This study aims to clarify why the Liberal People’s Party and the Left Party at multiple occasions have changed in their respective approach to the government alternatives in connection with the formation of government in Sweden during the period of 2019-2021. The study’s focus emphasizes on determining the two parties' different motives which can explain why the parties have acted in a particular manner. Relevant data that provide motivations for the parties’ actions have been collected and analysed. The parties' motivations have then been applied to four different theoretical models provided by Wolfgang C. Müller, Kaare Strøm and Gunnar Sjöblom. The different models each suggest different motives, office-seeking, policy-seeking, vote-seeking, and intraparty cohesion. The questions formulated to answer the aim of this study is as follows, how can the Liberal People’s Party as well as the Left Party’s change in their respective approach to the government alternatives be explained by the office-seeking, policy-seeking, vote-seeking, and intraparty cohesion models? The main result of the study shows that there is not a single motive behind the parties' changed approach to the government alternatives, rather than the different motives combined that explain the change in the party’s behaviour.

Syftet med undersökningen är att undersöka hur konflikter omskrivs i läromedel i samhällskunskap på gymnasieskolan. Via en kvalitativ läromedelsanalys av fyra läroböcker i samhällskunskap med inriktning mot gymnasieskolan undersöks hur konflikter definieras och vad som anses vara den föreliggande orsaken till konflikter utifrån en begreppsapparat taget ur fältet conflict resolution. De begrepp och förklaringar som undersöks är inkompatibilitet utifrån antingen territorium eller regeringsmakt samt mellanstatlig konflikt, statsbildningskonflikt och inbördeskrig. Resultatet visar att det existerar en skillnad gällande formuleringarna i de olika läroböckerna. Slutsatsen visar att både mellanstatlig konflikt och statsbildningskonflikt synonymiseras med konflikt medan inbördeskrig behandlas som ett eget begrepp. Vidare visar materialet med tydlighet på när en konflikt är grundad i inkompatibilitet gällande territorium. Konflikter grundade i inkompatibilitet gällande regeringsmakt saknar dock antingen en koppling eller en tydlig koppling till regeringsmakt. Slutsatsen som görs till följd av studien är att det undersökta materialet inte är konsekventa i sin beskrivning av konflikter. / The purpose of this study is to examine how conflicts are described in educational textbooks in social science for the upper secondary school. Via a qualitative textbook analysis of four educational textbooks in social science for the upper secondary school conflicts are examined by how they are defined and what is considered to be the cause for conflicts from a conceptual apparatus taken from the field of Conflict resolution. The concepts and explanations that are being examined are incompatibility of either territory or state and interstate armed conflict, state formation conflict, and intrastate conflict. The result shows a difference between the formulations in the textbooks. The conclusion shows how both interstate armed conflicts and state formation conflicts are being synonymized with conflict while intrastate armed conflicts are being treated as an own concept. Furthermore, the material shows with clarity when a conflict is sprung out of incompatibility of territory. Conflicts of state are however either missing a connection to incompatibility of state or the connection is unclear. The drawn conclusion following the study are that the material is not consistent in its description of conflicts.