The purpose of this essay is to examine and compare two different minority governments that have been ruling in Sweden since the one chamber parliament was introduced in 1971. This examination will be helpful to make conclusions about the political strategies that have been used during their time in the government. This essay will also try to answer why these strategies were used, if the motives were just tactical or if they were based on ideological theories. In this essay I will review and compare the government of Ola Ullsten from 1979 and the government of Stefan Löfven from 2014 to see if there are any similarities between their strategies and also what effects their time as prime ministers of Sweden have on the aspects of democracy and efficiency. Sweden is known for its negative parliamentarism which often generates weak minority governments and the cases of this study are examples of that. The question to be answered is wheater or not political strategy is absolutely necessary and a result of a selection system that forces politicians to use strategy to be able to rule or if political strategy is used as a weapon to maximize their self interests.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:lnu-109317 |
| Date | January 2022 |
| Creators | Lindblad, Petter |
| Publisher | Linnéuniversitetet, Institutionen för statsvetenskap (ST) |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds