The research on the Radical Right dealt marginally with Sweden in comparison to other European cases such as Germany and France. That was caused, among other things, by the fact that Sweden is still a negative case in terms of successful Right wing parties. The assumption in this particular case was negatively derived from a party research perspective. However, the
social movement research shows another picture when it comes to Radical Right phenomena below the surface of party organization. The Radical Right movements in Sweden are rather strong and in some cases tremendously well organized.
Obviously, there is a certain gap between these two perspectives. This is not caused by contradicting findings of both research traditions per se. It is rather an outcome of the specific range of each research tradition and the empirical bipolarity of the case. While the classical party research states a negative case in terms of successful parties, the research on social
movements and milieus highlights a picture of traditionally strong and vital Right wing forces below the perceptional focus of party research. A research on the whole phenomenon, including both party level dimension and movement level dimension and their interacting mobilization conditions,
has not jet been done.
It is the aim of this paper to fill this research gap by focusing on the Swedish
case and by combining both party and social movement research in order to understand and possibly explain the above-described bipolarity more deeply than it has been done separately before. In doing so I can hopefully supplement to a more complete picture on the Swedish party landscape,
especially the phenomenon of a continued absence of an established RR party while at the same time movement type organizations enjoy a relative strength.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction: Relevance of the topic and purpose of the paper
1.1 The current state of research
1.1.1 The theory
1.1.2 State of research on Sweden and Scandinavia
1.2 Terms and definitions
2. The actors and their relevance in this paper
3. Analytical Model: Why and how the Radical Right exists?
3.1 Concept on RR’s organizational manifestation (Minkenberg)
3.2 Second model: Rydgren’s approach
3.3 The Synthesis
4. Analysis of the case
4.1 Historical tradition and political culture
4.2 Conflict patterns
4.3 Presence or absence of societal strains
4.4 Availability of a potent master frame
4.5 Agenda setting ability, politicization of new issues, elite allies, access to mass media
4.6 State’s capacity and propensity for repression
4.7 Degree of convergence in political space
4.8 Relative openness or closure of the institutionalized political system
5. Conclusion
Objectives and Research Focus
This paper aims to bridge the research gap regarding the Radical Right in Sweden by combining party research and social movement research to explain the bipolarity between a weak party-level presence and a vital movement-level existence.
- Analysis of the Swedish Radical Right's organizational strength below the party level.
- Examination of the reasons for the failure of Radical Right parties to establish themselves at the national level.
- Comparison of Sweden's unique historical context with its Scandinavian neighbors.
- Application of the Minkenberg and Rydgren theoretical models to the Swedish case.
- Investigation of the impact of political opportunity structures and framing on Radical Right performance.
Excerpt from the Book
4.1 Historical tradition and political culture
The historic tradition as a cultural aspect of political opportunity structures (Minkenberg 1998, 2003) is of tremendous importance in the Swedish case since it is able to explain, in part, the long tradition of the Swedish RR movement and their qualitative strength on the one hand and their inability to escape marginalization on the other hand. The historic tradition is closely related to the specific political culture of the case (Minkenberg 2003: 156ff.). Even though, the term political culture is a bit diffuse, I am going to utilize it as defined in chapter 1.3, since the criterion may cast light on the political language in the political sphere in contrast to the RR actor. It could therefore possibly identify a closure or gap between both.
When analyzing the current Swedish RR phenomenon and its internal (resources, strategy, ideology, framing ability) and external conditions (POS, legal set-up), it is useful to cast some light on the historical corner stones, as they have explaining power for the criteria analyzed below. These historical corner stones may also be useful to create a more sufficient picture of the Swedish political culture. A country’s historical tradition and political culture are closely interwoven indicators as the political culture is always to a certain degree a historical aggregate.
The historical corner stones for most European countries are WW II, the Cold War, and the European integration. In contrast to the majority of European countries, Sweden’s history has not seen war since 1814 (Aylott 1999: 47ff.). During both World War I and especially World War II, Sweden stayed neutral by a tightrope walk between Nazi-Germany and the Alliance (Bieler 2002: 130ff.). Swedish neutrality was singular in Europe, since it was internally negotiated and not an outcome of any external treaties, as has been the case in Switzerland, Austria, and Finland. Sweden kept its neutral status until 1994 with the referendum on EU membership and its EU accession in 1995. This long tradition of neutrality and equilibrium may be a root of Swedish immunity towards political extremism as a mainstream phenomenon.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Relevance of the topic and purpose of the paper: Outlines the research gap regarding the Radical Right in Sweden and establishes the aim of combining party and social movement research.
2. The actors and their relevance in this paper: Identifies and categorizes key Radical Right organizations, focusing on qualitative measures of "strength" like internal structure and networking.
3. Analytical Model: Why and how the Radical Right exists?: Introduces the theoretical framework by synthesizing the models of Minkenberg and Rydgren to explain Radical Right success or failure.
4. Analysis of the case: Provides a comprehensive empirical test of the defined analytical variables, including historical background and organizational performance.
5. Conclusion: Summarizes findings on the bipolarity of the Swedish Radical Right and reflects on the potential for future electoral changes.
Keywords
Radical Right, Sweden, Social Movement Research, Party Research, Political Opportunity Structures, Master Frame, Extreme Right, Political Culture, Electoral Marginalization, Ny Demokrati, Sweden Democrats, Cordon Sanitaire, Historical Tradition, Mobilization, Populism
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this research?
The paper examines the Radical Right in Sweden, specifically why it remains strong at the movement and network level while failing to establish a permanent, successful party in the national parliament.
What primary theoretical models are employed?
The research utilizes the analytical frameworks developed by Michael Minkenberg and Jens Rydgren, focusing on political opportunity structures and the diffusion of master frames.
How is "strength" defined in this context?
Strength is defined qualitatively rather than quantitatively, encompassing the internal organizational structure, external networking, ideological input, and overall action potential of the groups.
What is the significance of the "old Right" versus "new Right" distinction?
This dichotomy helps categorize Swedish actors based on their ideological origins and strategies, with the "old Right" often linked to historical national socialism and the "new Right" focusing on more modern populist and ethno-nationalist rhetoric.
How does Sweden differ from its Scandinavian neighbors regarding the Radical Right?
Unlike Denmark and Norway, which experienced earlier and more sustained electoral success for Radical Right populist parties, Sweden remained a "negative case" for decades, characterized by the absence of an established national Radical Right party.
What role does the "cordon sanitaire" play?
The cordon sanitaire refers to the informal consensus among political and media elites to isolate and stigmatize Radical Right organizations, which the author identifies as a key factor in preventing these groups from gaining national political influence.
Why did New Democracy (NyD) fail after its initial success?
NyD failed due to internal leadership disputes, a lack of clear roots in a Radical Right tradition, and its inability to sustain voter support after its short parliamentary guest appearance in the early 1990s.
Is the Sweden Democrats' (SD) recent growth a sign of long-term success?
While the SD has shown increased electoral results and a modernization of its strategy and rhetoric, the author notes that it is still in a process of attempting to cultivate a sufficiently potent master frame to enter parliament securely.
- Quote paper
- Stephan Redlich (Author), 2007, The Radical Right in Sweden, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/122858
