Anders Hellström

‘We Are the Good Guys’ Ideological positioning of the nationalist party Sverigedemokraterna in contemporary Swedish politics

This article explores the ideological positioning of Sverigedemokraterna (SD; the Sweden Democrats) in contemporary Swedish politics. Comparative research on nationalist parties pays very little attention to SD, despite the fact that following the general elections in 2006 it came close to consolidating a permanent position in Swedish politics. In the analysis, we highlight the recurrent rhetorical figures in the public debate as manifested in the media coverage from September 2006 to May 2007. The ideological positioning of SD evolves in the interaction between its self-image and the counter arguments adopted by SD-antagonists. Although the established parties were careful to distance themselves from SD, our analysis indicates a possible taming of SD in the run-up to the general elections in 2010. The party’s monocultural nationalist messages may also become more widely accepted and still allow it to be considered as ‘one of the good guys’.

Nationalism vs. Nationalism: The Challenge of the Sweden Democrats in the Swedish Public Debate

In the 2010 Swedish general elections the nationalist party Sverigedemokraterna (SD) crossed the threshold and entered parliament. The other parties in parliament reacted with strong antagonism; the mainstreaming of the ‘radical right’ had finally come to Sweden. This article analyses the media coverage of the SD following the 2006 elections, when it emerged as a high-profile party in the public arena. The presence of the SD in Swedish politics encourages both SD allies and opponents to emphasize their views on what constitutes social cohesion in Sweden. We see the public debate surrounding the SD as a rhetorical struggle between different nationalist claims.

Nationalism vs. Nationalism: The challenge of the Sweden Democrats

In the 2010 Swedish general elections the nationalist party Sverigedemokraterna (SD) crossed the threshold and entered parliament. The other parties in parliament reacted with strong antagonism; the mainstreaming of the ‘radical right’ had finally come to Sweden. This article analyses the media coverage of the SD following the 2006 elections, when it emerged as a high-profile party in the public arena. The presence of the SD in Swedish politics encourages both SD allies and opponents to emphasize their views on what constitutes social cohesion in Sweden. We see the public debate surrounding the SD as a rhetorical struggle between different nationalist claims.

The return of the Kings: Temporality in the construction of EU identity

The authors analyze how pro-federative representatives of the European Commission exploit the temporal dimension of identity construction within the EU. The paper shows, through the analysis of speeches and statements of Commission members, how efforts are made to construct a common past and visualize a common future to enhance common identities within the EU. The common past is invoked through recurrent claims that Europe is on the point of being reunified, and, most prominently, through references to the words and deeds of the Founding Fathers of the EU, notably Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman. This near past seems to make up the affective glue most counted upon to promote common identifications. Furthermore, the temporal dimension is used to invoke visions pertaining to the near future, here labelled the common near. Most often, these visions deal with the favourable and harmonious conditions to arise once the current enlargement is completed.

Europe in Peril

In July 2005, four bombs exploded in London. This act of terrorism created fear and caused disruption to the lives of Londoners; foreign tourists decided to cancel their vacations to the British capital. That autumn, the UK government presided over the European Council of Ministers. On 7 September, Charles Clarke, at the time British Home Secretary, made a speech to the European Parliament in Strasbourg. The European Union (EU), he said, ‘has been a massive source for good’; however, not all people, especially not the British, were convinced of the virtue of the European project. The reason why, he stated, was that the EU did not seem to offer practical solutions to pressing problems such as terrorism. For Clarke, the EU should earn its citizens’ approval and satisfy their demands for security and protection against organized crime. The EU needed to offer its citizens protection from what they feared. Adopting Clarke’s argument is also a feasible means to endorse popular commitment to the European project.

Brussels and Populism

The more ‘‘Brussels’’ grows the more people look for their own identity, their roots. One day we may even come to the conclusion that European integration generated a measure of alienation. Fear of the future would be an ill chosen guide. The future harbours challenges and there are policy options we ought to consider in order to cope with mounting problems [. . .]. The levels of immigration and the lack of integration tend to stretch the absorption capacity of a number of urbanised areas . . . As a result both popular discontent and populism have become rampant.

National myth-making and populist mobilization in Scandinavia

This paper analyses if and how the Sweden Democrats (the SD), the Danish People’s Party (the DPP) and the Progress Party (the PP) in Norway use myths of national exclusiveness and myths about the c ...

Book review : Debating multiculturalism in the Nordic welfare states

This book grew out of a conference in Turku in the fall 2010. The book is devoted to the contested issue of multiculturalism, focusing on the Nordic welfare states. The basic puzzle is, as Peter Ki...