A politics of one

The Swedish daily newspaper, Dagens Nyheter carried a news item today wherein the leader of the opposition Social Democratic party, Mona Sahlin invited middle road parties to join her coalition party in order to avert what political analysts predict may might be a catastrophic situation if the newcomer Social Democrats (SD) get into the Swedish parliament. But she was politely refused.

Mona Sahlin referred to the Liberal and Center parties in her invitation for "cross over party borders" cooperation in order to edge out whatever decisive role the SDs might have if they come into the parliament. She excluded the Moderate party, whose alliance with other non-socialist parties are currently in power. Just now, the Synovate political barometer shows an even chance for either of the two blocks at winning the national elections next year.

The SDs have had a phenomenal rise in the Swedish political arena. One wonders why it has gained supporters considering its hostile position on Muslims and immigrants which is anathema to everything Swedish politics stand for. What is it that attracts supporters to SD? I reckon that many Swedes who cannot speak openly against the Swedish open-door policy vis-a-vis refugees and asylum seekers and what it is costing the taxpayers to support the exodus of these people into Sweden, are looking for a way to put a break into this trend. But in Sweden, it is almost forbidden to say one's opinion regarding the government's benevolence vis-a-vis asylum-seekers.

The biggest number of asylum-seekers are coming from Iraq and friendly counties such as Södertälje- in the southern suburb of Stockholm have had the burden of receiving the largest number of Iraqi asylum-seekers. Other counties have flatly refused to take in more than their economies can support. With the current difficulties in the employment situation, it is understandable why many Swedish counties are not as open-hearted in their attitudes towards refugees and asylum-seekers.

But it seems a desperate move on the part of Sahlin to invite middle road parties to a cooperation in order to create a majority party and avert a situation wherein a small unwelcomed party could play a decisivie role in parliamentary politics. What I don't understand is, why don't the big Swedish parties analyse what it is that makes the SDs popular, if not appealing? What is it that they are missing out, like the unspeakable fear of an unstopable exodus of refugees coming to Sweden that puts a burden on a over-taxed population? Instead of unblocking borders between the non-Socialist and the Socialist opposition, is it not better to re-examine the issues that make the SDs attractive to Swedish voters?

When the Swedish elections take place next year, the decisive issue is still employment and taxes. The opposition Social Democratic Party promises to do better, and how is not really specified. They have been in power for a long time without any progress in this major problem. On the other hand, the non-Socialists alliance have instigated not only tax reduction for the low-income earners but succeeded in reducing over-dependence upon the welfare system by those who refuse to work, or make honest attempts at getting jobs.

In an open society, it is better to speak of even the unspeakable topics. When humanity and solidarity are challenged by hard economic times, it is more honest to admit where the limits are to one's sense of hospitality.
Sometimes it pays to think of who's footing the bill for the policy of humane admittance of refugees and asylum-seekers that come not only from conflict areas but from places where life promises no future.#