Ideology and Entry Policy: Why Non-Socialist Parties in Sweden Support Open Door Migration Policies

On the morning of 20 September 2010 Swedes woke up to a new political landscape. The openly xenophobic " Sweden Democrats " (SD / Sverigedemokraterna) had, with 5.7% of the votes at the general election, comfortably gained Riksdag (parliament) representation for the first time. However, although newly elected, signs had existed for nearly a decade of its impending political breakthrough, as SD had steadily increased its representation in the country's regional and local political administrations throughout the 2000s. Moreover, while the party's success may have been a sea change in Swedish politics, it was not the first time a far-right populist party had broken through nationally. The " New Democracy " (NYD / Ny Demokrati) party gained nearly seven percent of the seats during the 1991 Riksdag election, before losing practically all of its votes in 1994. Conventional wisdom, as presented in a host of previous research, would expect existing parties, and the centre-right parties (or in a slightly wider sense, the non-socialist parties 1) in particular to react to the new party system context and voter threat by adopting anti-immigration policies (Bale 2003, 2004). Strict immigration policies as a feature of right-of-centre parties have been described as the norm in Western Europe (Neumayer 2005), as well as for Sweden's Nordic neighbours (Green-Pedersen & Odmalm 2008; Gudbrandsen 2010). Thus, the pressure towards stricter policies among Swedish non-socialist parties 1 While much of the literature uses the label 'centre-right parties' we prefer the term 'non-socialist parties' in order unequivocally to include the Greens. NB please note that the non-socialist cabinets in place 1991-94 and 2006-have not included the Greens. 3 should have been apparent at least during the 1991-94 period and increasingly, from the early 2000s onward. However, throughout this period, Swedish non-socialist parties have refrained from adapting to anti-immigration sentiments and moving towards stricter entry policies. Moreover, they have done the exact opposite, formulating more open policies, and when in government, implementing these measures. Sweden clearly appears to be a deviant case (Dahlström & Esaiasson 2010). In different entry policy instances, and at different times, various non-socialist parties have been present and leading the charge to make it easier for people to enter and settle in Sweden. It is not an exagerration to say that where there is a debate over entry policy in Sweden, at least one non-socialist party advocating a less restrictive stance. This puzzling development of non-socialist …