Leroy N. Soetoro
2018-09-11 20:48:34 UTC
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/sweden-election-results-populist-
pattern-elites-lost-touch/
As in the U.S., populism gains ground when media and government leaders
deride many voters concerns.
Swedens elections on Sunday carry the same lesson we should have already
learned with Brexit and Donald Trumps 2016 victory: Those whom political
elites view as deplorables are going to have their say. The question now
is whether elites will continue to ignore them and the lessons they bring.
Once a poster child for political consensus, Sweden is now deeply
polarized. Parties on the traditional right and those on the traditional
left wound up in a photo finish, each with about 41 percent of the vote.
The remaining 18 percent of the vote was captured by Sweden Democrats
(SD), a once obscure populist party with some roots in 1980s neofascism.
It has since largely cleaned up its act and seen its support skyrocket as
other parties have ignored its key issues of immigration and crime. The SD
claims it now practices a zero-tolerance policy against members who make
openly racist or anti-Semitic statements.
Despite the growth of the Sweden Democrats, none of the seven mainstream
parties will have anything to do with the party, with most labeling it
racist and extremist. Johan Norberg, a Swedish commentator, says that
no other party will deal with them. He adds that the SDs stance on many
issues makes them unreliable partners to either side because on the one
hand they want to maintain the famous Swedish welfare state but on the
other are climate-change skeptics and promise to cut taxes on fuel.
Whatever their stated reason, the refusal of all other parties to
negotiate with the SD may now lead to political paralysis in Sweden, since
neither the combined forces of the Right or the Left parties can command
the majority needed to form a stable government.
The irony is that all of this turmoil is happening during relatively good
economic times. Just as with Brexit and Trumps victory, the populist
revolt in Sweden is taking place during a time of falling unemployment.
But the instability of todays job markets and slow wage growth cancel
that out. In Sweden, only 27 percent of voters believe that the country is
heading in the right direction, while 50 percent think that it is going in
the wrong direction.
The key moment that gave the Swedish Democrats their opening was the 2015
migrant crisis. In Germany, the admission of 1 million migrants caused
support for the major parties to collapse and fueled the rise of the
populist Alternative for Germany. In Sweden, a similar result occurred
after the country took in 165,000 asylum seekers in one year. That would
be the equivalent of the United States admitting some 6 million refugees
in a year.
But what really made the Swedish migrant crisis a political tinderbox is
that elites decided that discussing the issue in frank terms including
its negative impacts was forbidden in the media and polite society. As
Tino Sanandaji, a researcher of Iranian Kurdish background at the
Institute for Economic and Business History Research in Stockholm, wrote
at Politico today:
Over time, openness and multi-culturalism were pitted against hatred
and racism, and that in effect ended the discussion.
Exposing negative statistics about immigration sparked angry accusations
of bigotry. Establishment voices shied away from the topic for fear of
being accused as racist. Opposition to immigration became off-limits
within all establishment parties, and Swedish policy gradually moved
toward open borders.
The underlying unease, of course, did not vanish. In anonymous social
surveys, there was never a majority in favor of increasing migration to
Sweden. Faced with a pro-migration political establishment, the silent
majority of voters began to feel they had no other outlet than fringe
parties with racist roots.
Polls show that Swedish Democrats even captured 12 percent of the foreign-
born vote, perhaps explained by the fact that some of them resent the
recent rise in crime and disorder in their own neighborhoods.
Swedens governing elites made things even worse for themselves by turning
a blind eye to increases in gang violence, sexual assault, and arson that
occurred in neighborhoods where migrants congregated. Sanandaji says that
the Swedish Democrats benefited from the governments decision to
obfuscate or simply mislead the public about the rise in violence
despite the indisputable statistics about the phenomenon.
Much as with support for President Trump, a general belief that elites
arent telling the truth on key issues has propped up SDs base of support
and solidified it.
And just as the mainstream media have stepped out of their traditional
role and declared war on the Trump administration, the Swedish media have
taken the side of the elites. During the final election debate on Swedish
state television (SVT) last Friday, Sweden Democrats party leader Jimmie
Akesson claimed that the reason many immigrants cant find a job is that
they are not Swedes and they dont fit in, in Sweden. After the
debate, the SVT host made a sudden intervention: We must begin by saying
that Jimmie Akessons comments were blatantly generalizing, and SVT does
not stand by them.
The argument over the poor assimilation of migrants to Sweden is worth
airing, though Akesson expressed his concerns in harsh terms. But it was
the place of the other parties to debate, not the state broadcasters. For
their part, the Sweden Democrats tweeted: SVT chose to take a stand
against the Sweden Democrats. It is an act that is unprecedented in modern
Swedish history.
Youd think that elites would see a pattern when looking at Trump
supporters, Brexiteers, or Europeans skeptical of mass migration; youd
think that the lesson would sink in by now. But instead, in country after
country roiled by populist uprisings, elites steadfastly are refusing to
grapple with the legitimate sentiments of working-class voters, dissidents
from politically correct identity politics, or workers unsettled by
industry that has shut down.
Instead, the elites are continuing to roughly follow the example of
candidate Barack Obama, who in 2012 famously tried to explain the
attitudes of such people at what he thought was an off-the-record
fundraiser:
They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who
arent like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a
way to explain their frustrations.
Of course, there are elements in the ranks of Brexit supporters, Trump
backers, and the Swedish Democrats that are nasty and retrograde. But so
long as elites continue to ignore the legitimate fears and grievances of
ordinary voters, they will be both inhibiting a genuine public debate over
solutions and encouraging even more of a backlash.
--
Donald J. Trump, 304 electoral votes to 227, defeated compulsive liar in
denial Hillary Rodham Clinton on December 19th, 2016. The clown car
parade of the democrat party ran out of gas and got run over by a Trump
truck.
Congratulations President Trump. Thank you for cleaning up the disaster
of the Obama presidency.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp.
ObamaCare is a total 100% failure and no lie that can be put forth by its
supporters can dispute that.
Obama jobs, the result of ObamaCare. 12-15 working hours a week at minimum
wage, no benefits and the primary revenue stream for ObamaCare. It can't
be funded with money people don't have, yet liberals lie about how great
it is.
Obama increased total debt from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the eight
years he was in office, and sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood queer
liberal democrat donors.
pattern-elites-lost-touch/
As in the U.S., populism gains ground when media and government leaders
deride many voters concerns.
Swedens elections on Sunday carry the same lesson we should have already
learned with Brexit and Donald Trumps 2016 victory: Those whom political
elites view as deplorables are going to have their say. The question now
is whether elites will continue to ignore them and the lessons they bring.
Once a poster child for political consensus, Sweden is now deeply
polarized. Parties on the traditional right and those on the traditional
left wound up in a photo finish, each with about 41 percent of the vote.
The remaining 18 percent of the vote was captured by Sweden Democrats
(SD), a once obscure populist party with some roots in 1980s neofascism.
It has since largely cleaned up its act and seen its support skyrocket as
other parties have ignored its key issues of immigration and crime. The SD
claims it now practices a zero-tolerance policy against members who make
openly racist or anti-Semitic statements.
Despite the growth of the Sweden Democrats, none of the seven mainstream
parties will have anything to do with the party, with most labeling it
racist and extremist. Johan Norberg, a Swedish commentator, says that
no other party will deal with them. He adds that the SDs stance on many
issues makes them unreliable partners to either side because on the one
hand they want to maintain the famous Swedish welfare state but on the
other are climate-change skeptics and promise to cut taxes on fuel.
Whatever their stated reason, the refusal of all other parties to
negotiate with the SD may now lead to political paralysis in Sweden, since
neither the combined forces of the Right or the Left parties can command
the majority needed to form a stable government.
The irony is that all of this turmoil is happening during relatively good
economic times. Just as with Brexit and Trumps victory, the populist
revolt in Sweden is taking place during a time of falling unemployment.
But the instability of todays job markets and slow wage growth cancel
that out. In Sweden, only 27 percent of voters believe that the country is
heading in the right direction, while 50 percent think that it is going in
the wrong direction.
The key moment that gave the Swedish Democrats their opening was the 2015
migrant crisis. In Germany, the admission of 1 million migrants caused
support for the major parties to collapse and fueled the rise of the
populist Alternative for Germany. In Sweden, a similar result occurred
after the country took in 165,000 asylum seekers in one year. That would
be the equivalent of the United States admitting some 6 million refugees
in a year.
But what really made the Swedish migrant crisis a political tinderbox is
that elites decided that discussing the issue in frank terms including
its negative impacts was forbidden in the media and polite society. As
Tino Sanandaji, a researcher of Iranian Kurdish background at the
Institute for Economic and Business History Research in Stockholm, wrote
at Politico today:
Over time, openness and multi-culturalism were pitted against hatred
and racism, and that in effect ended the discussion.
Exposing negative statistics about immigration sparked angry accusations
of bigotry. Establishment voices shied away from the topic for fear of
being accused as racist. Opposition to immigration became off-limits
within all establishment parties, and Swedish policy gradually moved
toward open borders.
The underlying unease, of course, did not vanish. In anonymous social
surveys, there was never a majority in favor of increasing migration to
Sweden. Faced with a pro-migration political establishment, the silent
majority of voters began to feel they had no other outlet than fringe
parties with racist roots.
Polls show that Swedish Democrats even captured 12 percent of the foreign-
born vote, perhaps explained by the fact that some of them resent the
recent rise in crime and disorder in their own neighborhoods.
Swedens governing elites made things even worse for themselves by turning
a blind eye to increases in gang violence, sexual assault, and arson that
occurred in neighborhoods where migrants congregated. Sanandaji says that
the Swedish Democrats benefited from the governments decision to
obfuscate or simply mislead the public about the rise in violence
despite the indisputable statistics about the phenomenon.
Much as with support for President Trump, a general belief that elites
arent telling the truth on key issues has propped up SDs base of support
and solidified it.
And just as the mainstream media have stepped out of their traditional
role and declared war on the Trump administration, the Swedish media have
taken the side of the elites. During the final election debate on Swedish
state television (SVT) last Friday, Sweden Democrats party leader Jimmie
Akesson claimed that the reason many immigrants cant find a job is that
they are not Swedes and they dont fit in, in Sweden. After the
debate, the SVT host made a sudden intervention: We must begin by saying
that Jimmie Akessons comments were blatantly generalizing, and SVT does
not stand by them.
The argument over the poor assimilation of migrants to Sweden is worth
airing, though Akesson expressed his concerns in harsh terms. But it was
the place of the other parties to debate, not the state broadcasters. For
their part, the Sweden Democrats tweeted: SVT chose to take a stand
against the Sweden Democrats. It is an act that is unprecedented in modern
Swedish history.
Youd think that elites would see a pattern when looking at Trump
supporters, Brexiteers, or Europeans skeptical of mass migration; youd
think that the lesson would sink in by now. But instead, in country after
country roiled by populist uprisings, elites steadfastly are refusing to
grapple with the legitimate sentiments of working-class voters, dissidents
from politically correct identity politics, or workers unsettled by
industry that has shut down.
Instead, the elites are continuing to roughly follow the example of
candidate Barack Obama, who in 2012 famously tried to explain the
attitudes of such people at what he thought was an off-the-record
fundraiser:
They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who
arent like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a
way to explain their frustrations.
Of course, there are elements in the ranks of Brexit supporters, Trump
backers, and the Swedish Democrats that are nasty and retrograde. But so
long as elites continue to ignore the legitimate fears and grievances of
ordinary voters, they will be both inhibiting a genuine public debate over
solutions and encouraging even more of a backlash.
--
Donald J. Trump, 304 electoral votes to 227, defeated compulsive liar in
denial Hillary Rodham Clinton on December 19th, 2016. The clown car
parade of the democrat party ran out of gas and got run over by a Trump
truck.
Congratulations President Trump. Thank you for cleaning up the disaster
of the Obama presidency.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp.
ObamaCare is a total 100% failure and no lie that can be put forth by its
supporters can dispute that.
Obama jobs, the result of ObamaCare. 12-15 working hours a week at minimum
wage, no benefits and the primary revenue stream for ObamaCare. It can't
be funded with money people don't have, yet liberals lie about how great
it is.
Obama increased total debt from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the eight
years he was in office, and sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood queer
liberal democrat donors.