Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Dö, den traditionella demokratins räddare eller förrädare: En kvalitativ textanalys av debatten om decemberöverenskommelsen
Mälardalen University, School of Business, Society and Engineering.
2016 (Swedish)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

The aftermath of the Swedish general elections of 2014 was a rare political incident, compared to previous elections in Sweden. The fact that the political party Swedish Democrats became the third biggest party meant that it had enough of seats in the parliament that neither the winning government including the Social Democrats and the Green Party, with support from the Left Party, nor the Alliance including the Moderate Party, the Centre Party, the Liberals and the Christian Democrats could get a majority of the parliament. This led to the highly debated deal that would get the name Decemberöverenskommelsen (DÖ). The purpose of this essay will be to examine the debate that has occurred after the announcement of DÖ. I will analyse a decent amount of article material about the deal and by doing so distinguish what kind of democratic and parliamentary views that might come up. I use the democratic theories developed by the two political scientists, Arend Lijphart and Leif Lewin. Though, I have a bigger concentration of Arend Ljphart’s theories that include two models: the Westminister model and the consensus model. The result indicated that I could link several articles to both models but with a higher amount linking to the consensus model.         

 

Keywords: Swedish general elections, parliament, government, majority, decemberöverenskommelsen, debate, analyse, democratic theories, Westminster model, consensus model          

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016.
National Category
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-31828OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-31828DiVA: diva2:935659
Subject / course
Political Science
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2016-07-04 Created: 2016-06-11 Last updated: 2016-07-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(332 kB)