Following the Social Democratic Party’s (S) election defeat in 2022, growing dissatisfaction within the party has led to calls for a new party program to replace the ten-year-old one. The decline of social democracy, from being a governing party and, on several occasions, a majority party, to having to share power and stand in opposition, has in turn forced its leaders to come up with a “new direction.”
The Social Democrats would like to present themselves as a “party of the whole people,” but do not be fooled; every party has a class character and a social base. By social base, we mean, unlike the voter base, which is those who vote for a party, the actual social group that, like priests, preaches its politics and carries out its work to the voter base. The Social Democrats are a bourgeois party in terms of class character, a servant of the Swedish imperialist monopoly bourgeoisie, and their social base, on which they rely, is the labor aristocracy. The labor aristocracy, a layer of pre-bourgeoisified workers whose class affiliation is petty bourgeois, consists of the representatives of the bourgeois “labor organizations” (S, LO, HGF) who systematically serve to defend imperialism, the interests of Swedish monopoly capital, and the subjugation of the proletariat. The Social Democrats, in collusion with the labor aristocracy, claim to represent the interests of the working class in order to win its votes and create the illusion of a workers’ government.
The position of the labor aristocracy is inseparable from imperialism, of which it is an expression. In an imperialist country like Sweden, which bordered the socialist Soviet Union (until 1956), it was absolutely necessary for the imperialists to have a calm and well-organized country. In order to transform the Swedish proletariat from being a rebellious and combative proletariat (which in the early 1900s was among the most steadfast in the world) into a “calm and refined people,” in the sense of the Jante Law, Swedish imperialism was able to use its imperialist superprofits to usurp and corrupt the proletariat’s organizations by transforming them into corporative organizations representing both workers and employers in the same way that a fox guards the henhouse and says it is doing so for the sake of the chickens.
The labor aristocracy in Sweden was born out of the class betrayal of social democracy and old revisionism in the early 1900s, systematized by the so-called “Swedish model,” a corporatist monstrosity that was born during the Saltsjöbaden Agreement of 1938, where the Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO) took away the workers’ right to strike in order to instead protect “class peace,” under the idea that a “people’s home” offering social prosperity and welfare could only be achieved if the workers protected the growth and exploitation of capital.
The entire army of bureaucrats—whether they are called officials or representatives—who belong to the Social Democrats, the trade unions, the Left Party, the “popular movements,” etc., constitute this stratum, together with supervisors and foremen of various kinds. The existence of the labor aristocracy is directly dependent on the prosperity of finance capital and its state, which is why this stratum is thoroughly reactionary. It is the Social Democrats’ most important support. However, due to the weakening of the LO, HGF, and “popular movements,” which have repeatedly shown their true colors toward those they claim to defend, as well as due to government cutbacks that have weakened part of the state bureaucracy where the labor aristocracy may exist, the social base of the Social Democrats has been weakened. The labor aristocracy is a less influential stratum today than it was in the second half of the 20th century, and due to the Social Democrats’ constant anti-worker policies, its voters have tried to find solutions elsewhere. This, in turn, has led to the weakening of the Social Democrats, which is becoming more and more apparent with each election.
The Swedish monopoly bourgeoisie faces problems it is incapable of solving
Social democracy, as an expression of imperialism’s superstructure in Sweden, has developed on the basis of the development of the economic base. In the early 1900s, when Swedish imperialism was in its infancy and Swedish industrialization was in full swing, there was room for reformism, for bourgeois workers’ parties that offered crumbs from the rich man’s table in exchange for peace. During this period, in order to divert the proletariat’s attention from power, the proletariat was allowed to win several social reforms. After World War II, which left Europe in ruins while Sweden remained unscathed and wealthy thanks to Swedish imperialism’s dirty war business, the Swedish imperialists enjoyed years of growth with the reconstruction of Europe and through its relatively strong capacity for capital export. This made possible the construction of the welfare state, whose purpose was to divert the masses’ interest in socialism and to compete with the prestige of the communists in the post-war period.
However, the social democratic superstructure was forced to reform after imperialism entered its strategic defensive and decay process in the 1980s. Growth slowed and the economy experienced increasing stagnation. This brought the social democratic reforms to a halt and ended its character as a reformist party. The so-called “Swedish model,” with its developed corporatism and strong labor aristocracy, based on Swedish imperialism’s relatively good position in the world, has come to an end. Swedish imperialism was able to emerge from the crisis of the 1990s through the new markets and spheres of influence it conquered, primarily in the Baltic states, but also in Central and Eastern Europe. But after that, there was no longer room for further expansion. Capitalism does not allow for stagnation; the group of monopoly capitalists that does not grow and strengthen itself will perish and be swept away by others. Therefore, profits must constantly increase, at any cost.
The Swedish imperialists became less and less inclined to use the superprofits they gained through the exploitation of oppressed nations to bribe the labor aristocracy. Instead, reaction was applied across the board. In pursuit of greater profits, the imperialists are increasing exploitation at home through higher prices, real wage cuts, and the dismantling of workers’ hard-won rights. The labor aristocracy is also being weakened by cuts in the state bureaucracy and by the fact that the trade unions are increasingly forced to lower their already meager demands.
This has led the Social Democrats and their supporting parties to transform their image into that of yet another “neoliberal” party, similar to the others in the Riksdag, which in turn has led to a crisis as their voter base has become even more undefined. The Social Democrats have become a party that is dismantling the reforms they themselves pushed through and is thus applying the same policies as its competitors.
The social democrats’ new programme
The “new direction” that the Social Democrats want to present in their new programme merely reflects their crisis as a party with an increasingly undefined social base, facing serious problems that it is unable to solve. To begin with, they present five main points in the draft of their new programme:
1: You should live a better life in a richer country.
A policy for increased growth and more good jobs with a wage you can live on.
2: You have the right to a functioning society.
3: A new policy to deal with market failures and strengthen welfare.
4: You should live in safety and security.
A new, effective criminal justice policy and a security policy for a new era.
5: You should be part of a strong community.
A policy that breaks down segregation and ensures strict migration control.”
Four of the five points presented as the main rationale can be summarized into two positions: to make Sweden “richer” and “stronger.” It is easy to see that they primarily want to expand the state from a security perspective, which means both a larger military and police force, in order to ensure “strict migration” and, more importantly, “a functioning society.” The absence of their old empty platitudes about justice, equality, and class is obvious.
What they themselves see as a “functioning society” is not expressed. But for Marxists, it becomes quite obvious. We know that the main function of the state is as an apparatus of violence for the domination of one class over another. This is consistent in its descriptions of the program’s most important tasks.
They then write the following:
“Social democracy is a freedom movement. It recognizes that the individual’s ability to control their own life and make free choices requires a society based on equality.”
Here they express the bourgeois individualistic worldview that is a cornerstone of liberalism, the ideology of the bourgeoisie. The “free choices” they talk about are only choices about which capitalist you sell your labor to or which party will rule over you, unless you are bourgeois and can enjoy whatever freedom you want. This freedom is nothing more than the freedom that all kinds of capitalists talk about: individual freedom. Social democracy thus represents only the same “freedom” that capitalism offers.
Furthermore:
“Social democracy wants to see a Sweden where residents support each other and trust each other. It is a Sweden where citizens can find meaning, belonging, and a sense of being part of something bigger.”
They go on to highlight the importance of society “belonging” to a common body that acts monolithically. They distinguish between residents and citizens, but argue that everyone should be obedient to the common denominator, i.e., the state. This view of society resembles Mussolini’s corporatist “everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” Viewing society as a common body is an extremely important cornerstone of corporatism, which is the most important aspect of fascism. The contradiction between the first and second paragraphs can only be understood by introducing class into the analysis. What they want is freedom for capital and the subordination of the working class in a common body under the bourgeois state, under the political leadership of social democracy.
The question of the party’s social base
“The importance of work for human freedom and independence cannot be overestimated. It is the foundation of Sweden’s prosperity and common welfare. Having as many people as possible in work is crucial for the country’s future, both for cohesion and for welfare and prosperity. Work is both a right and a duty. Everyone who is able to work therefore has a responsibility to contribute to the common good. This requires society to ensure good employment opportunities throughout the country and good working conditions. Both unemployment and job insecurity are consequences of work being subordinated to short-term profit interests and society withdrawing. High unemployment undermines the position of workers and other employees in the labor market, through a weakened bargaining position and poorer working conditions, to the benefit of employers and capital.”
Once again, “cohesion,” “the common good,” and “Sweden’s prosperity” express an increasingly corporatist attitude. This is also expressed in its view of work as a “duty,” which under capitalism becomes a defense of the bourgeoisie’s right to exploit the workers. The only role that the working class has, according to them, is to contribute to the “common prosperity.” However, this prosperity is hardly something that we can all share in, which they themselves acknowledge when, as class divisions grow, the people become poorer while capital makes record profits year after year. They do not mention that it is their own policies that have caused this, such as during their last term in office, which was marked by economic crisis, inflation, pandemic, electricity crisis, etc. for the working class, while Swedish capitalism produced 351 new billionaires during these four years, an increase of 183% (!).
So why should it be the workers’ duty to continue increasing this prosperity for the capitalists? Perhaps this is due to the “weakened negotiating position” they mention? But if that is the case, why were the Social Democrats the ones who tore up our trade union rights during the previous term of office, fulfilling the character as the biggest destroyers of trade union rights in Sweden’s history?
As we note in the draft, they are opposed to “short-term profits” and those who represent them, such as “healthcare giants,” staffing agencies, so-called “independent schools,” etc. These are simply the capitalists who are most visible to their voter base, and they therefore find it difficult to openly defend them, unlike all the other larger and more influential capitalists.
Their class analysis is simply expressed in their use of the terms “employee” and “employer,” where the employee, like a thief, takes wages from the kind employer who offers work. This is evident in the crisis of its social base even to the Social Democrats themselves. Prominent figures within the Social Democrats, such as Björn von Sydow and David Lundqvist, recently submitted a proposal to change the party’s name from the Social Democratic Workers’ Party to the “Wage Earners’ Party,” explaining that:
“If we continue to describe ourselves as ‘just’ a workers’ party, we will give 2.1 million white-collar workers continued reason to ask: ‘Why should I vote for a party that doesn’t appeal to me?’”
As a result of its weakening social base, it is attempting to transform itself into a “party of the whole people” instead. The question is: will it reach more people, or will it miss everyone?
Economical politics
“Social democracy wants to see a healthy market economy where private companies can operate effectively. This requires democratic counterbalances to capital interests in the form of stable rules. Only institutions that are independent of the market can decide on adequate rules to maintain competition and prevent private monopolies (…) The many and varied needs of society require a mixed economy based on a combination of political decisions and market mechanisms, effective public welfare, responsible companies, and strong trade unions.”
The “mixed economy” that the Social Democrats talk about is merely an expression of state-monopolistic capitalism—a form of monopoly capital domination based on high concentration and centralization of capital, the omnipotence of monopolies in the economy and politics of capitalist countries, leading to a fusion of the monopoly apparatus and the state apparatus, to the financial oligarchy subjugating the bourgeois state. The Social Democrats have long been a political representative of the state monopoly capitalism faction as opposed to private monopoly capitalism. These two factions are two parts of the same class.
State monopoly capitalism takes several forms, such as “personal unions,” whereby influential government officials are drawn into the boards of monopolies and representatives of monopolies are given positions in the governments of bourgeois states. This is evident among several prominent Social Democrats on the boards of large companies, such as Göran Persson, former party leader, Minister of Education, Finance, and Prime Minister, and Jens Henriksson, former State Secretary, who are chairman and CEO of Swedbank, respectively, or Thomas Östros, vice-chairman of the Riksdag’s Industry and Finance Committee 2006-2011, former CEO of the Swedish Bankers’ Association, the power organ of big finance. The list could go on and on. Another form of state-monopoly capitalism is for monopolies to take control of the “state budget,” either by building state-owned companies, railways, etc., or through bourgeois nationalization, whereby monopoly capital can appropriate enormous sums from the state budget via the tax system and profitable military orders.
The Wallenberg sphere is part of the state monopoly faction within imperialist monopoly capital. They use state intervention and state-owned companies to strengthen their own position and increase their share of capital control. For example, LKAB, a state-owned mining company where both Marcus Wallenberg and Göran Persson have served as chairmen of the board, generates large profits for the Wallenbergs by purchasing products from companies such as Atlas Copco.
The development of state-monopolistic capitalism further exacerbates the contradictions of capitalism. It therefore grows most rapidly in times of war, war preparations, and economic crises. The bourgeois state’s interference in economic life does not remove the fundamental contradictions of the capitalist system; on the contrary, the anarchy of production and all the contradictions of capitalism become even more apparent. Different groups of monopoly capitalists are drawn into the struggle for control of the state apparatus, for positions in state bodies, and to grab as much of the “state pie” as possible.
Preventing private monopolies and maintaining competition, as the program states, is merely a show for the public.
“State-monopoly capitalism is monopoly capitalism in which monopoly capital has merged with the political power of the state. Taking full advantage of state power, it accelerates the concentration and aggregation of capital, intensifies the exploitation of the working people, the devouring of small and medium enterprises, and the annexation of some monopoly capitalist groups by others, and strengthens monopoly capital for international competition and expansion. Under the cover of “state intervention in economic life” and “opposition to monopoly”, and using the name of the state to deceive, it cleverly transfers huge profits into the pockets of the monopoly groups by underhand methods.” (More on the Differences Between Comrade Togliatti and Us, Chapter V: Can State-Monopoly Capital Become “a More Effective Instrument for Opposing Monopolistic Development”?, Hongqi (Red Flag), March, 1963)
In essence, these state interventions, regulations, and the whole mess of “mixed economy” and “long-term thinking” are nothing more than state-monopolistic capitalism, which only serves monopoly interests behind closed doors and contributes to an ever-increasing share of national income being seized by monopoly capital. State monopoly capitalism grows larger in times of economic crisis and preparations for war. The Social Democrats are well aware of the heightened international tensions that will inevitably lead to more crisis and war.
The world’s “democracy” in crisis?
“The weakening of democracy has led to increased restrictions on freedom for people around the world. Wars and conflicts have been driven by authoritarian leaders pursuing their own power interests, resulting in indiscriminate violence and suffering. Large numbers of people have been subjected to increased surveillance and repression, while independent media and critical voices have been silenced.”
While discussing how the world has moved toward “positive” development in the form of increased prosperity, they also talk about how ‘democracy’ is weakening and war has become even more widespread. They say that it is mainly “authoritarian” leaders who have fueled war for their own power interests, without the Social Democrats acknowledging their own role in this. By following in the footsteps of US imperialism, which is the world’s number one enemy, defending its position as the world’s only hegemonic superpower, they have tried to move their military pawns around. They have acted as the biggest accelerator of reaction around the world. The Social Democrats were the force that brought Sweden into NATO, the world’s biggest warmonger, and contributed immense support to one of the greatest conflicts of our time, the so-called “war on terror,” waged under the leadership of US imperialism between 2001 and 2021. Conservative sources say that nearly 5 million people have died and 38 million have been displaced from their homes as a result of the US invasion, but we know that the numbers are much higher.
But when the Social Democrats refer to war in their draft program, they are not referring to these devastating wars. In typical imperialist spirit, they distinguish between this war (“the war on terror”) and the Russian invasion of Ukraine as two different things, the former being entirely justified, since the Social Democrats themselves have been at the forefront of ensuring that Swedish forces have been able to support the West’s imperialist conspiracy, including in Afghanistan, Iraq, Mali, and Libya, while the latter is unjustified, which is of course true, but which they only acknowledge in order to serve their own imperialist interests.
Furthermore, the Social Democrats believe that Sweden should be a “leading player in the EU,” that it should develop “Nordic cooperation, including in security policy, with the whole of the Nordic region participating in NATO,” and that there is a need for “a more powerful common foreign and security policy for the EU to contribute to greater security in an uncertain world.” The EU, as an alliance of imperialists, is contributing to the increasing warmongering through the militarization of the EU in recent years, especially after Russian imperialism’s war of aggression in Ukraine. By taking advantage of this imperialist aggression, the EU has increased its warmongering and its militarization process. It is clear that the Social Democrats’ fondness for the EU brings Swedish imperialism closer to its friends in the EU, especially German imperialism, which is the leader of this alliance.
The program also fails to mention the Social Democrats’ involvement in arms deals, which Stefan Löfvén, former party leader and prime minister, has been instrumental in promoting, both during his time as party leader and prime minister and afterwards. They are keen to avoid distinguishing between “authoritarian” leaders and “democratic” leaders, as they so often do in their rhetoric, when it comes to arms exports. Their analysis of the world is an analysis of hypocrites. They helped start the fire and now they are pointing at the smoke.
Other points they raise are “strong resilience throughout society through robust total defense, significant military capability, and good civil preparedness” and “a Swedish national defense with expanded military and civil service.” The Social Democrats contribute to the warmongering and militarization by expanding the military, and through NATO membership, they are forcing more and more workers into imperialist wars.
They also write that they plan to take “measures to promote Swedish exports, protect free trade, and counteract protectionism.” Their policies suggest that the Swedish bourgeoisie was probably confident in advance that Trump would win the election in the US, which is trying to resolve the crisis of US imperialism by weakening the European imperialists, including Swedish imperialism, by competing with them and advancing at their expense.
That is why the Social Democrats see the importance of advocating free trade and combating protectionism. There are several reasons for this, but one of the main ones is that Sweden cannot compete with the larger economic powers in a trade war. The Swedish economy may be strong for its size, but it is very limited compared to the American or the German market.
Domestic politics: stronger repression, stronger repression
The draft program presented by the Social Democrats differs from the programs of the “right-wing parties,” including the Sweden Democrats, in principle only in terms of form, how they express themselves, how they formulate their arguments and positions, but the content is essentially the same. A “strict Swedish migration policy” is the general line taken by the parties in the Swedish Parliament.
The Social Democrats advocate “vigorously combating organized crime.” We know from previous terms in office that this is merely a call for increased repression and militarization of proletarian suburbs. They demand “a police force that reflects the entire population, with a strong local presence and the necessary powers and tools.” This is obviously not to “combat the gangs,” which they are clearly not interested in, as they have several connections to the gangs, especially at the municipal level, and because their measures only involve militarized suburbs and not real police investigations among consumers, the petty-bourgeois and bourgeois everyday drug users, where they can find the evidence. These measures are intended to make the state’s monopoly on violence more effective, which in turn develops its defense. The proposals presented are obviously linked to the increased wave of gang violence in Sweden, but this is only used as an excuse to reactionize the state and enable increased surveillance and develop police repression, probably as a result of a fear of the future, which will mean greater resistance and increased dissatisfaction with the bourgeois state. Measures such as “chat control” and increased powers of interception do not seem to have affected the gangs. Rather, criminal violence is even more widespread than before these measures were introduced.
The Social Democrats claim to defend democracy. But in practice, during the coronavirus pandemic, the Social Democrats showed that it is not so difficult to abolish civil democratic rights. Although Sweden has a constitution that guarantees freedom of expression, this was restricted by the ban on public gatherings, regardless of whether one considers this to be right or wrong at this time. This took the form of increased repression of demonstrations, not least during the BLM demonstrations in 2021 and during several Palestine demonstrations in recent years. The police were determined to stop these protests, and many who participated in these events have for the first time witnessed police brutality.
What are the Social Democrats today?
The Social Democrats, like the other bourgeois parties, are merely defenders of the old, rotten imperialist world system, which brings only misery, poverty, and war to the peoples of the world. The Social Democrats’ character as a reformist party has disappeared. The social democratic experiment, which was in full swing in the middle of the previous century, is over. The Social Democrats do not differ much from the so-called “right-wing parties.” In the upcoming elections, as the opposition, they will probably adopt more “progressive” slogans. But do not be fooled. Today, social democracy only intends to develop reactionary and militaristic tendencies, increase warmongering, and increase the exploitation of the working class. The Social Democrats are following the same path as the other parties in parliament, called upon by the imperialist monopoly bourgeoisie to all move in the same direction.
This does not apply solely to the Social Democrats, as they in turn have several supporting parties. Among these is the Left Party (V) – a revisionist party that for at least 60 years, under various names, has played the role of “the friendly promoter.” It is a social force whose role is to channel the resistance of the working class and the people into reformist dead ends. But in the current situation, there is no longer any room for reforms, which makes the Left Party nothing more than the Social Democrats’ “more radical” propagandist, and nothing else. It is also worth bearing in mind that there are a variety of “revolutionary” or “left-wing” parties, organizations, and groups that, to varying degrees, call themselves “extra-parliamentary” and claim to “put pressure” on V, which effectively makes them the tailing force of the Left Party and, therefore, its support troops; they are “the friendly promoters of the friendly promoter.” By extension, all of these are in turn also support parties for the Social Democrats. In the coming period, the Left Party will do everything it can to maintain its “cooperation” with the Social Democrats and will be its most important tool in trying to use popular protests in the struggle against Swedish imperialism to channel this into the power of the Social Democrats.
It is therefore important for all revolutionaries to build a movement that opposes all forms of revisionism, opportunism, often expressed in various forms of reformism and parliamentary cretinism – this requires leadership. We therefore raise the slogan of reconstituting the Communist Party of Sweden as the vanguard, fighting force, and war machine of the working class.