« | Home | »

Sweden’s ‘Centre’ Party

Tags: |

A couple of years ago, Swedish politics were shaken up by the fresh-faced young Jimmy Åkesson’s Sverigedemokraten getting 5.7 per cent of the parliamentary vote on an anti-immigrant ticket. Now Centerpartiet – traditionally the party of the countryside – has been taken over by another fresh face, Annie Lööf (pronounced ‘lurve’), advocating unlimited immigration. Both are considered to be of the right, but totally opposite rights: the Sweden Democrats nationalistic and chauvinist, the Centre Party just about as ‘new liberal’ as you can get. (This kind of contradiction isn’t unique to the right. The left has its state socialists at one end of the spectrum and anarcho-socialists at the other.)

Lööf’s programme embraces not only free immigration, but also cutting the years of compulsory education, a flat rate of income tax, no limit on how little you can pay workers, and allowing polygamy. It is the last, predictably, that has attracted the most debate, causing her to backtrack on it recently. Other policies you can probably guess at from her first principle, which seems to be the old John Stuart Mill one of individual freedom in anything that doesn’t directly harm others. This is individualist liberalism taken to its logical conclusion – or ad absurdum, if you like. It is the most extreme form of it I’ve come across in a significant politician anywhere; and Lööf is significant, with the job of enterprise minister in the current centre-right coalition government.

It seems very osvensk. Sweden is supposed to be the country of consensus and social democracy, yet here we have the most right-wing (in one sense) politician apparently flourishing. How she and her libertarian allies managed to hijack the old farmers’ party as they did I don’t know, and nor do any of my shocked Swedish friends. Lööf is very young (not yet 30); from a political family in Småland in the south; a great admirer of Margaret Thatcher and Ayn Rand; and very personally ambitious. The Centre Party has loads of money, after it sold its interest in a newspaper group in 2005. Its change of tack is supposed to have made it more attractive in urban areas. It matches other trends around the world, like the Tea Party movement in the United States. And Sweden has shifted to the right more generally over recent years (though not this far). The Lööf line may also have caught on with younger voters, who feel stifled by the democratic consensus around them and anxious to break out. (Piratpartiet – free music downloads from the internet – was another symptom of this.) Whether it indicates any deeper disillusion with the ‘Swedish model’ – managed capitalism and social welfare – is difficult to say. Admirers of that system, and of its resilience through the recent global troubles, will hope not.

They may be encouraged by recent opinion polls, which show support for the Centre Party sliding to 3.2 per cent (down from 6.6 per cent in 2010) which would not be enough to entitle it to a single parliamentary seat after the next election. As a result it is currently dogged with internal dissension. It would be nice to think that the reason for the decline in its support is that its new programme really is ‘un-Swedish’, though it could just as well be that people are put off by its promise of even more immigrants.

Comments on “Sweden’s ‘Centre’ Party”

  1. gringo_gus says:

    Sweden has a population of 10 million. Denmark has a population of 5 million. The NW of England has a population of 7 million. Sao Paulo has a population of 26 million. We should give s**t about a bunch of Nordics obsessed with purity of the nation ? Even lovely Birgitte ?

    I am sorry, but there must be students unions bigger than some of these countries, and with more adult politics. Someone needs to make the case for leaving the EU because the UK is the only oasis of inter-racial tolerance within it. Far from perfect, but, in comparison.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • mideastzebra on Swedish-Israeli Tensions: Avigdor Liberman was not foreign minister November 2015.
    • lars hakanson on Exit Cameron: Europe will for good reason rejoice when the UK elects to leave. The country has over the years provided nothing but obstacles to European integration...
    • Michael Schuller on Immigration Scandals: The Home Office is keen to be seen to be acting tough on immigration, although I'm not sure that the wider project has anything to do with real number...
    • Geoff Roberts on What happened in Cologne?: The most surprising thing about the events in Cologne (and the most disturbing) is that some 600 incidents of theft, harrasment and rape were reported...
    • EmilyEmily on What happened in Cologne?: The author's argument is straightforward: Sexual violence is one beast; fears about migrants is another - let's not confuse the two. Alfalfa's poin...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement