While working for the Social Justice party in the recent Swedish elections, Jimmy Dignam witnessed the disturbing emergence of far right anti-immigration sentiment in what until recently has been a country synonymous with social democracy.
The Sweden Democrats (SD) shocked many across Europe as they won 5.7 per cent of the national vote in the Swedish general election of September 19th, entitling them to 20 Parliamentary positions. The SD ran on a platform of opposition to immigration, heavily criticizing Islam and Muslims, and portrayed themselves as the party that defends elderly healthcare.
Much of the SD success can be attributed to the lack of alternative offered by the Left and in particular the traditionally working-class Social Democratic Party. The SD started out in the late 1980s as an openly racist party, but have ‘reformed’ themselves into an ‘immigrant-critical’ organisation.
The party has reneged on previous proposals to deport anyone who immigrated into the country since 1970, favouring instead incredibly harsh integration policies and much stricter punishment for immigrants found committing crimes, in a country where approximately one in five people have a foreign background.
Coupled with their new ‘cleaner image’, the right-wing media have resisted criticising the SD and in many cases have defended their racist policies. Historically, Sweden has followed a social-democratic model investing heavily in the welfare state, especially in the 1960s and 1970s.
The Social Democratic Party has held office virtually continuously since its inception in 1889. Sweden has, on most social issues – housing, education and healthcare – has been one of Europe’s most progressive societies.
However in the September election the Social Democrats recorded their worst result since 1914, only narrowly holding their position as the country’s biggest party. Even though the Social Democrats claim to still represent the working class, many people have become disillusioned with their increasing shift towards neo-liberal policies.
In the lead-up to the election, the Establishment parties divided themselves into the Red/Green Alliance and Blue Alliance, neither offering any kind of genuine alternative to the 8% unemployed or policies to counter an impending housing bubble collapse. The SD, on the other hand, proposed a very simple solution to very difficult questions. They appealed to many disillusioned voters facing increasing economic uncertainty.
Per-Åke Westerlund, the Chairman of Sweden’s Socialist Justice Party, summed it up when he stated, “I think that the most important thing is the insecurity about the future for more and more people. There is an increasing gap between rich and poor, increased inequality, and there has been no real anti-racist reply against this racist party”.
All the main parties took a stand against the SD, which probably increased their ‘protest vote’, but in no way organized against them or offered a viable solution to Sweden’s economic problems. The Blue Alliance has managed to win a slim victory without gaining a majority.
It appears now that they will rely on the SD to achieve that majority on certain issues in Government, as they have done repeatedly already in local councils across Sweden.
The day after the election, 20,000 people demonstrated against the SD on the streets of Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö. This shows the potential for a movement against the SD and racism. The principled Swedish Left is trying to build a strong anti-racist movement, uniting workers and young people regardless of their religion or ethnic background. The struggle needs to be based both on fighting against racism and simultaneously struggling for high quality jobs, education, health care and housing.
Despite the SD’s efforts to disguise themselves as the party defending the elderly against healthcare cuts, they voted in favour of them at local council level. It is up to the Swedish Left to now show it offers the only real alternative to the fear and uncertainty parties such as the SD prey upon.
