Sverigedemokraternas första mandatperiod : Hur har partiets idéer kring invandring samt brott och straff förändrats?

Sammanfattning: This thesis explores the ideational change of the Sweden democrats (SD) during its first mandate in the Swedish parliament and focuses on the issues of immigration as well as crime and punishment which are theoretically relevant in regard of populist radical right parties (PRR). This inquiry is motivated in relation to the suggested significans of PRR-parties moderation of extreme ideas in order to reach representation and thereof obtain ability to influence policy. The thesis focuses on the potential change of the ideas of SD on two issues by analysing those ideas at the party´s early stage in the parliament in 2010 as well as in the end of this first mandate in 2014. The second aim of the thesis is to explain why SD display a radicalization, stabilization or moderation in those ideas. In order to describe the change in ideas an idea analysis with constructed ideal types is used as method and tool of analysis. For the explaination a theoretical framework on PRR-parties, inspired by Cas Mudde, is used with emphasis on the demand-side as well as the external supply-side. The results show stabile ideas regarding crime and punishment but a marginal ideational moderation on the issue of immigration between 2010 and 2014. According to the author, the relatively high propotion of voters contending to tougher punishment as well as the low salience of the issue could explain why the ideas on crime and punishment remain stabile. The marginal moderation of ideas on immigration is on the other hand understood with reference to the external supply-side, foremost as a necessity in order to approach the mainstream parties and gain coalition potential in its main issue.