Li Hong: The Leftward Shift in Nordic Party Politics and Its Prospects
In September 2021, the Norwegian Labour Party became the largest party in the national parliamentary elections, leading a center-left coalition to victory with a significant margin. This election ended eight consecutive years of rule by a center-right coalition led by the Conservative Party. Norway thus became the fourth country in the Nordic region—following Sweden, Finland, and Denmark—to be governed by center-left parties. Against a backdrop where populist parties across Europe are expanding rapidly and "populization" is prevalent in European society, the four Nordic countries have collectively "turned left." This round of center-left parties coming to power has benefited from changes in both the international environment and the internal conditions of Nordic countries; their return to power is accompanied by new characteristics of the era while facing new challenges under a new situation.
The Collective "Left Turn" of the Four Nordic Countries
The Nordic region was once the "bastion of European social democracy." The Swedish Social Democratic Party once set a record of 44 consecutive years in power; the Social Democratic Party of Denmark remained the largest party in parliament for over 70 years; the Norwegian Labour Party has governed for a cumulative total of 50 years since the end of World War II; and the Social Democratic Party of Finland has been the country’s primary governing party since 1966. For a long period, center-left parties in various Nordic countries held power, establishing and perfecting the welfare state system. This secured global top rankings for these nations in terms of happiness indices and represented the fundamental ideals and the highest concrete achievements of European social democratic parties.
However, the situation changed at the beginning of the 21st century. Under the impact of the wave of economic globalization and the overlapping effects of factors such as the global financial crisis, terrorist attacks, and refugee waves, the party political landscape in Nordic countries underwent a major transformation. The Social Democratic and Labour parties, which had long held power, fell in national parliamentary elections one after another, while right-wing populist forces continued to grow. Right-wing populist parties such as the Sweden Democrats, the Danish People's Party, the Progress Party in Norway, and the Finns Party [1] saw their support rates soar in a short period, becoming major parliamentary parties or even participating in government, playing significant roles in national politics. Against the broader background of the political environment shifting to the right, the social democratic and labor parties of Nordic countries successively became opposition parties and found it difficult to return to power for a long time. The predicament of these center-left parties triggered pessimistic views among some scholars regarding their fate. They argued that even in the Nordic region, with its long history of governance and deep social foundations, center-left parties were unable to adapt to the new changes and situations of the 21st century, lacked the strength to play a role in national politics, and would find it difficult to stage a comeback.
But in recent years, just as the populization of European society has become rampant, Nordic center-left parties have successively won general elections and once again become governing parties, manifesting a "resurgent tide" of the left. The turning point first appeared in Sweden. In the 2014 parliamentary elections, the Swedish Social Democratic Party won 113 of the 349 seats with 31.01% of the vote, the Green Party won 25 seats with 6.89%, and the Left Party obtained 5.72% of the vote and 21 seats. The center-left trio led by the Social Democrats ended the rule of the center-right alliance composed of the Moderate Party, the Christian Democrats, the Liberals, and the Centre Party; the Social Democratic Party became the governing party again after an eight-year hiatus, and its chairman, Stefan Löfven, became Prime Minister. Four years later, in the 2018 Swedish parliamentary elections, the Social Democratic Party again ranked as the largest party with 28.26% of the vote, and in January 2019, it formed a minority left-wing coalition government with the Green Party, continuing its rule.
In April 2019, the Social Democratic Party of Finland became the largest party in the parliamentary election with 17.7% of the vote, forming a five-party coalition government with the Centre Party, the Green League, the Left Alliance, and the Swedish People's Party. This ended the joint rule of the center-right coalition composed of the Finnish Centre Party, the Finns Party, and the National Coalition Party, marking a comeback for the Finnish Social Democrats since losing their status as the largest parliamentary party in 1999. In June 2019, the Social Democratic Party of Denmark, led by Mette Frederiksen, became the largest party with 25.9% of the vote and 48 seats, forming a center-left coalition government with the Socialist People's Party, the Social Liberal Party, and the Red-Green Alliance. In September 2021, the Norwegian Labour Party became the largest party with 26.4% of the vote and 48 seats, while its center-right rival, the Conservative Party, received only 20.4%. The center-left alliance formed by the Labour Party and its partners—the Centre Party and the Socialist Left Party—won a total of 89 out of 169 seats. Thus, following Sweden, Finland, and Denmark, Norway also became a country governed by a center-left coalition led by the Labour Party.
Why the Center-Left Parties Won the Elections
The center-left parties in the four Nordic countries have won general elections and returned to the stage of governance in recent years primarily for the following reasons.
First, the negative impacts of globalization have become prominent, and a "political pendulum effect" has begun to emerge. Market- and efficiency-oriented neoliberal economic globalization, which began in the 1990s, optimized resource allocation, improved production efficiency, and accelerated global economic growth, but also caused many negative consequences. it intensified competition between nations and financial speculation, increased economic risks, and caused varying degrees of shock and damage to the economies, societies, and environments of all countries. Specific to the Nordic region, economic globalization intensified economic competition between states, slowed the growth of workers' wages and the improvement of living standards, and widened the gap between rich and poor. The arrival of large numbers of immigrants lowered the degree of social homogeneity, causing opposition or even division between citizens of different ages, professions, and identities, undermining social solidarity and reducing national cohesion. Negative consequences such as environmental destruction caused by the capitalist production and consumption model oriented toward profit maximization continued to accumulate. All the above factors objectively accumulated sufficient momentum for the return of center-left parties that uphold ideas of equality and justice and advocate for increased government regulation. Therefore, from the perspective of the political pendulum effect, it was only a matter of time before the party politics of Nordic countries, with their deep social democratic foundations and traditions, turned from right to left.
Second, the center-left parties' policies have returned [to their roots], absorbing and catering to the needs of both left-wing and right-wing voters. Recent general elections in Nordic countries have focused on different themes than previous ones. Previously, elections largely focused on economic issues; most typical was the 2015 Finnish election, where the Centre Party’s victory was mainly because voters hoped its leader, Juha Sipilä, a former entrepreneur, could use "extraordinary means" to reverse the country’s economic decline. However, in the general elections of recent years, economic issues have dropped in priority, while the welfare state, refugee policy, and climate change have become the focus of greatest concern for voters. To this end, center-left parties have adjusted their policies to win over more voters.
One [adjustment] is a strong return to welfare state policies. The welfare state system is the concretization of the ideals of freedom, equality, mutual aid, and solidarity upheld by Nordic center-left parties; it has played an important role in narrowing social gaps, mitigating class contradictions, and maintaining sustainable economic and social development. However, since the 1990s, the welfare state system—originally a solution—encountered problems of its own. Most center-right parties that came to power against the backdrop of the global financial crisis, the European debt crisis, and general economic recession implemented fiscal austerity policies, taking measures such as cutting welfare funds and programs, reducing unemployment and sickness benefits, and lowering wages, which further intensified social inequality. The center-left parties argued that the policies of the center-right, guided by the neoliberal concept that "the hungry wolf hunts best," not only intensified the public's sense of insecurity but also hindered the active participation of the labor force in the labor market, ultimately proving detrimental to national economic development. Center-left parties advocate that welfare is inseparable from individual freedom; providing universal welfare can promote individual freedom, thereby better stimulating individual initiative and creativity. To reverse the weakening and destruction of the welfare state system during the center-right governance, center-left parties have made a strong return to welfare state policies. For example, the Swedish Social Democratic Party emphasized building a "trustworthy welfare system" in its campaign platform, the Danish Social Democratic Party expressed its intention to build a "stronger welfare society," and the Norwegian Labour Party committed to achieving "a fairer society."
The second [adjustment] is the absorption and inheritance of center-right policies regarding the strict control of refugees. Historically, because center-left parties governed for a long time and consistently upheld humanitarian values, Nordic countries received war refugees on many occasions. However, the wave of refugees sparked by the Syrian Civil War in 2015 was different from the past; its scale and numbers were overwhelming for European countries. According to statistics, approximately one million refugees and migrants from the Middle East and North Africa entered Europe in 2015, with Sweden alone receiving nearly 150,000. The influx of large numbers of refugees caused a series of problems such as security, community integration, culture and religion, social customs, and national identity; it also pushed up crime rates, triggered strong public dissatisfaction, and led to the fall of center-left governments that held a tolerant attitude toward refugees. Right-wing populist parties advocating exclusion—the Sweden Democrats, the Danish People's Party, the Progress Party in Norway, and the Finns Party—catered to public opinion by advocating for the priority of national interests and demanding strict refugee controls, the termination of non-European immigration, and increased deportation efforts, thereby increasing their support. Under the pressure of overall exclusion in the Nordic region, center-left parties significantly adjusted their policy positions on the refugee issue, shifting from tolerance to a hardline stance. In November 2015, the Swedish Social Democratic government introduced strict border management, requiring identity verification for everyone crossing the Sweden-Denmark border and proposing to close the Øresund Bridge connecting the two countries. The Danish Social Democratic Party, while in opposition, supported the right-wing governing coalition in parliament to pass a highly restrictive immigration bill known as "Europe's toughest," publicly claiming during its campaign that it would implement an "immigration policy based on common sense rather than sympathy." The significant rightward shift of center-left parties on the refugee issue allowed for the continuation of strict control policies from the center-right era, and as a result, attracted some voters who had supported right-wing parties.
The third [adjustment] is the high level of importance attached to climate change. In recent years, with the accumulation of the greenhouse effect and accelerated global warming, glaciers and permafrost have melted and extreme weather has occurred frequently. Since most Nordic countries are located at high latitudes, with some having one-third of their territory within the Arctic Circle, glacial melting caused by warming is not just a trendy topic of conversation but a realistic threat concerning the survival of these countries. The 2021 Norwegian election happened to coincide with high temperatures, wildfires, and floods hitting many European countries; the disastrous scenes caused by extreme weather were shocking. Many Norwegians used to feel that climate change was far away, but now they believe its catastrophic consequences are right before them; some observers even called the Norwegian election a "climate election." Center-left parties have paid close attention to climate change, emphasizing the urgency and severity of the problem and the necessity of taking action. However, unlike the Green and Environment parties, which advocate for radical measures to control global warming, the Social Democratic and Labour parties prefer gradual measures. Jonas Gahr Støre, chairman of the Norwegian Labour Party, stated that a more balanced sharing of the economic burden would help reduce the difficulty of implementing stricter climate policies, adhering to the Paris Agreement on climate change, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and gradually reducing the Norwegian economy's dependence on fossil fuels. The importance attached to climate change and the relatively pragmatic response plans of the Social Democratic and Labour parties responded to the concerns of the public—especially young people—on the issue, winning the support of voters. Therefore, in a sense, it can be said that the frequent climate disasters in Europe were also among the factors that pushed center-left parties to victory.
Third, the fragmentation of the party landscape and the relative disadvantage of center-right parties. Nordic countries practice multi-party systems, characterized by small countries with many parties, high voter turnout, but dispersed votes, and a continuous decline in the vote shares of major parties. Since the 21st century, as populist forces have risen in various countries, right-wing populist parties have entered their respective parliaments, the number of parties has continued to increase, and the degree of fragmentation in the party landscape has further deepened. Overall, the number of parties entering parliament in the four Nordic countries is more than seven in each. The increase in parties led to the dispersion of votes and the decline of major parties' shares. Taking the Swedish Social Democratic Party as an example, the party won 144 seats in parliament with 39.9% of the vote in the 2002 election; in 2006, it won 130 seats with 35.3% of the vote—
...seats; in 2010, it won 112 seats with 30.6% of the vote; in 2014, it won 113 seats with 31.01% of the vote; and in 2018, it won only 100 seats with 28.26% of the vote, yet it remained the largest party in parliament. In the general elections of recent years, former center-right governing parties have been "punished" by voters for various reasons and find themselves at a relative disadvantage. In Finland, Juha Sipilä, leader of the Centre Party—once regarded as an economic savior—triggered public discontent through the rigorous implementation of fiscal austerity, facing repeated resistance from trade unions; his healthcare and social security reforms also failed to achieve the expected results. In Denmark, the right-wing populist Danish People's Party saw a sharp decline in its vote share due to its hardline stance and extreme conservative propositions on issues such as refugees and education; dragged down by this performance, the Danish Liberal Party, which also belongs to the "Blue Camp" [2], lost its governing status. Furthermore, the strong concern voters in these countries have shown for climate issues actually implies a dissatisfaction with the neo-liberal, market-oriented, and efficiency-driven economic and social policies pursued by center-right parties. All of the above are important factors driving the collective "leftward turn" in Nordic party politics.
Leftward Shift with Populist Imprints
Following the Norwegian Labour Party's victory in the parliamentary elections, together with the Swedish Social Democratic Party's continuous governance and the return of the Finnish and Danish Social Democratic parties to the governing stage, the party politics of the Nordic countries have once again shifted toward the left. Judging from the change in the balance of power between left and right, the shift in political priorities, and the adjustment of policy propositions, a "leftward shift" has become the current political characteristic of Nordic countries. However, viewed through the continuation of strict refugee control policies, the shift in the guiding philosophy of migrant integration, and the redefinition of the welfare state, the leftward shift of the four Nordic countries essentially bears populist imprints.
After the center-left parties in the Nordic countries returned to power, they made adjustments in domestic and foreign affairs that represent a return to leftist traditions. In the economic sphere, they ended the fiscal austerity policies strictly enforced by center-right parties for many years, implementing relatively moderate economic policies, reducing personal income tax, and increasing tax rates on items such as tobacco, alcohol, and fuel. In the social sphere, they are rebuilding a stronger welfare state to reinforce comprehensive social security during the period of COVID-19 prevention and control. They continue to oppose uncontrolled neo-liberal globalization and reject the nationalism and populism advocated by right-wing parties. Regarding their stance on the EU, they emphasize that the Union plays an important role in common foreign and security policy as well as ecological and social sustainability, and they support a stronger EU to cope with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, partially reversing the anti-European and Euro-skeptic tendencies stirred up by right-wing populist parties. In diplomacy, they are committed to maintaining and strengthening rules-based multilateral cooperation.
At the same time, however, one must also note the center-left parties’ absorption and inheritance of propositions and policies from right-wing populist parties. First, regarding refugee admission, center-left parties have fully inherited the center-right parties' policies of strict control, causing the number of asylum seekers to continue to decline as they are deterred by the difficulties. Second, center-left parties have shifted their philosophy on the issue of refugee integration, taking the promotion of national integration as a governing objective. To this end, they have adjusted the long-standing integration policies of the mainstream left—previously guided by multiculturalism—to absorb the integration propositions centered on "dominant culture" (leitkultur) advocated by right-wing populist parties. On one hand, center-left parties have raised the threshold for new immigrants, increasing requirements for those entering Nordic countries under the guise of family reunification in terms of language, education level, work skills, and knowledge of the host country. On the other hand, by increasing financial investment in public and private primary and secondary schools as well as various forms of adult education, they aim to improve the language skills of already accepted immigrant families, provide them with training and internships, and push them into the labor market. This is intended to enhance immigrants' identification with the host country’s cultural values and reverse the various negative impacts produced by multiculturalism policies. Third, center-left parties emphasize that welfare beneficiaries should bear responsibilities. The premise for establishing the Nordic welfare state system was overall homogeneity. Homogeneity "is regarded as the prerequisite for the development of the specific Nordic-style welfare state, as well as the prerequisite for its sustained support and legitimacy." Upon taking office, center-left parties placed welfare at the top of the national political agenda, promising to increase financial investment and welfare projects and expand coverage. However, they also place greater emphasis on the necessity of education, lifelong learning, and employment, promising to formulate action plans to vigorously push adult female refugees with low education and no labor skills into the labor market to ensure their contributions align with social expectations. In the view of center-left parties, while the welfare system remains universal, immigrants who enjoy benefits also have the responsibility and obligation to accept the mainstream values of the host country.
Governance Prospects for Center-Left Parties
In a relatively favorable political environment, the center-left parties of the four Nordic countries achieved an electoral counter-attack and successively returned to power, causing the region to exhibit a leftward shift. However, judging from the current situation, the governance prospects of center-left parties still face many challenges and tests.
First, the leading Social Democratic and Labour parties within the center-left camp have low vote shares, and their governing foundations are weak. In the most recent general elections, the vote shares for the main Nordic center-left parties—the Social Democrats and the Labour Party—were all below 30%; the Finnish Social Democratic Party's share was not even 20%. Compared with other parties, the comparative advantage of the leading party’s vote share is not prominent, reflecting the reality of a limited voter base and a thin foundation for governance.
Second, the stability of multi-party coalition governments faces tests. Since no single party can obtain an absolute majority in a general election, all four Nordic countries are under multi-party coalition rule. Differing positions on specific issues subject these coalitions to tests regarding their stability and sustainability. After the Finnish election, a five-party coalition led by the Social Democrats was formed; however, the Centre Party, a member of the coalition, withdrew its support for Prime Minister Antti Rinne due to the government's poor handling of domestic labor disputes. This led to the collapse of the Social Democratic government after only six months in office, followed by the formation of a new government with Sanna Marin, Deputy Chair of the Social Democrats, as Prime Minister.
Third, the strength of right-wing populist parties should not be underestimated. In the general elections across the four Nordic countries, right-wing populist parties performed differently: while the Danish People’s Party saw a sharp drop in votes, Finnish right-wing parties performed quite well. The gap between the Finnish Social Democratic Party and the Finns Party was only 0.2%, with only a one-seat difference in parliament, leaving the two parties evenly matched. Right-wing populist parties will pose a strong constraint on center-left governments led by Social Democrats.
Fourth, center-left governments face the test of improving governing effectiveness. These center-left parties came to power against a backdrop where national economies were performing well, unemployment and inflation rates remained low, and the refugee issue had been basically resolved. Voters chose center-left parties largely out of dissatisfaction with center-right policies. Therefore, although the political pendulum is swinging in a direction favorable to the center-left, this does not mean they can sit securely in power. In fact, as large traditional parties under a multi-party system, whether they can govern long-term fundamentally depends on whether the Social Democratic and Labour parties in Nordic countries can find a balance and provide solutions between their upheld ideals and the practical needs of voters, between rebuilding a strong welfare state and maintaining economic growth, and between urgent climate change issues and sustainable economic development. Whether the governance plans, capabilities, and effectiveness of these center-left parties can satisfy voters in the future remains to be seen.
(The author’s affiliation: Institute of Contemporary Socialism, Shandong University) Web Editor: Zhang Jian Source: Contemporary World, Issue 2, 2022