The Sweden Democrats has become the third largest party in Sweden after the parliamentary elections in 2014. Ever since the party was founded in 1988, debates regarding the party’s policy has been of great interests but also the party’s ideological affiliation whether to classify it as a populist radical right party or not. Furthermore, many scientists have arrived at the conclusion that the Sweden Democrats should be seen as a populist radical right party. This conclusion makes it interesting to further investigate what ideological affilitation the party should identify itself with since the party itself argues to be a social conservative party with a nationalist ethos. With this in mind, the purpose of this study is to examine if the party has populist radical right fundamentals in its recent policy program through the use of the method idea analysis and through the use of creating an ideal type of the theory populist radical right. In addition, it has thus been possible to confirm or to deny the Sweden Democrats as a populist radical right party. The result of this thesis has shown that the policy program does consist of populist radical right elements. Hence, it has been concluded that the Sweden Democrats should be categorized as a populist radical right party.

I analyse whether coalitions consisting of one or several parties from both political blocs have a causal effect on the following election results of the Sweden Democrats using election data. I find that, when the largest bloc is unable to reach a seat majority in a municipal assembly and forms a coalition with one or several parties from the other bloc, the Sweden Democrats increase their municipal vote share by on average 11.71 percentage points the following election. I interpret the result as support for the view that Swedish voters punish the established parties when they are perceived as becoming more similar in terms of policy and ideology. Moreover, my results show that the effect is only significant in municipalities where no small and/or local parties exist, indicating that the largest bloc in many municipalities prefer to form a coalition with these parties when the opportunity exists.

Immigration is one of the effects, one of the symptoms of the ill-functioning and outdated machine that is the elite. Immigration and asylum-seeking have been frequent topics in public debates for years. The number of refugees making their way from war-torn regions of the world to Sweden makes the citizen versus asylum-seeker dichotomy highly relevant for social psychology research about discursively constituted identities. That is to say: how social-categorizations, emotions and attitudes are created in text and talk. Today, public opinion is largely produced online, this makes it possible to explore the motivations, strategies and goals of “the nonracist racist” on Facebook. This study utilizes a dual-edged approach in that coding is done both from an inductive- and a deductive direction. It adheres to a discursive psychology approach and follows Potter and Edward’s (2001) situated, action-oriented and constructed features of discourse. These theoretical features inform the deductive coding and are contextualized using Sakki and Pettersson’s (2016) three representation of otherness with subsequent six discourses produced by the populist radical right. Findings indicate that cultural comparison constructing cultural incompatibility is the main rhetorical resource for constructing the citizen versus asylum-seeker dichotomy. However, this dichotomy is not the most dominant “us and them” construction by the “nonracist racist”. “The elite versus the people” is the most common “us and them” construction. It carries significant weight that the seemingly unfiltered expressions of hatred on anti-immigration pages on Facebook are more concerned with what “we” are doing wrong rather than what is wrong with any “deviant others”. It is more about an internal clash of moral compasses than it is about a supposed clash of civilizations. Along with the occasioned feature of discourse, this partly explains why anti-immigration advocates for example position themselves as victims or defenders.

In the past decade, scholars have discovered how European populist radical right parties have increasingly resorted to instrumentalizing issues of gender equality within broader anti-immigration and anti-Islam campaigns. This phenomenon has been coined as femonationalism by sociologist Sara R. Farris; building on her theorization, this thesis aims to investigate thisfurther in a Nordic context by examining whether and how femonationalism can be traced within the politics of the Finns Party (FP) and the Sweden Democrats (SD). This has been achieved by conducting an ideational analysis of the parties’ official election material and policy documents provided on their respective party websites. The analytical framework applied is political scientist Mats Lindberg’s VDP-triad, in which the central task is to capture the proposed value, descriptive, and prescriptive statements in a text. The thesis’ main findings indicate that for the FP, femonationalism could most closely be linked to their policy implications. Here, the FP advocates for extensive anti-immigration and anti-Islam policies, while also promoting policies that uphold a traditional gender order amongst Finns. For the SD, femonationalism was mostly found in their expressed value statements concerning the supremacy of western values in relation to gender equality, which migrants are supposed to internalize and respect. Implications for future research are to examine the phenomenon of femonationalism further in different country settings in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how it presents itself.

No description available.

Given the tendency of Populist Radical Right (PRR) parties to form anti-LGBTQ+ claims, this thesis aims to understand how a PRR party operating in a context characterized by progressive values relates to LGBTQ+ topics in their political messages on social media. A single case study of the Sweden Democrats (SD) – an example of a PRR party operating in such a context – was conducted. Idea analysis, which included the concepts of homonationalism and heteroactivism, was performed on 44 posts published during the year following the 2022 election on the social media platform X by politicians representing the SD in the national parliament. The results show that the SD pursued a homonationalist discourse in that they advocated LGBTQ+ rights to oppose Islam in general and Muslim integration in Sweden in particular. However, when the SD solely focused on the Swedish domestic context, LGBTQ+ rights were not promoted, but rather heteronormativity was favored above non-normative relationships, gender identities, and gender expressions. Thus, the results suggest that the SD took part in heteroactivism. Moreover, while the SD avoided outspoken homophobic statements, transphobic ideas were evident. Hence, the SD adapted to the Swedish context by performing a balancing act where they weighed the expression of heteronormative ideals against the potential loss of acceptance from a public supporting LGBTQ+ rights. Altogether, these results contribute to research on PRR parties operating in contexts characterized by progressive values as well as research on the SD concerning LGBTQ+ topics.

No description available.

In 2010, the populist radical right party the Sweden Democrats were voted into the Swedish parliament, which rattled the mainstream parties. The Sweden Democrats’ stance on migration policy was clear from the start, with their MPs promoting a radical decrease, if not a complete stop, to all immigration. This thesis aims to expand the existing research about populism in Sweden and contribute to the field of political science by analysing the general policy debates on migration policy held after the entry of the Sweden Democrats into parliament. The study examines the debates to get answers to several questions: What do politicians think is the main problem with migration policy over the years and how are the problems represented? Is it possible to find indications of populism during the debates and are there signs of the Sweden Democrats' discourse being normalized? Are there any discursive shifts made by the mainstream parties and is there a hegemonic discourse visible throughout the debates? The results show four dominating problem representations on the topic of migration over the years, with the problem representation of the Sweden Democrats gaining support from the Liberals and the Christian Democrats in the debate of 2018. Tendencies of normalization of the Sweden Democrats’ discourse are also detectable in the 2018 debate, as well as some discursive shifts by mainstream parties. A hegemonic discourse is visible during the 2010 and 2014 debates, but it has lost its hegemonic position during the 2018 debate.

This diploma thesis examines the suitability of generalization of the populist radical right parties (PRRP). In recent years, these parties have succeeded on the political scene of many European countries. Using the example of "new" Svoboda a přímá demokracie (SPD) political party and the established Danish People's Party (DF) it shows the differences in the party pre-election rhetoric and program, which are brought about by parties' age as well as by different historical developments in the respective countries. The historical context has affected contemporary political environment and, therefore, there are reasonable doubts about the generalization of the PRRPs. This is especially the case of post-communist countries, which, after years of oppression, had to go through a process of transformation that involved not only economic issues. This thesis is based on the Lipset's and Rokkan's cleavages theory, while it tries to confirm its existence in the given states, namely the economical, the religious, the center - periphery and the urban - rural cleavage. The inclusion of six tested factors in the analysis helps to do this. The multiple linear regression analysis tested which factors (the factors are socio-cultural, socio-economic, and demographic factors) have a statistically significant...

Do Populist Radical Right Parties have an impact on the attitudes of other parties? Despite drawing much attention from the general public as well as academics, there is no clear answer to this conundrum. In this paper I examine how mainstream political parties change their positions in parliamentary debates on immigration and refugees after Populist Radical Right Parties enter parliament. In order to do this, I use theoretical concepts such as discourse coalitions and storylines in combination with network methodology to map out how parties in the Swedish parliament relate to one another through their attitudes towards key themes in the debate on immigration and refugees. This paper focuses on the relations between parties through language by applying Discourse Network Analysis on parliamentary debates. Thus, it contributes with a new relational aspect and methodological tool on a relatively underutilised material. The findings indicate that there is a change in other parties’ attitudes towards immigration and refugees, with two mainstream right parties moving closer to the Populist Radical Right Party. However, the datatype does not support causal language and the findings are limited due to small amounts of data.