Öppna hjärtan blev till stängda gränser: En idéanalys av hur Sveriges tre största partier ideologiskt motiverade en restriktiv migrationspolitik inför valet 2018

Sammanfattning: This is a descriptive ideational analysis of how the three biggest parties in Sweden motivated a restrictive migration policy before the general election in 2018. Although the Sweden Democrats, the Moderates and the Social Democrats have notably different ideological roots, and have different ideas about how the world is and should be shaped, they still all seek to justify a restrictive migration policy. By using Mats Lindberg's VDP-triad to divide the ideational content into value judgments (V), descriptive judgments (D) and prescriptions (P), and relate them to an ideological context, I describe how these parties motivate a more restrictive immigration to Sweden. In short I find that the Sweden Democrats justify their restrictive migration policy with nationalist notions that national interests should be prioritized, and that a high migration rate is negative for the nation-state. The Moderates justify their restrictive migration policy by underlining the importance of considering long- term consequences in the decision-making and what is considered practically realistic, which is in line with conservative reasoning. The Social Democrats instead emphasize the importance of international cooperation and that Sweden alone cannot take responsibility for all international refugees, and thus motivate a restrictive migration policy. I interpret this as the notion of solidarity brought up to an international level. I conclude that big parties have a wide and flexible interpretation of their ideologies and that this gives them considerable room for maneuver when taking political positions.