview Ries implies the opposite, that the job focused/union related right wing SAP is as strong as the "peachy" leftists with the current coalition with Mp a bigger stumbling block than overcoming their left wing (that is at least the tone in interview). But just wishful thinking from a professional defense analyst?

[politicus]

The 27% that aren't concerned about xenophobia corresponds to the share that will vote for SD, so a very polarized population. It is a shame the poll didn't ask about intensity of positions. That would be interesting for Sweden.

[politicus]

The 27% that aren't concerned about xenophobia corresponds to the share that will vote for SD, so a very polarized population. It is a shame the poll didn't ask about intensity of positions. That would be interesting for Sweden.

The number of SD voters differ between polls though, other polls have them at about 20, or in one case 16 %.

16% is clearly an outlier. I think the interesting thing here is that there is a relatively large minority which is outside the consensus. If you distrust the YouGov poll and others at that level lets just say the number is 21.5% (not unrealistic). In that case about 80% of the people saying xenophobia isn't a problem are voting for a nativist party. Given the relatively higher number of immigrants and that only a small number of them would vote SD (there is always some, but quite few) this equals at more than a quarter of old stock Swedes (dunno if you call them "old Swedes" the way we use new Danes/old Danes, but those who are ethnically Swedish). So you got a large share that are outside the consensus and my guess is they on average have stronger opinions about their position (= higher intensity) than the ones being more afraid of xenophobia than mass migration, which is the line the establishment supports and the media sustained social norm.

[politicus]

Meanwhile, the Swedish government is on a roll when it comes to foreign policy. Rumor has it that Sweden is almost ready to recognize rebel group POLISARIO as the legitimate ruler over the Western Sahara. In response, Morocco blocked the opening of the first IKEA store in the North African country.

Freedom decision!

(if they stick to it and don't back down as they did with the Saudi-Arabia critique)

[politicus]

I don't really agree (I'm pro-Morocco)

HP

Why do you support the occupation of small nations? Just to be consequent as a defender of Israeli occupation of Palestine?
(I am one as well, so I don't hold that against you, but I am strictly Israeli exceptionalism - to me Israel is a historical necessity due to extremely special circumstances, but not something that should form the basis for a general principle)

[politicus]

KD now also demands new elections, interesting if the Moderates will change their mind as well.

[politicus]

Ebba Busch Thor from KD wants a common Alliance budget in 2016, which Batra has refused. But it seems Thor is determined to keep rocking the boat, so to speak.

SD has said they will vote for the Moderates budget proposal.

[politicus]

Cross-posting this from the refugee crisis thread:

Moderate leader Anna Kinberg Batra has demanded immediate reinstatement of border controls in Schengen (temporarily during the crisis).

- "It is time that the government takes responsibility for the situation. It is an extreme situation that we see being worsened by the day. We must get a handle on who is coming here"

The Moderates have their party convention now and polls show they are losing voters to both Centre and SD over this - a liberal segment with youngish well-educated women over represented is going to Centre and a right wing with 60+ men as a core group is going to SD, so a bit of a dilemma for them.

[politicus]

In other news, SD has today announced that they will finance an ad campaign to discourage asylum seekers to go to Sweden, similar to the Danish campaign earlier this year.

Yeah, I suppose I might as well cross-post the last part of my post in the refugee thread.

The Sweden Democrats will now post "scare adds" in Turkish, Jordanian and Lebanese media to dissuade refugees from coming to Sweden. So they keep copy-catting the Danish right wing.

Wonder if Swedish left wingers will also finance a counter campaign?

I suppose broadcasting the possibility of having to live in tent camps or be housed in remote Norrland small towns would have an effect.

[politicus]

Wonder if Swedish left wingers will also finance a counter campaign?

Good God, that idea hadn't even crossed my mind! :S Why do loony right-wingers and left-wingers get to spend my tax money?!

Since when is it your tax money??

Public party aid.

[politicus]

Some math from Swedo-Kurdish economist Tino Sanandaji in a recent interview with Weekendavisen (not online, so no link) called Nordens Mexico ("The Nordic Mexico")

He says that if the authorities let the number of refugees and immigrants continue at the current level Swedes with two Swedish-born parents will become a minority in 10 to 15 years.

His calculation:

At the moment 1,000 to 1,500 refugees and immigrants arrive each day. Multiply this by 365 days and then 15 years. Since about 77% gets asylum at their first applications (he adds that the number is higher, because you can apply again), you land at between 4.2 million and 6.3 million asylum seekers in 15 years time. Each asylum recipient will receive one additional asylum receiver through family reunification (rounded down from 1.2). Multiply this by two and you get between 8.4 million and 12.6 million immigrants by the year 2030.

The total number of people in Sweden is 9.7 million. Of these, 21.5% have a foreign background, which means that Swedes with two Swedish-born parents makes up 7.7 million. Ergo, the number of immigrants will within 10-15 years become higher than the ethnically Swedish population is today and since this group doesn't increase (it will fall a bit) the minorities will surpass ethnic Swedes within 10-15 years.

He says he expects the Swedish authorities to slow down migration long before that  happens, but its still a thought provoking calculation.

In an editorial in the LO owned Aftonbladet editor Anders Lindberg says the numbers are "creative statistics", where figures are bend to suit a particular purpose and that such ideas are "based on racial ideology" (given that they operate with an "eternal Swedishness"). But there seems to be little basis for claiming the first - and the second doesn't disqualify them as relevant.

While the calculus is unlikely to become a reality (which Sanandaji underlines) it just seems basically to be on solid ground.

His portrait of the future Sweden as a Latin America style society with a functioning economy, but high inequality, violence and gated communities is obviously a dystopia seen from a Social Democratic view, so no wonder he is unpopular in SAP circles.

[politicus]

Of these, 21.5% have a foreign background, which means that Swedes with two Swedish-born parents makes up 7.7 million.

I think it's important to point out that the current 21,5% with foreign background also includes me, since my mother is Danish, and the rather large group of everyone else in Sweden with one Swedish-born parent, and a Nordic or otherwise western parent, and I hardly think we count as foreign even by the the most rigid Swedish Democratic viewpoint.

All these sorts of estimations always rely on ceteris paribus, which rarely come true. The current level of immigration will not continue for 10 or 15 years. The idea that the Swedish population could double in a mere decade is of course absurd.

His point wasn't that it would come through, but to demonstrate the extent of the current inflow and part of his point was, of course, that it is unrealistic for Sweden to keep taking so many.

Reinfeldt made that speech where he talked about the endlessness of the Swedish landscape and that there was room for everybody (I can't find the actual text, but he made the Swedish countryside sound as if it was the North American prairies). In reality most immigrants wants to live in cities and are not interested in a pioneer existence as subsistence farmers in rural Norrland. Sweden's potential as an immigrant country is related to how much your cities and larger towns can hold (without creating actual ghettos/slums or massive housing shortage for "the natives") and how many your labour market can absorb. And seen in that context Sweden is a fairly small country.

Refugees currently become immigrants (we seem unable to disconnect this mechanism - and Swedish pols are less willing to give temporary residence permits than neighboring countries, so they aren't even trying) and immigration is a numbers game. We Europeans should decide on a maximum. How large a population can we accomodate? How large a population are we willing to accept? And how much can we accept to change the ethnic balance? Those issues seems stil to be taboo in the Swedish debate - especially the last one, which is labeled as "racist".

So this simple calculation is interesting in a context in which many tend to trivialize the extent of the ongoing demographic changes and their consequences. There are people who are too alarmist, but the trivializing of both demographic and economic consequences is more widespread. It is as if most of the open borders crowd refuse to do or accept basic math and disregard prognoses.

In the 90s professor in demographics P.C. Mathiesen proposed that Denmark should have an Immigration Commission, where demographers, economists etc. could create prognoses of how immigration would affect Denmark in various areas, but the idea was blocked by Radikale, who claimed such numbers would be "abused". I think Danish debate would have been a lot more rational if based on the detailed studies Mathiesen wanted to conduct, and if Sweden wants to keep taking anywhere near as many refugees as you do now, you should establish an Immigration Commission to do some serious number crunching - also on the delicate matters like ethnicity. Of course that would be even harder to get accepted in Sweden.

[politicus]

Ebba Busch Thor (KD) keeps establishing her party as the "hardliners" on immigration/refugees among the mainstream centre-right. She wants temporary residency permits for refugees to lower the "asylum pressure" and faster rejection of baseless applications. Her view is that Sweden shouldn't have more favorable rules than Germany. Rather moderate in an international context, but still controversial in Sweden.

SD claims KD is getting closer to their views, which Thor obviously denies. Seems a bit shortsighted of Åkesson to undermine KD like that. A stronger KD would be a strategic advantage for SD - pressuring M towards the right.

[politicus]

SD claims KD is getting closer to their views, which Thor obviously denies. Seems a bit shortsighted of Åkesson to undermine KD like that. A stronger KD would be a strategic advantage for SD - pressuring M towards the right.

Is it undermining them though? By saying KD is getting closer to their views they do paint KD as the most attractive second choice for SD-voters and an acceptable alternative. SD obviously want a centre-right minority government dependent on them, and painting KD as an attractive alternative to their supporters would actually probably benefit them. 

My thinking was that they would want KD to attract voters from M, thus pressuring M to go towards the right (KD would be a more respectable alternative for M right wingers than SD). If KD only "borrows" voters from SD this wouldn't pressure M in the same way.

M are currently losing voters to both SD and Centre, I would assume they would only turn right if the loss to SD and KD became bigger than the loss to Centre.

Do you think Batra has actual liberal principles regarding this issue? Or would she drift right if the loss of votes were big enough.

(its easy to assume no politicians have deeply felt principles on anything, but Reinfeldt clearly had on this issue and even if Batra isn't quite as committed she may have too)