Suchergebnisse

The strategic approaches towards radical right-wing populist parties (RRP-parties) are in special focus for the thesis. The aim of the thesis is reconstruction and analysis of the content of the established parties' strategic approaches towards parties that are seen as challenging central principles of liberal democracy, such as pluralism and tolerance, and who´s presence are creating a democratic dilemma. The aim has been operationalized within a Swedish context with focus on the strategic approaches used by the Social Democratic party and the Conservative party towards the Sweden Democrats, a Swedish RRP-party. The methodological framework is built upon a qualitative perspective with focus on interviews with representatives for the two established parties and the Sweden Democrats. The empirical material has been analyzed with the PSO-theory (Position, Salience and Owner-ship theory) as point of departure. The theory shows how strategic approaches used by the established parties are related to 1)the specific political issue raised by the RRP-party and 2) the degree of threat posed by the challenging RRP-party towards the established parties. The results generated from the thesis show that the content of the strategic approaches from the established parties towards the Sweden Democrats have changed since the election 2006, from a common dissmissive strategy to a strategic approach marked by tendencies of divergence (the Social Democratic party) and vauge tendencies of convergence (the Conservative party). The thesis also shows that the specific issue politicized by the Sweden Democrats, i.e. the immigration- and refugee issue, is central to the way the content of the strategic approaches used by the two established parties has been shaped. The thesis indicates that the presence of RRP-parties have caused a situation where the democratic dilemma have become subordinated to a strategic dilemma. The established parties need to relate to the goals they are striving towards through the strategic approach of the RRP-party (such as maximation of votes) at the same time as they relate to the strongly value-charged political issue monopolized by the RRP-party.

Etablerade partiers strategiska bemötande av radikala högerpopulistiska partier(RHP-partier) står i fokus för avhandlingen. Syftet med avhandlingen ärrekonstruktion och analys av innehållet i de etablerade partiernas strategiskabemötande av partier som anses utmana centrala principer inom den liberalademokratin, såsom pluralism och tolerans, och vars närvaro också anses skapa ettdemokratiskt dilemma. Syftet har operationaliserats inom ramen för en svenskkontext med fokus på Socialdemokraternas och Moderaternas strategiskabemötande av ett svenskt RHP-parti i form av Sverigedemokraterna. Detmetodologiska ramverket utgår från ett kvalitativt perspektiv med fokus påintervjuer med representanter för de två etablerade partierna ochSverigedemokraterna. Det empiriska materialet har analyserats med hjälp av PSOteorin(Position, Salience and Owner-ship theory). Teorin visar hur de etableradepartiernas strategiska bemötande av RHP-partier kan relateras till 1) den specifikasakfråga RHP-partiet politiserar och 2) till vilken grad RHP-partiet hotar deetablerade partierna i fråga om väljarstöd. Avhandlingens resultat visar attinnehållet i de etablerade partiernas strategiska bemötande avSverigedemokraterna har förändrats sedan valet 2006 och att den sakfråga somSverigedemokraterna politiserat, flykting- och invandringsfrågan, är central förutformningen av de etablerade partiernas bemötande av partiet. ; The strategic approaches towards radical right-wing populist parties (RRP-parties)are in focus for the thesis. The aim of the thesis is reconstruction and analysis ofthe content of the established parties' strategic approaches towards parties thatchallenge central principles of liberal democracy, such as pluralism and tolerance,and who´s presence are creating a democratic dilemma. The aim has beenoperationalized within a Swedish context with focus on the strategic approachesused by the Social Democratic party and the Conservative party towards theSweden Democrats, a Swedish RRP-party. The methodological framework is builtupon a ...

It is rather often assumed that Swedish foreign policy debate is largely characterized by consensus and that foreign policy goals often are material (for example security or economic welfare). Despite this, it is possible to identify disagreement among political parties about ideological goals – i.e. the promotion of values – in Swedish foreign policy debates. This raises questions about the nature and importance of these ideological goals in such debates. To study this closer I investigate foreign policy debates about the military conflicts in Vietnam and Iraq. The purpose of the dissertation is to describe and explain the content and relative importance of the ideological goals expressed by Swedish parliamentary parties in both party and public arenas. Four parties are included in the study: the Left, the Social Democrats, the Liberals and the Conservatives. The theoretical framework is made up of two main parts. First, I develop a classification scheme to identify and sort the goals found in the empirical material. This scheme includes four goal types: ideological, security, economic, and other. Second, insights from literatures on foreign policy and the behaviour of political parties are used to analyze the content and importance of ideological goals. The research design used in the dissertation is comparative case studies. The empirical material is composed of documents from the internal party arena (meeting minutes, congress material, etc), the parliamentary arena (debate material) and the official arena (press material). The material has been analyzed mainly qualitatively with the help of ideational and argument analysis. In order to estimate the relative importance of ideological goals quantitative content analysis has also been used. As regards the content of ideological goals during debates about Vietnam, the empirical results show all parties discussed the promotion of humanity, democracy and states' rights to national independence. In the Iraq conflict, all parties expressed goals about humanity, human rights, internal security/safety, democracy and states' rights to national independence. Beyond these goals, individual or a few parties also expressed other ideological goals. However, a central result is that the parties have linked the ideological goals – which they often agree about – to different ways of reasoning. The empirical analysis also revealed that ideological goals have generally been more important than other types of goals (with the exception of the Conservative Party in the debate about Vietnam). Regarding developments over time, the importance of ideological goals was unchanged for the Social Democrats and the Liberal Party. For the Left there was a slight decrease, and for the Conservatives a significant increase. The overall conclusion about what explains the content and importance of ideological goals in the foreign policy debates studied here is that explanations at the systemic level are inadequate. Variables like the international political structure (polarity) and institutional mechanisms in the EU and the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy had little explanatory power. Instead, explanations like type of foreign policy issue, party ideology and party strategy were more useful. Differences in parties' fundamental ideological views were also discussed as an important source of difference as regards the positions and arguments that expressed ideological goals.

Mellan 2002 och 2018 utvecklades Sverigedemokraterna från ett marginellt parti till en politisk kraft att räkna med: partiet fick cirka 18 procent av rösterna i riksdagsvalet 2018. Björn Fryklund och Sigrid Saveljeffs artikel är en analys av Socialdemokraternas och Moderaternas förhållningssätt till Sverigedemokraterna under denna period. En utgångspunkt är den amerikanska statsvetaren Bonnie Meguids PSO-teori (position, salience, ownership), vilken urskiljer tre huvudsakliga strategier som dominerande partier kan tillämpa mot nischpartier: avvisande, konvergerande och divergerande. Författarna visar att trovärdighet och demokratisk legitimitet har haft stor betydelse för vilka strategier S och M har valt. Det finns ett demokratiskt dilemma: väljarnas efterfrågan på partier med högerpopulistisk dagordning skapar motsvarande tillgång, och förr eller senare uppstår en konflikt med den liberala demokratins grundläggande värden. Det skapar ett strategiskt dilemma för de etablerade partierna: de tvingas balansera mellan att sträva mot sina egna mål och att hantera det demokratiska dilemmat. I Sverige har det demokratiska dilemmat blivit allt mer underordnat det strategiska dilemmat.Publiceringshistorik: Originalpublicering.(Publicerad 20 mars 2019)Förslag på källangivelse: Fryklund, Björn & Sigrid Saveljeff (2019) "Det politiska etablissemangets strategier gentemot högerpopulistiska partier", i Arkiv. Tidskrift för samhällsanalys, nr 10, s. 33–70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13068/2000-6217.10.2 ; [The political establishment's strategies towards right-wing populist parties]Between 2002 and 2018, the Swedish right-wing populist party Sverigedemokraterna (the Sweden Democrats) developed from a marginal party to a political force to be reckoned with: the party received about 18 percent of the votes in the parliamentary election in 2018. Björn Fryklund and Sigrid Saveljeff's article is an analysis of the Swedish Social Democratic Party's and the liberal-conservative Moderate Party's approach to the Sweden Democrats during this period. One starting point is the American political scientist Bonnie Meguid's PSO (position, salience, ownership) theory, which distinguishes three main strategies that dominant parties can apply to niche parties: dismissive strategy, converging strategy or diverging strategy. The authors show that credibility and democratic legitimacy have been of great importance to which strategies the Social Democrats and the Moderates have chosen. There is a democratic dilemma: the voters' demand for parties with right-wing populist agenda creates the corresponding supply, and sooner or later a conflict arises with the fundamental values of liberal democracy. It creates a strategic dilemma for the established parties: they are forced to balance between striving for their own goals and dealing with the democratic dilemma. In Sweden, the democratic dilemma has become increasingly subordinate to the strategic dilemma.Publication history: Published original.(Published 20 March 2019)Citation: Fryklund, Björn & Sigrid Saveljeff (2019) "Det politiska etablissemangets strategier gentemot högerpopulistiska partier", in Arkiv. Tidskrift för samhällsanalys, issue 10, pp. 33–70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13068/2000-6217.10.2