The growing uncertainty and turbulence in the world are reshaping the European political landscape, raising questions about the place and role of social democratic parties within it. The aim of this study is to examine the transformation of Danish and Swedish social democrats views on immigration during and after the 2015–2016 European migration crisis. The scholarly significance of the research lies in identifying the institutional and electoral factors that have influenced the strategic adjustments of social democrats in response to the challenges posed by far-right and right-populist forces. The theoretical framework is grounded in neo-institutionalism, drawing on both historical and rational choice approaches. This combination makes it possible to account simultaneously for the institutional path dependence of party development and the rational strategies of adaptation to a changing electoral environment. The findings indicate that Danish and Swedish social democrats increasingly incorporated elements of welfare chauvinism into their rhetoric and policy platforms. However, the Danish Social Democratic Party moved toward a systemic use of restrictive migration discourse and policy, which secured electoral success. By contrast, the Swedish Social Democratic Workers’ Party confined itself to temporary restrictive measures, which resulted in declining electoral support and the growing influence of the Sweden Democrats. These results demonstrate that the European migration crisis functioned as a structural catalyst of party change and highlight the fundamental tension between the universalist legacy of social democracy and the pragmatic necessity of adapting to new electoral realities. The contribution of the study lies in expanding the understanding of the mechanisms of political transformation among mainstream parties.
Butenko et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: