The Symbol of Cooperative Individualism--"Alliansen"?

Fredrik Reinfeldt, the prime minister of Sweden, yesterday in his Summer Speech thanked Maud Olofsson, the retiring Party Leader of the Swedish Center Party, because the Swedish right of center Political Alliance would not have come into existence without her. Apart from he skill as a minister she then must have projected a cohesive function and it would be interesting if it is this talent Hilary Clinton, the US State Department Secretary, is tapping now by consulting Olofsson.

If Olofssons largest talent is as a cohesive force for keeping four individualist parties together in an alliance, the current search for a new party leader in the Center Party would have to balance the need for cohesion and a profile that keeps that party above the 4% barrier for membership in the Riksdag, the Center Party just polled 4,3%. The unusually open search for a new party leader in the Center Party is of course highly dependent on the latter and Reinfeldt yesterday was careful with inviting the new leader to the "Alliansen".

It is of great importance that this coalition is maintained for the wellbeing of Sweden and as Reinfeldt pointed out in his speech the left of center coalition that challenged him last year does not exist anymore. All leaders will be exchanged shortly when also the Left Party is electing a new leader and furthermore they don't have a common project. We were lucky that the Swedish people called their empty hand.

Priorities of the Red-Greens?

Sahlin öppnar för styre med C och FP - DN.se: "Mona Sahlin ställer nu ultimatum och kräver att det ska bildas en majoritetsregering efter valet om Sverigedemokraterna kommer in i riksdagen och får en vågmästarställning. 'Det skulle bli politiskt kaos med en minoritetsregering', säger Sahlin till DN."

Mona Sahlin seems to want to defy history since (S) has been ruling in minority governments for long periods.

It seems to me that what Mona Sahlin is saying is that she prefers the "icke-jämlika", or non-equal, liberals before the "främlingsfientliga", or the foreigner averse, (SD) line. This means that they are less socialistic than yesterday and thus fits less with the (V) which they, like PJ Anders Linder suggested would "drop like a hot potato".

Is this not a very important ideological shift by Mona Sahlin and as such it should be welcomed not spurned? (FP) is on top of this supposed to have taken a step to the right of (M). Sahlin might though be more afraid of the grand personal popularity of Reinfeldt, which might cloud her ideological self?

On the other hand, Sahlin might assume that (FP) and (C) should lose their souls and become strictly "jämlika", like perhaps (MP) has become, in a (S), (FP), (C) and (MP) alliance. After the recent discussions about the flirtation of Maria Wetterstrand with the social liberals a governing system with Wetterstrand as Statsminister and with only (S), (FP), (C) and (MP) might be a real alternative that easily would get a majority.

Perhaps Sahlin has changed the game to a fight between two majority governments: Liberals, Greens and either (M) or (S) where (KD) and (V) would be the losers? The likelihood for this might be higher with a positive outcome of the COP15 meeting. Environmental issues become all the rage and Sweden would project itself as a world leader on climate change lore--as it seems to aspire to? This might very well happen if the left odorous China takes the initiative over the US as indicated by the latest debate in The Economist.

Personally I would prefer the "Alliansen" to get a majority. Andreas Carlgren has done a great job as environmental minister, now recently by taking responsibility for the poisonous story of Boliden, he then projects the climate change lore. It does not seem to work for either (C) or (KD) to attract green voters, however. Right now in Sweden they seem to gravitate to the popular Maria Wetterstrand.

Why is Centerpartiet bleeding?

”Opinionssiffrorna en tydlig signal från väljarna” Politik Debattämnen Debatt Aftonbladet: "Jag brukar sällan kommentera opinionssiffror. De kan snabbt ändra sig till något helt annat. Men ett stadigvarande tapp i opinionen för centerpartiet är tydligt. Ett parti får de opinionssiffror det förtjänar och den sista tidens siffror är en klar signal från väljarna om en besvikelse över att vi inte längre levererar framtidsdrömmar och liberala reformer som ifrågasätter rådande system."

Fredrik Federley wonders why his party is losing ground. He thinks liberal dreams fuel interest in Centerpartiet. I wonder if this is true? The popular Maria Wetterstrand in the Green party is potentially recruiting center party members that do not like the nuclear power issue. Perhaps this is why Maud Olofsson, less popular than Wetterstrand, tries to be nasty to Vattenfall AB that dares to have a wish on making some money building nuclear power stations in the UK? The greens have indeed gained popularity lately.

Magnus Andersson, the CUF leader writes on his blog in an approximately similar fashion. He says, for example, "you form politics from the need of the people rather than for the need of the political apparatus". However, is the problem not that natural force that by necessity makes small parties smaller in a coalition with a greater party? People tend to vote with the power.

PJ Anders Linder has again brought up the idea of forming an election alliance. But this is of course tactics rather than politics. I have been told that Reinfeldt's popularity is not necessarily going to help in the election because Swedes vote on the party. Is that on ideology? In pragmatism you do what works. "Regeringsduglighet"! The problem with that ideology might be that there is no driver in the system. Today it should be possible to find out whether people like the situation they are in. It should be possible to run experiments where you find out what politics people prefer without people even knowing about it. Maybe the Chinese are doing that currently? They have apparently made a replica of Sigtuna.

That's true. It is different to ask a person their opinion and asking their body of its opinion. Andersson and Federley both think their party would benefit size wise if they verbalize a clear policy and criticize the government. I wish them luck because I will vote for freedom. For the living human being.