The Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats Idea Development 2010-2018:

Full text


Department of Political Science

The Moderate Party and the Swedish

Democrats Idea Development 2010-2018:

Comprehending the Parties Migration Policy Development Through

Rational Action, Societal Discourses and Critical Junctures



I would like to thank Professor Emil Uddhammar for being an excellent supervisor providing both professional guidance and support. I would also like to thank all the teachers at the Department of Political Science at Linnaeus University for providing informative lectures and for an excellent two years master education. I would also like to thank my father Agim, my mother Vjollca, three sisters and my family in Kosova for their immense support and positive encouragements throughout the whole period of me writing the master’s thesis. Last but not least, I would like to thank my dearest friend and masterstudent Moa for five years of tough studying and funny memories. Thanks to each and everyone of you for making me to the individual I am today and for all the new knowledge I have obtained. This is my way of thanking all of you.



The aim of this study is to analyse the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats idea development in the issue of migration in 2010-2018. The inquiry consists of the following two research questions. How has the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats positions regarding migration developed in 2010-2018? How can institutional theories explain the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats idea development? The study is encompassed by three theoretical perspectives also recognised as rational-choice institutionalism, historical institutionalism and discursive institutionalism. In regard to the methodological approach, the study employs the comparative case study design with the most-similar system and is essentially an idea analytical study. The main results reveal that both the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats have adjusted their migration policies but to different degrees. The Swedish Democrats promote similar policies in 2010 as in 2018 with smaller alterations while the Moderate Party has customised larger alterations, distinguishing the party’s migration policy from 2010 and 2018. These policy alterations are primarily explained as a result of rational action, societal discourses and critical junctures.


Table of Content

1 Introduction 4

1.1 Problem Formulation, Research Purpose and Questions 6

1.2 Demarcation 7 2 Disposition 8 3 Previous Research 9 4 Institutional Theories 15 4.1 Defining an Institution 15 4.2 Rational-Choice Institutionalism 15 4.3 Historical Institutionalism 18 4.4 Discursive Institutionalism 20

5 A Comparative Idea Analytical Inquiry 23

5.1 Research Design 23

5.2 An Idea Analytical Study 25

Table 1. Analysis Scheme 27

5.2.1 Operationalisation 28

Figure 1. Policy Alteration 30

5.3 Material 30

5.4 Validity and Reliability 32

6 The Political Parties Ideas and Policies 34

6.1 Moderate Party 34

6.1.1 Migration Policy 2010 34

6.1.2 Migration Policy 2018 35

6.1.3 Moderate Party’s Idea Development 36

6.2 Swedish Democrats 44

6.2.1 Migration Policy 2010 44

6.2.2 Migration Policy 2018 45

6.2.3 The Swedish Democrats Idea Development 46

7 Conclusion 53

Table 2. The Parties Migration Policies 2010 & 2018 53





(Rydgren 2010:58, 67). Swedish mainstream parties have taken a clear distance from collaborating and compromising with populist parties if compared to other political parties in the Scandinavian countries (ibid.). For example, the Danish People's Party, who is a Danish right-oriented populist party, has not encountered the same kind of rejection from other Danish parliamentarian mainstream parties as the Swedish Democrats has. Jens Rydgren states that unlike the Swedish Democrats, the Danish People's Party did not, from the start, originate as a political organisation sharing ideological roots in far-right extremism, Nazism, nationalism or fascism. Despite that the party has over time progressively accommodated policies that are closely comparable to the ideas the Swedish Democrats promote and support in present time. This is one explanation to why the Danish People's Party has not experienced the same kind of adversities as the Swedish Democrats (Rydgren 2004:480, 497).


publicly expressed that violence-making organisations and ideologies, that use violence as a political method should be illegal and prosecuted to the full extent of the law (Svensson & Samuelson 2017; Baas & Jakobson 2017).

The Moderate Party, on the other hand, was first established at the start of the 20th century and was back then recognised as the General Electoral League (Allmänna Valmansförbundet). At the beginning of the 1900s, the General Electoral League promoted an ideology strongly equivalent to what is today recognised as classic conservatism and nationalism. Throughout the years, the party’s ideological positions altered progressively, accepting a more liberal-oriented agenda. The Moderate Party grew to accept more liberal and internationalistic policies, while at the same time, combining them with conservative values (Moderate Party 2018b). Some claim that tensions between social conservatives and market liberals within the organisation emerged which also influenced the party’s political agenda. Despite these contradictions, the two ideological positions within the party have agreed on emanating from certain mutually defined ideas. Aspects such as individual ownership, freedom of choice, tax reductions, the preservation of the family as an institution and strengthening the role of the market. These are some examples uniting the social conservatives and the market liberals within the Moderate Party (Nilsson 2003:101-103). Nevertheless, to comprehend the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats policy alterations over time, it is also crucial to understand the parties ideological origins and historical backgrounds.


Problem Formulation, Research Purpose and Questions


Akkerman 2018:4; Papademetriou 2018:14). In the Swedish case, this would also mean that the Swedish Democrats increased electoral support has influenced other mainstream parties and especially the Moderate Party’s position in the migration issue. There exist multiple scientific inquiries that focus on studying the Swedish political parties idea and ideological development. The contemporary political debates are encompassed by discussions regarding party convergence, collusion and polarisation. It is, therefore, scientifically interesting to analyse the two political parties idea development mainly to unfold features of increasing similarities or differences. The aim of this research inquiry is to study the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats idea development in the issue of migration in 2010-2018. The subsequent research questions will be of importance when conducting the analytical work.

➢ How has the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats positions regarding migration developed in 2010-2018?

➢ How can institutional theories explain the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats idea development?




contemporary political issues they perceive as the most important. The final conclusions imply that the Swedish population places policies regarding health-care, migration, education, law and order amongst the most important political issues. The study does also reveal that questions concerning law and order increased before the election in 2018. Becoming a more prioritised issue among the Swedish population. If compared to the election in 2014, policies concerning health-care, unemployment and education were placed amongst the most prioritised political issues (Novus 2018a:1). In a timeline produced by Novus, in the last eight years, political issues regarding health-care, education and unemployment have remained amongst the most prioritised issues despite decreasing tendencies. While the migration issue has obtained increased importance from 2015 and onwards. Which has appeared as a result of the large migration crisis that transpired in 2015. Where approximately 163 000 migrants (primarily asylum-seekers and refugees) applied for residence permits in Sweden during a short period of time (Novus n.d; SCB 2016).





Previous Research

The research report ‘’​The Swedish Democratic Party’s Voters. Who are They, Where Do


because the Moderate Party leans more towards the right on the left-right scale in many political issues. As for anti-establishment, migration issues and future visions, the electors that sympathise with the Swedish Democrats tend to be more critical towards migrants, express pessimistic future visions and distrust governmental institutions to a greater extent. If compared to electors who sympathise with the other two mainstream parties (Jylhä 2018:12-13, 16, 39, 49, 57, 86). Additionally, the study presents existing similarities between the electors of the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats. Especially with regard to which political party the respondents would choose as their second choice and which political party would improve the future of Sweden. Among the Moderate Party’s electors, approximately 24 % agree on that the future would improve if the Swedish Democrats obtained the governmental control. While approximately 44 % of the Swedish Democrats electors see a more optimistic future if the Moderate Party ruled in Sweden. Nevertheless, the study exhibits additional differences between the parties voters. The electors of the Moderate Party tend to be less critical towards immigrants, experience stronger inclusion in the society, are less conservative and share more sanguine future visions (Jylhä 2018:16, 89).


Oscarsson argues that it is incorrect to conclude that the Moderate Party lost many of their voters solely to the Swedish Democrats. When studies reveal that between 2010 and 2014, a majority of the Moderate Party voters were obtained by the remaining Alliance parties and not only by the Swedish Democrats (Oscarsson 2016:5, 36-38, 43-44, 47).

Cartelisation, collusion and convergence are three terms that have captured large attention among academics and are considered important contemporary research concepts (Hagevi & Enroth 2018:22; Hagevi 2014:21). Richard Katz and Peter Mair were amongst the first scientists to problematise the cartel party model. Highlighting the negative effects that increased state subventions to political parties would entail (Katz & Mair 1995; Katz & Mair 2009). Demonstrating that increased state subventions will eventually appear in extending the distance between political parties and the civil society. Resulting in strengthening the relationship between political parties and the state (Katz & Mair 1995:6, 20; Katz & Mair 2009:754, 755-756; Hagevi 2014:21). According to Henrik Enroth ‘’[...] the term ‘cartel party’ is not Katz and Mair’s invention, nor are party cartels per se the product of the latter-day conditions that they describe and theorise.’’ (Enroth 2018:34). Additionally, Katz and Mair claimed that due to the reduced number of party members, decreasing levels of political participation and party loyalty. Financing political parties through membership fees would no longer be an option. This would eventually lead to political parties searching for other methods to continue financing their organisational work and assuring their long-term survival and political success (Katz & Mair 1995:5; Katz & Mair 2009:753, 755-756, 758). When membership fees are no longer a secure financial option, the enablement of state subsidies will be a more certain alternative source for political parties to consider. Political parties stronger attachment to the state and decreased detachment to the civil society are considered to be the side effects of replacing membership fees with state subventions (Hagevi 2014:21-22; Katz & Mair 1995:6; Katz & Mair 2009:755-756, 759). The cartelisation concept can, therefore, be recognised as a process were political parties start converging and becoming more ideologically similar. Indicating that political organisations would start promoting comparable ideas and share a greater resemblance to each other. Entering a depoliticised era where political competition, ideological divisions and social cleavages start to progressively diminish (Katz & Mair 1995:23; Katz & Mair 2009:754-756). One of the recent publication that problematises the cartelisation concept is found in the anthology


In essence, the book captures different angles of how the cartel party model should be comprehended and empirically tested. Scientists state that the cartel party model and other additional party typologies should be treated as firmly ideal examples rather than actual reflections. This implies that the different typologies can not alone define a political party in its entirety. Conversely, a political organisation might instead obtain certain prominent features from the different models (Katz & Mair 2009:759). Magnus Hagevi and Karl Loxbo have conducted a case study with the focus on Sweden to empirically examine if the cartel party model should be accepted or rejected. Four hypothetical presumptions are constructed and put up for empirical examining. In essence, the final conclusions imply that only one of the three hypotheses is proven empirically founded. While the remaining hypotheses are scientifically rejected. Hagevi and Loxbo’s first hypothetical presumption highlights that in the future, the number of political party associates will descend while political parties dependence on state subventions and public finances will enhance. The timeline shows that since 1965, the number of party associates has declined drastically while financing political parties through state subventions have increased continuously. Implying that political parties dependence on state contributions has also weakened their bonds to the civil society. While at the same time strengthened their connection to the state. Swedish political parties can no longer rely on membership fees and have to turn to state subventions to ensure their long-term survival. The increasing individualisation is also considered to be amongst the main reasons explaining why the connection to the civil society has debilitated over time. The outcomes of individualisation have resulted in political parties losing devoted members and decreased party loyalties to a greater extent (Hagevi & Loxbo 2018:49-54). The effect of individualisation is also a theme that Hagevi emphasises in the article ‘’ ​The Parties


Loxbo 2018 54-57). To draw the conclusion that the Swedish intra-party democracy is impaired, is also considered an inaccurate illation to make. Loxbo argues similarly in the scientific article ‘’​The Fate of Intra-party Democracy: Leadership Autonomy and Activist Influence in the Mass Party and the Cartel Party.’’, ​that Swedish intra-party democracy is not impaired because empirical findings indicate that it has ameliorated ​over time (Loxbo 2011:549). As for the third hypothetical assumption, which claims that opposing political parties will start converging and become less ideological dissimilar. The results from the study presents no strong indication of convergence nor that Swedish political parties are becoming more ideologically similar. Instead, the study reveals that Swedish political parties are indeed moving towards the middle but are still strongly diverse viewed from an ideological perspective. Although Swedish political parties have become more middle-oriented, the third hypothesis is shown to be weakly founded. There still exists strong ideological diversities which make the plausibility of convergence invalid in the case of the Swedish political parties. As for the last hypothesis, which emphasises that convergence equals decreasing representation and trust for political institutions. The final conclusions show weak pertinence, implying that the representation is not threatened nor has the trust for politicians decreased (Hagevi & Loxbo 2018:57-66).



Institutional Theories


Defining an Institution

What defines an institution and how the concept can be understood from diverse institutional perspectives is something that Guy Peters emphasises in the book ​Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism​. What exactly characterises an institution is complicated to conceptualise because there are different ways to define the concept. Depending on what institutional perspective is taken into wider consideration. According to Richard Scott ‘’Institutions comprise regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive elements that, together with associated activities and resources, provide stability and meaning to social life.’’​(Scott 2014:56). Additionally, Peters argues that there are four overall basic traits that together establish the foundation of an institution. Firstly, institutions are reflections of a given society, permeated by both informal and formal structural attributes. This indicates that an institution can be comprehended as both a bureaucratic and a legislative entity. Or as a system permeated by communicative organisations and as an assemblage of commonly defined norms. Secondly, institutions must construct certain predefined patterns that make them stable and sustainable over time. Influencing and limiting individual attitudes and behaviours through formal and informal restrictions is the third trait that institutions must obtain. It is, therefore, necessary that the participants of an institution share one common value system that concatenates the members. If these fundamental requirements are not met, then it is also incorrectly to classify something as an institution mainly because these traits establish the basis of an institution (Peters 2011:19-20, 29; Scott 2014:56-60; March & Olsen 2009:3-5).


Rational-Choice Institutionalism


behavioural outcomes are permeated by individual perceptions of what actions contribute with the most profitable gains. This approach is firmly individualistic, indicating that the primary focus is on the specific person and how actions, that are taken individually, contribute with the most advantageous utilities (Downs 1957:4,6,71: Schmidt 2009:126; Peters 2011:47, 59-60). Additionally, Peters questions how a theory that is firmly individualistic and actor-centred can be employable on institutions? How can individual utility-maximisation be understood from an institutional perspective?

Utility-maximisation and rationality are considered to be the two most prominent concepts in the rational-choice approach. According to Anthony Downs, there are five different features that together constitute the foundation of rationality. In essence, when an individual is proposed with several different alternatives, she/he will rank the preferences and select the option that is considered to entail the most profitable outcome. Despite that the most preferable alternative might have an undesirable outcome, the individual chooses what she/he believes would provide the largest utilities. Rationality can also be understood from a party political perspective. Downs stated that in order for political parties to obtain electoral support, it is crucial that political parties behave rationally by holding promises and remaining responsive to their voters. If the party’s political action and agenda do not correspond to the expectations of the electorates, then it is more plausible that the party commence losing supporters. As a result of the party's inability to meet the preferences of their electoral unit. Moreover, Downs stated that political parties aim at increasing their political mandates, while the interests of the people are of less significance (Downs 1957:71-77; Parsons 2005:30-31; Ersson & Lane 2002:19). Otto Kirchheimer argued that mass parties have been replaced by catch-all parties. Whose primary aims are to gain electoral support and ensuring the own party’s survival rather than putting the civil society’s interests at the centre (Mair 1990:5).


complying with basic rules, the individual member might gain profits as a result (Wittek 2013:25; Pollack 2007:32; Peters 2011:50, 52; Garbaye 2011:26). What differentiates this institutional approach from the regular rational-choice theory is that the focus is shifted from the individual to the collective. The term collective rationality highlights that institutions that obtain a stable regulatory system, not only benefit the individual but the collective as well. Establishing rules is the most necessary fundamental cornerstone that enable collective rationality. Unlike normative institutionalism, which emphasises the importance of values and normativity, this approach supports a systematic and regulative idea. Establishing binding rules is a crucial factor for institutions to obtain mainly to avoid undesirable outcomes appearing. The institution’s functionality depends highly on the rules that are formed and implemented within the institutional frame (Peters 2011:47-59; Gächter 2013:34-35; Ersson & Lane 2002:4,7-8). The principal-agent model emphasises the interactive interplay between institutions but also how individuals interact with institutions. Within an institution, the head conductor is seen as the agent, who serves the interests of the whole organisation and its participants. While the game-theoretic approach highlights the importance of consenting members. This model emphasises that as primary actors of an organisation, it is necessary to encourage the participants to comply with the regulatory system. Additionally, the participants will only give consent if it is beneficial to them (Peters 2011:56-58; Edgar 2011:88). The interaction is viewed from a game perspective, where the process depends on ‘’[...] repeated games as means of establishing greater cooperation and mutual compliance among the participants in a game.’’ (Peters 2011:58). Both the game-theoretical and the principal-agent models face troubles ensuring approbation. This means that institutions who have implemented binding regulations could encounter internal resistance which, in turn, affects the institution’s long-term stability (Peters 2011:58).


occur within the institution are also caused by failures ‘’[...] to meet the requirements for which it was formed.’’ (Peters 2011:63). This suggests that institutional alterations are synonymous with failures to attain certain expectations that have been essential when the organisation was first formed. This would also indicate that for an institutional change to be successful, it is crucial that these wider alterations are internalised, widely accepted and perceived as beneficial (ibid.).


Historical Institutionalism


Institutions have according to the HI theorists various effects on political outcomes: they shape not only the balance of power between the actors and their strategies (as RCI theorists argue), but also their goals.

(Taeschler 2006:5)

In regard to organisational alterations, historical institutionalists argue that once organisational structures have been established and implemented, it is much harder to initiate new modifications. This process is also recognised as path dependency. Implying that institutions are created in certain ways, with specific policies that need to be sustained and protected from radical modifications (Fioretos et. al 2016:10; Peters 2011:70-71; Palier 2005:129). Organisational changes might appear but initial alterations are excessively challenging to implement and are oftentimes induced by internal pressures. Implying that if institutions are unable to sustain their policies rightfully, they tend to start discontinuing. An institutional alteration is regarded as a delayed evolutionary process that is not entirely admitted or contested. Instead, there has to exist constraints that curb these radical changes from emerging and putting the organisation’s survival and stability at stake. Institutionalisation is an unpredicted process that historical institutionalism has difficulties addressing in terms of how the changes occur and what plausible factors contribute to the alterations. This can also be related to the concept of ​critical junctures​, which emphasise that there has to be strong internal or external forces that bring forward initiatives for changes to take place. Critical junctures can be explained from diverse perspectives but do normally transpire when new institutions exceed older organisations. These changes are seen as essential processes, mainly because they form new paths for contemporary and future political policies. Additionally, the historical institutional approach emphasises another important concept called ​punctuated equilibria. ​Highlighting that before any moderate or radical institutional alteration emerge, the institution is placed in an equilibrium state where fundamental policies are preserved and legitimised (Peters 2011:70-74, 78-9; Olsson 2016:18; Marriott 2010:38-40, 45; Rutherford 2013:25; Koga 2017:13).


leading constructors pass away or abdicate. This might result in current replacements searching for various alternative strategies that guarantee continued authority and legitimacy. In regard to alterations, a broader ​economic crisis might negatively affect the population’s confidence in political and economic institutions. Decreasing institutional legitimacy and credibility as a result of an economic crisis might, in turn, appear in replacing the unstable systems with newer trustworthy ones. Finally, the last feature of critical junctures emphasises the importance of technological alterations ​and how technology might generate institutional replacements to take place. As mentioned, historical institutionalism does not either contest nor completely affirm changes. However, external influences might encourage other institutions to replace older policies as a result of being inspired by other organisations ideas and policies (Peters 2011:70-71, 73-74, 78-79, 85; Rutherford 2013:25-27). Historical institutionalism highlights that in order to comprehend how contemporary institutions operate, it is crucial to travel back in time and examine the organisation’s historical background and idea development (Conran & Thelen 2016:61).


Discursive Institutionalism


constructs that are maintained and developed through the ideational capabilities obtained by various actors (Schmidt 2010:1, 4, 9-10, 12; Peters 2011:112-113). Institutions are not permanent entities with consistent regulations. Instead, institutions are constantly re-established and renewed as a result of diverse discourses emerging and due to the interactive interplay between the members (Peters 2011:113-114; Schmidt 2010:1, 9). According to Anita Fetzer, a discourse is synonymous with concepts such as the language, interaction, conversation, communication and speech act. A discourse can, therefore, be observed from a wider societal context where certain ideas develop into broader discussions. Encouraging a larger group of people to engage in communicating diverse social and political issues (Fetzer 2014:36-39; Kj​ær & Pedersen 2001:​220).

Political discourse has been classified as institutional discourse, taking place in institutional settings and being thus constrained by particularized contextual requirements, such as selection of discourse topics from the domain of institution [...].


Schmidt argues that institutional alterations can according to discursive institutionalists be comprehended through ​background ideational abilities ​and ​foreground discursive abilities (Schmidt 2008:12).

This represents the logic of communication which is at the basis of agents’ capacity to think, speak, and act outside their institutions even as they are inside them, enabling them to deliberate about the institutional rules even as they use them, and to persuade one another to change those institutions or to maintain them.



A Comparative Idea Analytical Inquiry


Research Design

A scientific inquiry’s main objective is to either explain or describe a specific phenomenon or event. There are three separate ways to conduct a study which are dependent on how the research questions are constructed and what type of phenomenon is of analytical interest. Empirical studies can either be descriptive, concept developing or explanatory in character. Additionally, explanatory studies are either theory consuming, theory developing or theory testing (Esaiasson 2017:35-36). This study is both descriptive and explanatory in essence. The first research question is descriptive, which aims at describing how the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats positions concerning migration have developed in the years 2010-2018. The idea is to analyse how ideas presented by the two political parties have developed during a limited period of time and bring forward profound similarities and differences between them. While, the second research question is considered explanatory in character, which aims at analysing how rational-choice institutionalism, historical institutionalism and discursive institutionalism can explain the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats idea development. The focus will be on analysing how ideas have developed over time and plausible factors that have contributed to these developments emerging. Conducting an inquiry that combines both descriptive and explanatory approaches is crucial because an eminent descriptive study contributes to a good explanatory study as well (Esaiasson 2017:136).


Additionally, the inquiry can also be considered a theory testing study. If the theories can not explain the different cases, then it is also considered a reason to start questioning the theories credibility and applicability (Esaiasson 2017:43). This inquiry is also regarded as a comparative case study, where the emphasis will be on analysing two cases. The selected cases that will be compared are the second and third largest political parties in the Swedish parliament, also recognised as the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats. Comparative studies are normally recognised through the employment of at least two or more cases that are compared to unravel profound similarities or differences. The ​most-similar system and the


find two cases that are identically similar in every respect. Instead, the study might produce results that indicate the opposite. That the two cases which are thought to share most similarities are proven to be essentially different (Esaiasson 2017:103). ​Process-tracing is another relevant methodological approach to consider when employing the most-similar design. This approach is based on employing plausible explanatory factors that can explain the link between the cause and the effect. The focus is on comprehending the processes and underlying causes leading to that final outcome. This implies that the value on the dependent variable is known but not of central interest. Instead, the focus is on highlighting certain prominent features that might explain the final turn-outs. Historical institutionalists normally use this methodological approach when comparing two or more cases in hope of finding plausible explanations for diverse historical outcomes (Esaiasson 2017:129-132). In this study, process-tracing is considerably important mainly because it will take into account important historical events and societal discourses that might have contributed to institutional alterations occurring within the two political parties.


An Idea Analytical Study


descriptive. Descriptive idea analytical inquiries have over time faced strong resistance by critics. Stating that these types of studies are often based on summarising what is already been stated in the material. Illustrating descriptions of the material are essential in order to produce new conclusions and understandings of the material ​(Beckman 2005:48-49). Factors such as rational action, societal discourses and critical junctures play a crucial role in explaining the parties idea alterations. Nevertheless, it might also become clearer if the parties have become increasingly different or similar to each other. Illustrating whether there are signs of convergence or diversity with regard to the parties positions concerning migration. In addition, the institutional theories will explain whether these similarities or differences are caused as a result of the parties acting rationally with the goal of achieving vote maximisation or due to changing societal discourses. However, the analysis might also reveal that the parties have remained path dependent. Maintaining similar stable positions over time and not undergone any remarkable institutional and policy alterations.


Table 1. Analysis Scheme

Key Concepts Institution Institutional Establishment Institutional Alteration Rational- Choice Institutionalism Rationality, utility- maximisation, constraints, regulations & actor-centrism. Institutions consist of regulatory systems and incentives that confine individual actions and behaviors. Institutions are established when proposed by actors who aim at achieving

personal preferences for the lowest expenses possible.

Institutional alterations are synonymous with

failures to achieve certain predetermined expectations. Historical Institutionalism Path-dependency, critical junctures ideas, policy establishment & punctuated equilibrium. Institutions are permeated by ideas that have developed into legitimised policies that’s been incorporated into a structural framework.

Institutions are established when ideas have developed into policies and been

successfully established, accepted

and internalised.

Institutional alterations are caused by diverse

critical junctures affecting the specific

institution’s punctuated equilibria. Discursive Institutionalism Discourses, ideas, social interactions, coordination & communication. Institutions are saturated by communicatively established ideas. Institutions are established through the emergence of ideas and discourses

that are processed communicatively between various


Institutions are not static but dynamical in

essence. Institutional alterations appear when the members of

an institution initiate changes by introducing new ideas and forming

new discourses.

* Table 1. The analysis model summarises how the diverse institutional approaches define an institution, key concepts, views on institutional establishment and alteration.


utility-maximisation. Contemporary discourses on migration do also play a crucial role in affecting the political agendas and the decision-making procedures (Castles 2014:301). Normally when the term political discourse is mentioned, it is often equated with political parties creating discourses that affect the thoughts and attitudes of the public in certain directions (Hayward 2010:4-5). In this case, it will be reversed and the focus will be on how the public and more specifically the parties electors affect the parties. Conducting a light form of a discourse analysis is, therefore, relevant to this study. Especially in the discussions about whether or not institutional alterations have been caused by different negative societal discourses about migrants surfacing.

5.2.1 Operationalisation

Operationalisation is a process that refers to rephrasing and assigning the abstract and immeasurable concept operational indicators. This implies that by allocating the theoretical term one or more indicators, it is also possible to make the concept measurable (Esaiasson et. al 2017:56). In this study, the concept of idea development is closely related to policy change. Implying that when new ideas are featured in the institution, they might also contribute to policy alterations emerging (Dudley & Richardson 2004:16-17, 19). A policy change is, therefore, defined as the process where positions, norms, regulations and ideational approaches within the institution change as a result of new ideas being introduced and accepted (Béland & Waddan 2012:167, 172). Policy alterations will, in connection to the three institutional approaches, be observed from three different perspectives. These can also be seen as operational indicators of policy change. In order to measure policy change and analyse the parties idea development, it is necessary to include factors such as rational action, societal discourses and critical junctures. These three crucial factors can also explain why policy changes emerge within the institutions.


imply that the parties would only accept policy alterations if they are perceived as beneficial for the parties. Contributing the highest degree of utility maximization. Viewed from the Moderate Party’s perspective, acting rational would correspond to avoid promoting policies that are considered similar to those the Swedish Democrats advocate. Changing and accepting new ideas that share a strong resemblance to the policies the Swedish Democrats promote would, in turn, be regarded as a non-rational approach. Since the party has on numerous occasions stated that they do not want to be associated with the party. As to the Swedish Democrats, acting rational would suggest not adjusting too large policy alterations, maintain in the position as an opposition party and reject contradictory mainstream ideas. This corresponds to Downs assumption that ‘’[...] parties in a multi-party system try to remain as ideologically distinct from each other as possible.’’ (Downs 1957:115).

Societal discourse ​is the second alternative factor that contributes to policy alterations emerging. According to Jessica C. Shearer, inducements proposed by the civil society might, in turn, initiate policy alterations appearing within the institution (Shearer 2016:1208). Viewed from a discursive institutional perspective, actors such as political leaders, the media, local officials, activists and authorities do also obtain very important positions in influencing the reconstruction of policies (Schmidt 2008:8). This study will primarily focus on the societal level and more specifically on the voter’s role in encouraging policy alterations. Muthiah Alagappa states that the civil society influences political institutions in different ways by ‘’[...] setting norms, representing interests, promoting transparency and democratic accountability and contributing to policymaking.’’ (Alagappa 2004:52). This implies that institutional and policy alterations might appear as a result of contemporary societal discourses (Weiss 2004:260). As to the Swedish Democrats and the Moderate Party, policy alterations would emerge through inducements initiated by the civil society, the party’s sympathisers or through diverse societal discourses. This implies that societal discourses encourage new institutional alterations to emerge within the political parties.


Critical juncture is also referred to as a process entailing institutional changes that obstruct the existing path dependency within the institution (Enjolras & Stømsnes 2018:15). As to the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats, critical junctures would be referred to as moments that have induced the political parties to change their positions in the issue of migration. Remaining path-dependent is the other alternative scenario, implying that there have not appeared any significant critical junctures enforcing institutional and policy alterations emerging (Marriott 2010:38). This would suggest that the two political parties promote similar policies between 2010-2018 with minimal or no significant signs of policy alterations. What will be referred to as a critical juncture in this thesis is primarily the migration crisis in 2015. Have in mind that there exists other critical junctures that might explain the parties policy alterations in the issue of migration which have not been mentioned here.

Figure 1. Policy Alteration

* Figure 1. Summarises how rational actions, critical junctures and societal discourses generate policy alterations.




primarily focus on documents published during the time period 2010-2018. The reason that anterior political documents are not taken into analytical consideration depends on a variety of reasons. The Swedish Democrats is a relatively new political organisation if compared to a majority of the remaining Swedish mainstream parties. The party has since its establishment in 1988 irregularly provided the public with scarce information about the party’s political ideas and policies (SND n.d.a). This is one reason to why the analysis disregards examining documents before the year of 2010. The Moderate Party, on the other hand, has regularly supplied the public with both election manifestos and idea programs since the year 1904 (SND n.d.b). The election that transpired in 2010 is also the year the Swedish Democrats entered the Swedish parliament. Obtaining as much as 339 610 votes which correspond to 5,7 % of the Swedish votes (Swedish Election Authority 2010). This is also the year the Moderate Party gained increased electoral support if compared to the national election in 2006. The Moderate Party was amongst the few political parties that made huge historical success after the election in 2010. Increasing from 97 to 107 mandates which correspond to an increase from 26,23 % to 30,06 %. The year 2010 is historical mainly because it was the first time since 1928 the Moderate Party obtained 30,06 % of the electoral support and the year the Swedish Democrats entered the parliament (SCB 2011:7, 15; Swedish Election Authority 2010). This is also another reason the study is constrained to examining a time period that primarily covers 2010-2018. As 2010 is considered an important year, resulting in increased electoral support for both the Swedish Democrats and the Moderate Party. Moreover, the following documents will be of interest to the inquiry.

99 Suggestions For a Better Sweden. The Swedish Democrats Contract with the Electors 2010-2014 (2010).

The Working Manifesto. Election Manifesto 2010-2014 (2010).

The Moderate Party’s Idea Program: Responsibility for the Whole Sweden (2011). The Swedish Democrats Principle Program (2011).

Election Manifesto: The Swedish Democrats Election Manifesto 2018 (2018). Now We are Taking Over Sweden: Election Manifesto (2018).

Election Platform: The Swedish Democrats Election Platform (2018).


documents have been selected mainly because they are permeated by ideas that the two political parties support(ed) and promote(d). It is also crucial to mention that one of the Moderate Party’s election manifesto has been in collaboration with the Alliance. The document will be included in the analysis mainly to avoid losing important information. Additionally, the Moderate Party stands behind the ideas presented in the election manifesto which makes it necessary to include the document into the analysis. The election manifestos are the most crucial political documents that all together are permeated by ideas and election pledges. If the document is disclosed from the analysis, it would also imply that the election manifesto approved and signed by the Moderate Party is excluded.


Validity and Reliability



The Political Parties Ideas and Policies

6.1 Moderate Party

6.1.1 Migration Policy 2010


These problems are blamed on a non-functional system and the inability to make use of the knowledge immigrants obtain (Alliance 2010:31). Alienation can only be combated through solidarity and employment (Moderate Party 2011:6). This suggests that immigrants that come to Sweden should also learn the Swedish language, find a job and be economically self-sufficient (Alliance 2010:31). The idea of equality is based on societal inclusion, the individual right to develop their own lives and not end up in alienation. Employment is the most crucial factor opening up the way for people to integrate into society and learn about Swedish culture and language. The term Swedishness includes all people that live in Sweden. Accepting differences, association with other groups and the right to self-realisation are also included into the definition. Acceptance and tolerance for diversities are believed to contribute to stronger cohesion. What is important for the party is what the migrants can contribute to the Swedish society and not what religious beliefs and ethnic backgrounds they obtain (Moderate Party 2011:13-14, 17-18, 24).

6.1.2 Migration Policy 2018


necessary to reduce the number of asylum seekers and insert temporary residence permits. For those that receive permanent residence permits, it is also required that they learn the Swedish language and become economically self-sufficient. The party initiates mandatory preschool in language for children, mandatory training for those without any primary education, a two-year vocational program in Swedish and implementation of entry jobs. Integration does not solely encompasses the idea of working and being self-sufficient. It does also require that people who come to Sweden respect the law, the idea of freedom and the right to work, independent of gender etc (Moderate Party 2018a:15). In order to gain Swedish citizenship, the Moderate Party proposes different strategies. Extending the time to receive citizenship from 5 years to 7 years, obtain knowledge about the Swedish society and language, work and be economically self-sufficient. Citizenship should be recalled if the individual commits serious criminal offences or submit false information to Swedish authorities. The reliance on subsidies among newly arrived is also portrayed as a large problem. Many people that receive and live on welfare allowances have neither contributed to the welfare system through work or paying taxes. This is considered problematic because it strengthens the dependency on state subsidies. To counteract the problem of subsidy dependency, the party initiates that receiving allowances should only be permitted through working or living legally in Sweden (Moderate Party 2018a:17).

6.1.3 Moderate Party’s Idea Development


1991:3; Moderate Party 1994:2; Moderate Party 1998:1; Moderate Party 2002:11). Viewed from a historical institutional approach, the migration crisis that appeared in 2015 can be considered one important event generating changes in the Moderate Party’s approach to migration. The large migration from primarily the Middle-Eastern regions has also resulted in the issue of migration becoming amongst the most prioritised questions on the political agenda. The crisis and the voter’s changing attitudes toward migration are crucial factors affecting the Moderate Party’s approaches in the issue. In their latest election manifesto, the party highlights that ‘’The old migration policy did not work.’’ (Moderate Party 2018a:14). This statement mediates that the party’s earlier employed strategies are now perceived as ineffective and in need of update. Throughout the years, Swedish mainstream parties have encountered strong judgements for not being properly equipped to handle the outcomes of large-scale migration flows. A recently conducted study reveals that the Swedish population places migration and integration issues amongst the most important and urgent societal problem (Lindgren 2018:317). Seen from a discursive institutional approach, new institutional ideas and discourses are not only established through the proposals of different actors within the institution but as a result of alterations in public attitudes and opinions. It is primarily through different opinion polls, institutions obtain the knowledge about the preferences and attitudes of the citizens. Newly constructed ideas must in some way correspond to those of the public and the voting bases (Schmidt 2008:8).


eventually generate increased unsafety and alienation (Swedish Democrats 2011:21, 38: Moderate Party 2011:12).


centre-right and populist parties to increase. Especially for the Swedish Democrats (Ekengren & Oscarsson 2015:158-160; Jylhä 2018:10, 86, 89; Gerin & Bernhardtz 2014:26, 33).

Electors whose opinions are more right-oriented tend to also change to a party that promotes right-wing agendas (Oscarsson 2016:43). The party’s liberal approach to the migration issue is considered one plausible factor explaining the electors escape from the Moderate Party to the Swedish Democrats (Ekengren & Oscarsson 2015:153; Gerin & Bernhardtz 2014:33). Some argue that the electors who abandoned the Moderate Party for the Swedish Democrats believe that the society has been negatively influenced by migration (Jylhä 2018:89). Viewed from a rational-choice institutional perspective, political parties adjust policy alterations to maintain and increase their electoral support. In this case, promoting a more restrictive migration policy is therefore believed to benefit the party in the long-term and is a strategy to regain the support from the voters who left the party. Rational action does not only encompasses the party regaining the electoral support but also to minimise the Swedish Democrats influence on Swedish politics. Despite that the Moderate Party has adopted new approaches with regard to migration, the party still decreased in the latest election. According to Downs ‘’Policy shifts must be gradual if they are to ensure credibility remains.’’ (Downs 1957:74). This suggests that alterations with regard to the migration policy have not occurred gradually but rather rapidly during a limited time frame. There are differences between the party’s idea program from 2013 and the party’s latest election manifesto from 2018. The party highlighted in 2013 that they supported the idea of a humane and open migration policy which is absent in the party’s latest manifesto (Moderate Party 2013:11). Acting rationally suggests that the Moderate Party accepts policy alterations mainly to regain the support from their lost voters and prevent the Swedish Democrats from attracting more electors.


ensure the survival of the coalition (Bueno de Mesquita 1975:3-5; Moury 2013:11). Viewed from a rational-choice institutional perspective, the Moderate Party’s choice to join the Alliance in 2004 could, at the time, be considered rational and a way to influence the political agenda and the decision-making procedures. Joining the Alliance did not only result in the party obtaining the leading power within the coalition but a way to outcompete the remaining left-wing mainstream parties (Ekengren & Oscarsson 2015:164-165). Since the Swedish political system is based on proportional representation, political parties are normally dependent on joining coalitions to avoid becoming a minority in the parliament and to successfully implement different policies to the party’s advantage (Heywood 2017:73; Norén Bretzer 2017:91). This suggests that parties that have joined coalitions must, in turn, take into consideration how policy alterations might affect their relations with other collaboration parties. If new policies and ideas are initiated, they must take place within the framework of what has previously been negotiated between the parties and be representative of the coalition. Changing policies would be much harder for the Moderate Party because the party had to customise ideas relatively similar to those of the Alliance. The Swedish Democrats, on the other hand, have never and are not restricted by rules that accompany coalitions mainly because they have not joined any coalitions or been acknowledged to. This suggests that it would be easier for the Swedish Democrats to initiate policy alterations than for the Moderate Party.


Sweden. Instead of expanding the coalition by including a party that has been accused of being racist and populistic. It would be more rational to adjust the party’s own migration policy and make the ideas appear as unique and creative rather than as a reflection of the ideas the Swedish Democrats promote. This can however produce opposite outcomes because the party would be perceived as a copier in the eyes of the voters who in desperation changes position to gain legitimacy and support from the public (Castles 2014:311).

6.2 Swedish Democrats

6.2.1 Migration Policy 2010


citizen perceives himself/herself as part of the Swedish nation, manages the official language fluently and live in accordance with Swedish cultural norms. If these requirements are not met, then it could also result in both the native-born and the foreign-born losing their individual right to be part of the nation (Swedish Democrats 2010:3, 6; Swedish Democrats 2011:8, 13, 15, 19, 21, 23, 27).

6.2.2 Migration Policy 2018


to return to their respective homelands (Swedish Democrats 2018a:5-7, 12, 20; Swedish Democrats 2018b:3-4, 8, 15).

6.2.3 The Swedish Democrats Idea Development


Sweden has since the interwar period until this very day received migrants from different parts of the world due to either the need for labour or because of wars outbursting. During World War II, Sweden received migrants from the Nordic countries where a clear majority were labeled as Finnish refugees. This changed progressively over time and people outside Scandinavia and Europe started escaping to Sweden for various reasons. Despite certain periods of stricter migration policies, Sweden has long been characterised as a state promoting liberal and open migration policies. It was primarily during the 1960s that the concept multiculturalism became politically relevant in Sweden and considered something positive for the state (Byström & Frohnert 2017:i-iii). As discourses on migration have changed progressively over time, it has also replaced more optimistic views of migration with rather pessimistic outlooks (Castles et al. 2014:69-70, 82). Opening up the way for populist parties and ideas to influence. Andrej Kokkonen argues that different studies show that there is a stronger correlation between political discontent and xenophobic attitudes in countries that have long promoted liberal-oriented migration policies and had a history of immigration (Kokkonen 2015:33). The general trust for Swedish political parties reached all-time high in 2010 and remained stable until 2014. However, the year 2014 and onward shows decreasing trends, suggesting lower trust for political parties and institutions in general (Martinsson & Andersson 2017:7, 39; Andersson et. al 2017:17). The increasing political distrust in mainstream parties is considered one plausible reason explaining anti-immigrant parties success and increasing legitimacy. Xenophobic parties tend to gain stronger legitimacy if the voting population perceives that the party preserves democratic values and obtains the power to change the political agenda. While organisations that openly support ideas founded in ideological fascism and racism tend to be less successful in persuading the public (Kokkonen 2015:33-34). This explains why it took approximately two decades until the party gained enough electoral support to enter the Swedish parliament. The Swedish Democrats strategy to attract supporters has occurred through the replacement of more extreme ideological positions with social conservative stances. By employing this approach, the party would not be perceived as too extreme in the eyes of the voter (Rydgren & Ruth 2011:205; Kokkonen 2015:33-34).


populistic organisations and policies. Parties that are perceived as radically different from the remaining mainstream parties tend to gain increased electoral support and legitimacy during periods characterised by fast societal alterations with unrecognised outcomes (Mudde 2010:1172; Rydgren 2005:21). As mentioned, the mass migration is considered one such important event that the Swedish population perceives as an important political matter and an urgent social problem (Lindgren 2018:317). A study shows that the migration crisis has not only contributed to increased disintegration but an economic deficit as well. The occupational and integration processes have in the last three decades deteriorated which have raised wide concerns among the public (Ruist 2018:7, 11). The Swedish Democrats adjusting to a more restrictive migration policy can be considered a rational strategy. A way to increase the electoral support and political influence during unstable times. When there exists wide concerns among the civil society with regard to integration, assimilation and the future outlooks of the society, the electoral support proceeds increasing for populist parties. Encouraging other parties to adopt austerer policies as well (Schain 2018:22; Jylhä 2018:12). Right-oriented populist parties affect policy-making procedures both indirectly as directly. However, their direct impact is more confined since right-wing populist parties do not obtain executive control in many West-European states. Nevertheless, their direct impact increases when permitted entrance into a coalition. Joining coalitions with right-wing populist parties have an effect on the construction of the budget motions and propositions. However, right-wing populist parties indirect impact on mainstream policies are much higher than their actual direct impact. As a result of the electoral support progressively increasing for these parties over the years, it has also compelled parties to the right and in the centre to adjust their migration policies to avoid losing electors. Resulting in these parties adopting more right-oriented stances in the issue of migration. This does not automatically mean that populist parties are immune from being affected by mainstream ideas and policies. Since mainstream parties and coalitions are in majority in many West-European states, populist parties are normally compelled to adjust their outlooks to those of the mainstream parties. In order to have a chance to be included in the coalitions (Akkerman 2018:3-6; Akkerman 2016:3-4).


preferable alternative among the party’s supporters (Demker 2018:396-397). This is also an increase of 6 % if compared to an inquiry conducted in 2010 by Mattias Gunnarsson. Which shows that approximately 90 % of the Swedish Democrats electors preferred fewer migrants. While solely 5 % of the voters accepted the idea of developing a multicultural society (Gunnarsson 2011:81). A similar study from 2015 shows that there did not appear any wider changes in the electors opinions regarding asylum reception and the development of a multicultural society. The compiled results show that approximately 91 % prefered fewer migrants and 8 % approved of developing a multicultural society (Hagevi 2015:150-151). This suggests that the antipathy towards migration has increased if compared to before and after the migration crisis. In general, the sympathisers of the Swedish Democrats tend to be more right-oriented than middle-oriented in the issue of migration. A large proportion of those that vote for the Swedish Democrats are electors that support a restrictive migration policy, share a pessimistic view of the future and perceive immigration as a threat to the Swedish culture and economy. Approximately 43 % of these voters tend to a higher degree support xenophobic and authoritarian values. They are also considered to be the Swedish Democrats core voters (Jylhä et. al 2018:11-13). Nevertheless, the party promoting a restrictive approach to migration is not the only factor generating electoral success. Loxbo argues that when the Swedish Democrats first entered the parliament in 2010, the idea of receiving less migrants was not supported among a majority of the Swedish public. A timeline reveals that the migration contestation was at its lowest in 2010-2011 and highest in 1992. This suggests that the party’s stances on migration is not the only factor that have generated electoral success for the Swedish Democrats. Instead, additional factors such as contemporary social cleavages, ideological disagreements, mainstream parties centration around the middle, taxation and welfare policies played a crucial role (Loxbo 2015:140-143).


immigration in 2011 and how they view immigration in 2018. The party emphasised in 2011 the potential consequences that might appear as a result of a large migration and the expansion of a multicultural society. While, in the Swedish Democrats election manifesto from 2018, the party emphasises that these consequences have become reality as a result of an irresponsibly led migration policy. The current situation in Sweden is described as critical, permeated by social fragmentation, insecurity, illegal immigration and increased alienation (Swedish Democrats 2018a:6). This is also a way to tell the public that the party’s predictions and warnings have proven to be right from the start. Portraying immigration as an urgent problem which can only be solved through the policies the party advocate, can be seen as a strategy the party uses to legitimise their current policies and increase their electoral support. Ruth Wodak argues that populistic parties do normally point out immigrants in the society as wrongdoers and send out messages to generate fear among the population that the well-being of the society and the nation is threatened. These fears encompass political and social issues the electors perceive as significant and widely concerning. Issues that have surfaced in relation to different contemporary crisis (Wodak 2015:1-3, 5). Some argue ‘’[...] that increasing unemployment and high levels of immigration only yield more electoral success for populist radical right parties [...]’’ (Muis & Immerzeel 2017:916). Concerns emerge when the public experiences a status quo. Where no clear measures or strategies are implemented to handle an unstable occurrence (Moghaddam 2018:70-71). This can also be related to Down’s assumption, that the elector will always select the preference in which he or she perceives as most beneficial at the moment (Downs 1957:38). If the public perceives that the Swedish Democrats is the only party that does not ignore the problem and introduces reasonable strategies to handle a crisis. Then it will also give the electors a reason to vote for them before any other mainstream party. Especially if the migration issue is perceived as the most important. Nevertheless, generating fear could, therefore, be seen as a strategy the Swedish Democrats consider in order to win electors and legitimise their migration policies.




The aim of this thesis has been to analyse the Swedish Democrats and the Moderate Party’s idea development in the issue of migration in 2010-2018. How has the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats positions regarding migration developed in 2010-2018? How can institutional theories explain the Moderate Party and the Swedish Democrats idea development? To answer these two research questions, the study has primarily analysed policy alterations as a result of societal discourses, critical junctures and rational action.

Table 2. The Parties Migration Policies 2010 & 2018


Migration Policy Migration Policy


- Open borders and free movement of people. - International solidarity beyond national borders. - Welcome migrants escaping oppression and persecution. - Unprejudiced societies before homogeneous societies. - Sweden should be a sanctuary vulnerable people can seek to. - Openness contributes to increased knowledge and economic development.

- Diversity generates stronger cohesion. - The term Swedishness encompasses all people residing in Sweden despite differences.. - Respect the idea of diversity and being different. +/- Employment counteracts alienation.

+/- Successful integration equates to an inclusive labour market. +/- Establishment equates learning the Swedish language, culture and getting employed.

+/- Economic self-sufficiency is necessary for integration. +/- Preserve values of equality, safety and freedom.

+/- Preservation of the national identity and culture. +/- Rejection of a multicultural society.

+/- Advocate a regulated migration policy. +/- Insert temporary residence permits.

+/- Encourage and economically finance repatriation. +/- Stop religious fundamentalism.

+/- Introduce stricter assimilation requirements. Migrant should adjust to Sweden not vice versa. +/- Obtaining Swedish citizenship should be based on meeting basic requirements such as to follow Swedish legislation/ norms/rules, express loyalty, learn Swedish and have knowledge in civics.

- A stronger limitation of migrants from countries that show strong signs of Islamic fundamentalism. - Rejection of double citizenships.


+ A sustainable and austerer migration.

+ Counteract illegal immigration through repatriation. + Insert internal migration controls.

+ Extend expulsion decisions to counteract illegal immigration. + Decrease the number of asylum seekers to Sweden. + Insert temporary residence permits.

+ Mandatory pre-school in language for children.

+ Mandatory trainings for migrants without primary education. + Insert tests in civic for newly arrived migrants.

+ Entry jobs and vocational programs in Swedish for youths without secondary school diplomas.

+ Stricter supply requirements with special regard to family migration.

+ Rescind citizenship if it has been incorrectly permitted or serious crimes been committed.

+/- Immigrants who come to Sweden are required to learn the Swedish language, get employed and be economically self-sufficient.

+/- Decrease the dependence on welfare allowances.

+ Allow migrants from only the Nordic states. + Stop the asylum and quota reception until the safety of the Swedish vicinity is ensured and a repatriation system is inserted.

+ Counteract illegal immigration.

+ Stricter supply requirements for family migrants. + Increase expulsion through intergovernmental agreements. + Rescind citizenships that have been incorrectly permitted. +/- Make it harder to gain Swedish citizenship.

+/- Insert language tests for immigrants. +/- Counteract the growing alienation. +/- Collective responsibility required.

+/- Encourage and economically assist people that wish to return and help countries to take better responsibility of their citizens.

* Table 2. The following table provides an overview of the Moderate Party and Swedish Democrats migration policies 2010 and

2018. The table employs the following characters -,+ and +/- which suggest whether or not idea alterations have emerged. The




  5. Available at: ​
  7. Available at: ​
  13. at:​
  15. Available at: ​
  18. Available at: ​
  19. Available at: ​
  29. högskola. Available at: ​
Relaterade ämnen :