Sweden's Social Democratic Party turning left?

[Sentinel]

Ever since the end of the 80's, the social democrats in Sweden have firmly been following the 'third way' trend that has plagued the soc dem/labour parties around the world; which in practice means neo-liberal politics in style of Tony Blair in Britain with privatisations, tax cuts for the rich etc. People ceased to see them as a workers' or left party at all, which was exploited by the conservative party (Moderaterna), who portray themselves as the 'new workers party'.

Basically the conservative's argument is that 'at least we're lowering the taxes for the workers as well', and it has been successful so far; the bourgeois bloc won the 2006 elections. The right wing falangue of the soc dems that controlled the party tried to counter this by turning further right themselves, a tactic that failed miserably -- not only did they suffer a disastrious defeat in the 2010 elections, but the lack of alternatives to bourgeois politics was also exploited by ultraright populists and the racist Sweden Democrats marched into parliament.

Mona Sahlin, the very impopular party chairman, resigned.

A week ago the support for the once state-carrying social democrats, who in their glorious past had usually gotten 40-50% of the vote in the Swedish elections, was down at 26,3%. But then something extraordinary happened.

The social democratic election committee, which has been set to determine the future course of the party after the elections disaster (worst result in almost 100 years), announced that Håkan Juholt, the leader of the Kalmar district and considered to be to the left within the party, is to become the next chairman. He has in the past vocally expressed annoyment over privatisations and lists Olof Palme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olof_Palme), a staunch anti-imperialist and (reformist) socialist who led the party until he was murdered in 1986, as his prime role model.

Further, the election committee are demanding that two leading 'third way people' in the party's executive committee, Ylva Johansson and Thomas Östros, be replaced with 'left wingers' Veronica Palm and Leif Pagrotsky.

These developments immediately led to the support for the party to increase with over 8% in only 2 days, into 34,7%. The new party leadership will be confirmed in an extra congress on saturday, 26/3. Now, while the social democrats obviously aren't going to become marxists ever again (duh), not to mention build socialism, this is in my opinion a very interesting development and might affect the general political atmosphere and the living conditions for the working class in the Sweden positively.

For instance, the racist Sweden democrats have already backed with 2%.. :)

Discuss.

[StockholmSyndrome]

Olof Palme was awesome. "Revolutionary reformist"....I like the sound of that.

[Sentinel]

Olof Palme was awesome. "Revolutionary reformist"....I like the sound of that. He was an anti-communist, but I have deep respect for some of his actions, such as his vocal opposition to the Vietnam war, apartheid in South Africa, etc. Plus that he was an actual social democrat for whatever that's worth, rather than a closet neo-liberal, of course.

I doubt Juholt is going to be a new Palme, but I have to admit that this is quite exciting nonetheless.

[Tim Finnegan]

Very interesting. Hopefully, this serves as an example for the other nominally centre-left parties of Europe.

[Dimentio]

Hope they fare well in 2014. But I think the Alliance would have it hard then, mostly because the economic situation most likely will be worse at that point.

[Le Socialiste]

Interesting, to be sure. I don't know enough about the party to say whether or not this is a genuine turn to the left, but it's nice nonetheless. That said, could there be a hint of opportunism in these recent moves? Anyone have any insight regarding this matter?

[Tim Finnegan]

That said, could there be a hint of opportunism in these recent moves?
Of course, but the same could be said of their original shift to the right. Major parties are staffed by bureaucrats and poseurs, not ideological warriors, and they tend to follow whichever leadership offers the best career opportunities. (These leaders may well be ideological warriors themselves, of course- for every Clegg there's a Cameron.) Our position, as leftists, is to influence popular opinion in such a manner as to oblige their opportunism to shift in the favour of the working class.

[Crux]

Rather then a turn to the left my impression is that Juholt is merely not a further turn to the right, as most of the other viable candidates were, in other words he seems to be more status quo, and for the socialdemocratic party these days that means right-wing, than any drastic change.

[Zeus the Moose]

Didn't there used to be a lot of IMTers on RevLeft? You'd think they'd be all over this thread...

[Crux]

Didn't there used to be a lot of IMTers on RevLeft? You'd think they'd be all over this thread...
FYI the Swedish IMT split, those still with the IMT are to my understanding excusively working inside the Left Party, although they probably consider the Socialdemocratic party to still be a working-class one.

[Le Socialiste]

Our position, as leftists, is to influence popular opinion in such a manner as to oblige their opportunism to shift in the favour of the working class.


Naturally, of course. However, what's to say these elements within the leftist movement will remain rooted in the cause? All it takes is yet another potential "swing" to the right, and these same forces will follow, leaving any possible leftist position vulnerable and no better than when it first started. I agree that we must seize every possible moment that favors the positive development of the working-class, yet I cannot help but be wary of whoever leads the charge. If it's the Social Democrats, I would immediately question their motives, as well as their proposed goals. I don't know, I'll be the first to admit that I have a strong bias towards those in the Social Democratic camp - so it's hard for me to work up much enthusiasm for such a movement. If they were to undergo a completely radical and profound change, one which altered the entire political and ideological makeup of their rank-and-file as well as their own proposed ideas and solutions, I would throw in my support.

This isn't me trying to rain on anyone's parade...far from it.

[Sentinel]

Rather then a turn to the left my impression is that Juholt is merely not a further turn to the right, as most of the other viable candidates were, in other words he seems to be more status quo, and for the socialdemocratic party these days that means right-wing, than any drastic change.The thing with Juholt is that noone seems to know, he was relatively unknown until now. Some say that he is a 'centre-left' with the party while others say 'left'. Atm he is being careful with expressing himself, presumably until he is 'officially' elected as chairman.

But he has made some quite interesting statements before these recent events, I particularly liked a column of his in a newspaper, where he swears over the fact that Sweden (the state) today isn't supposed to own anything, but merely be owned (by private entrepenours).

The two other proposed executive committee members, Pagrotsky and Palm, also seem promising (for social democrats) to me. Pagrotsky has afaik been quite anti-EU and EMU, while Palm has tried to revive the old, quite radical demand for a six hour workday, although she may have dropped that now (I'm not sure).

But yeah, I'm certainly not expecting a return to the days of Olof Palme. But I do see a break from the third way line as a realistic possibility even though it's far from certain. Of course.

[Demogorgon]

Does praising Palme mean that much though? Being shot dead usually means that everyone in your party has to sing your praises as a rite of passage.

Anyway a move to the left would of course be positive, particularly if it is accompanied by an increase in poll ratings. Former social democratic parties across Europe always claim that they can't go back to Social Democracy because it would make them unelectable, but if doing so actually appears to increase popularity it might make some of their members think again.

[RGacky3]

Luckily for Sweeden is its good a strong labor movement, which is very good for socialism.

I think the social-democratic parties in europe that followed the "third way" crap, or the Tony blair Model are getting a rude awakening, in Norway the Labor party had to share power with the socialist-left party and the green party (a defacto left turn), the British labor party is out and they're gonna learn their lesson real quick, you have the French Socialist party which got a rude awakening after following that model, The Democrats (although definately to the right of European Social-democratic parties) are also getting a rude awakening, although the leadership is'nt catching it yet.

Unfortunately Sweedens already privatized a lot, and just stopping the privitizations and the right wing policies is'nt a enough, they have to start changing things.

[Dean]

These developments immediately led to the support for the party to increase with over 8% in only 2 days, into 34,7%. The new party leadership will be confirmed in an extra congress on saturday, 26/3. Now, while the social democrats obviously aren't going to become marxists ever again (duh), not to mention build socialism, this is in my opinion a very interesting development and might affect the general political atmosphere and the living conditions for the working class in the Sweden positively.

For instance, the racist Sweden democrats have already backed with 2%.. :)

Discuss.

What industrial backers have shifted support to or from the social dems? What businesses stand to benefit from the policy proposals that have shifted recently in the party? Perhaps it is too early to tell these things (and I'm not as familiar with Sweden's political processes). But I'm convinced you'll find the answers as to who is backing these changes in these data.

I'd also be interested to see at what rate labor unions are able to invest in politicians compared to the rate of industries, which parties they give to, etc.. I'm convinced that this rate, proportional to the democratic character of the labor unions, can serve as a precise measurement of the level of real socialism in a nation.

[RGacky3]

What businesses stand to benefit from the policy proposals that have shifted recently in the party?

Thats the thing, thats what having a large public sector controlling profitable national industries prevents, it prevents large industry to dictate public policy (because the industry IS public), also having strong unions provides a counter balance against buisiness interests that are around.

But it would be interesting to know more about the political process (election campains, funding and so on) in sweeden.

[Dimentio]

Thats the thing, thats what having a large public sector controlling profitable national industries prevents, it prevents large industry to dictate public policy (because the industry IS public), also having strong unions provides a counter balance against buisiness interests that are around.

But it would be interesting to know more about the political process (election campains, funding and so on) in sweeden.

Political funding is divided into two areas.

All parties which received more than 1,5% in the last election receive money from the state to pay for their election campaigns. Individuals and organisations could also donate money to parties anonymously. Traditionally, the Unions fund the Soc-dems while Big Business fund the conservatives.

In Sweden, you don't vote for a candidate. You vote for a party list. You could influence what candidates you want to see represented by marking one of the names of the list, but there are strong party whips.

[RGacky3]

no

[Sentinel]

Yesterday it was announced -- like a punch in the face for those who were expecting a more radical left turn -- that Mikael Damberg, a third way rightwinger who represents the Stockholm district will also be part of the new executive committee.

He is a former leader of the soc dem youth federation and was one of those proposed by the right wing falangue as new chairman. He was rejected by the election committee for being too much to the right.

If one wants to stay optimistic, it can be argued that this might merely be a necessary compromise from the left wing of the party to avoid a split, but as he is going to become the economic spokesperson it bodes ill for the future development. But I guess it all depends on the total final composition of the committee.

Oh and can that picture above please be removed by a moderator.

[Sentinel]

Today the website of Aftonbladet, the largest evening newspaper in Sweden, calls what is going on a 'sharp left turn'. It has been announced today that with the exception of Damberg all new appointed members of the party's executive committee are from the left fraction -- while all the removed ones are from the right wing one.

Two old members will remain, but on new seats. This should mean voting majority for the 'left wingers'. The exact course that the party will now take will likely be announced by Juholt on the congress on saturday.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

Oftopic: I just want to say that even if the majority of the swedish workers, technicly, are organized in a union that doesnt mean very much. The majority is organized among the beurictatic reformists in the LO, which very succesfully have killed any radicalism, ore class struggle among the workers. Since the 20s they have made extermination campaignes against communists and syndicalists ore any possible challanger.


Ontopic: Before i say anything about the possibillity of a left turn of the SocDem´s i want to see some real action, that they actually will do anything not just claiming it.

[Dimentio]

Ontopic: Before i say anything about the possibillity of a left turn of the SocDem´s i want to see some real action, that they actually will do anything not just claiming it.

They aren't even claiming, they are indicating.

Juholt appears to be a Palme nostalgic, which doesn't make sense since Palme was very bitter over the failure of his socialist reforms.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

They aren't even claiming, they are indicating.

Juholt appears to be a Palme nostalgic, which doesn't make sense since Palme was very bitter over the failure of his socialist reforms.

Yeah thats one other thing, the media tend to interpret whats goign on and then they go out and say it like if it where the absolute truth. It might be just speculations.

[Dimentio]

Especially Liberal media, which seems to goad onto the "unelectability" of Juholt, because Reinfeldt is a "glorious statesman". I am surprised that they actually criticised the Prime Minister for his ridiculous demand that the opposition should play dead every time the Fascists happen to agree more with the opposition than with the government...

[RGacky3]

The fact that the Unions are reformist or the ideology of unions is'nt the point, they absolutely do matter economically.

[Sentinel]

In a speech in Visby on Gotland this week Håkan Juholt finally shed some light on the practical side of his and the Soc Dem Party's politics. The speech was full of 'old school' social democrat rhetoric, and had certain interesting points.

Besides promising to end child poverty in the country and to increase the pensions, he announced that the railways, the electricity companies and the pharmacies will be regulated by the state again if the soc dems win the next elections.

He admitted that his party was partially responsible for the privatisations and de-regulations of 'these vital areas that are to serve the citizens, not the market', but that practical experience now shows that that line was wrong (no shit). He also promised to legislate for a right to full-time employment for public employees and summer jobs for all youth, and to expand the child care.

All this will naturally cost immense amounts of money, but Juholt didn't expand on how it will be financed at this point. He did talk a lot about solidarity, which in this context usually means increased taxes, but the question remains: for whom.

In other words, whether these reforms will be paid by a progressive taxation, ie whether the rich actually will be forced to pay their rightful share, remains to be seen. These are things that will hopefully be discussed indepth before the next elections in 2014.

[Tommy4ever]

I'll keep an eye on the developments with the Swedish Social Democrats.

If their shift to the left is an electoral success and then they form a reasonably successful government this could attract the attention of European Social Democracy.

[Demogorgon]

Are the Social Democrats seeing any recovery in the polls as a result of this?

As for taxation, from what I've read doesn't new taxation in Sweden almost always mean regressive payroll taxes or VAT rises? Mind you there is an argument to be made that can still be worthwhile if it goes on social spending.

[Sentinel]

Are the Social Democrats seeing any recovery in the polls as a result of this?

Atm it's hard to determine whether the red-green opposition or the ruling bourgeois coalition is backed by a majority of the voters, as results of different opinion polls seem to vary a lot. According to some the government parties are still backed by the majority, while others say that the opposition is leading with 5% or so.

All of these gallups that I've seen have been made before these most recent developments, though -- but in any case I think it's safe to say that it's still rather even between the blocs.

On the other hand we still have three years to the next elections. During that time the global crisis of capitalism is likely to deepen further, as Dimentio pointed out, which should tear on people's support for the current, ruthless rightwing government.

The crisis has yet to hit Sweden as hard as rest of Europe, but already it has been pointed out that the Social Democrats 'missed an open goal' in the last elections by failing to present an alternative to the slaughter of the welfare state the government is performing.

I think they might avoid that same mistake in the 2014 election campaign under Juholt -- and if so yes, they might win. Unfortunately, however, I also doubt that they are ever going to actually deliver much more than a bleak shadow of the former 'swedish model'.

Successful reforms have the potential to change the public opinion at least somewhat though, and I'm hopeful that during the current circumstances even a minor shift to the left could benefit the revolutionary left by extension.

But that is also the extention of the potential benefits here, as I see it.


As for taxation, from what I've read doesn't new taxation in Sweden almost always mean regressive payroll taxes or VAT rises? Mind you there is an argument to be made that can still be worthwhile if it goes on social spending.Sure, and that will likely still be the case to some degree. However, much of the popularity of the current government has come from lowering the taxes for the workers. So while further decrease is unlikely, I'm not sure the soc dems would risk giving the government propaganda ammunition by increasing them a lot, either..

But, as I'll believe that the rich will actually be put to pay when I see it and not before, it will be quite interesting to see how Juholt will solve this problem..

[Demogorgon]

Thanks for the information. Is there any hope that that this could make less people vote for the Sweden Democrats as a protest vote next time? I know the Social Democrats don't want to give the impression that they are the natural party for those votes to come to, but we all know that a lot of far right voters all across Europe are people who used to vote for Social Democratic parties.