The election results leave a loose coalition of the SD and three centre-right parties leading with a majority of three in the 349-seat parliament. The complacent compliance of the Moderates, historically the largest of Sweden’s conservative parties, has left a party that has been condemned as “neo-fascists” by the government and has avoided coming so close to power for most of the past decade. The SD is unlikely to be offered ministerial positions, but will still be able to exert significant influence as the largest party in the electoral alliance. Denmark, Finland, Norway and now Sweden, once considered bastions of social democracy – though less of racial equality – had, or have, governments either inclusive or based on populist, anti-immigrant parties. There are also early signs that, from its new position of influence, SD will continue to wage culture wars and pick fights with public broadcasters over alleged elite bias against it. In a country historically admired for its consensual politics, further polarization seems inevitable. It is expected to be quite an autumn for Europe’s radical right. In Italy, elections next Sunday are expected to hand power to a conservative coalition led by the Brothers of Italy, a party with neo-fascist roots. SD’s victory brought recognition via tweet from Marine Le Pen. The likely leader of Sweden’s next government, Moderate party leader Ulf Kristersson, will not want Sweden to become a Nordic version of Hungary and Poland, where democratic checks and balances have been eroded and judicial independence undermined. If he did, the new government’s slim majority would quickly be threatened by its more liberal elements. It is also true that under the bold leadership of Jimmie Åkesson, the SD has undergone a reformation, redefining itself as a socially conservative, nationalist party and combating overt extremism in its ranks. But that hardly makes his new proximity to power any more palatable. For centre-right moderates and the defeated Social Democrats (who topped the polls but couldn’t muster a majority), SD’s seismic breakthrough raises awkward questions. Both parties have veered sharply to the right on immigration, hoping to stave off the far-right threat – yet they still send votes to the SD. Meanwhile, Mr Åkesson has managed to convince many Swedes that the cost of absorbing asylum seekers has undermined a welfare state that has traditionally been a badge of national pride. Mr. Åkesson’s ambition is, he says, for the SD to sit in the government. This would be a game changer. In the wake of the economic crash and refugee wave of the mid-2010s, this strategy of combining anti-immigrant sentiment with welfare nativism is allowing the radical right to make headway across Europe. Progressive politicians and parties must come up with a better and more creative response than a pale imitation.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a letter of up to 300 words to be considered for publication, please email it to [email protected]
