Den nationalistiska jämställdheten. En analys av Sverigedemokraternas familjeretorik

Abstract

The right wing party the Sweden Democrats is through their conservative and nationalist approach and socio-political heritage, connected to various extreme-right populist movements, which have all been in conflict with different branches of feminism. This connection is argued for in relation to the research survey. The party has likewise been accused of pursuing misogynistic, homophobic and racist politics, but differ from its ideological peers due to their outspoken equality policy. The party shows strong rejection of discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation or geographical, religious or ethnical background. In the analysis chapter of this study, texts produced by members of the party are analyzed by means of parts of Karlberg and Mral’s rhetoric analysis method, aiming to clarify what ideals of family and the roles within it are being constructed. It also examines how the Sweden Democrats in their rhetorics relate to conceptual metaphors captured in previous studies of nationalist, conservative movements in an international context, when talking about family and equality issues. This is being discussed in the conclusions. Female emancipation and LGBTQ rights have in the rhetorics of similar movemets been conceptualized in the threat-metaphor, an enemie of traditional values and the nuclear family. The state has been constructed as a family, with an authoritarian father figure as the leader. The results show, that the party ́s rhetorics in many ways resemble those of previous studied groups, although it is possible to distinguish an ambivalent approach in their talking about family and equality issues. Women ́s and LGBTQ people ́s interests are talked about as important, yet they are frequently being neglected in favour of the notion of “the free choise”. There is also an inconsistency in the family relations and gender roles that are being rhetorically constructed. In the conclusions, I discuss wether this ambivalence is due to an incompatibility between the party ́s ideological foundation and being able to provide for the interests of subordinate groups.