The alarmists have a point about democracy

 Since election nightin Swden, there has been a competion in gloomy predictions - that democracy in Sweden would be threatened. In fact, it is the opposite.

 "I was just interviewed by a French journalist and told about the uncertainty that Sweden is experiencing right now. Is Sweden a democracy? There are many indications that the Swedish democratic state was abolished on October 14, 2022 when the new Swedish government was formed"

 How central Henrik Arnstad - who wrote the above - has been for Stefan Löfven's (an earlier socialdemocratic prime minister in Sweden) understanding of the Sweden Democrats of today is difficult to know exactly. What is absolutely certain is that Löfven referred to Arnstad when he called SD "neo-fascist" in Swedish television in December 2014. Eight years have passed. But Arnstad's warnings of a fascist takeover seems to have stuck with Stefan Löfven, who before the latest Swedish election was joined by Bengt Westerberg (the former People's Party leader) when just before the election they issued a warning that the Sweden Democrats seriously threaten democracy.

 Yes, since the night of the election, there has been a competion in gloomy predictions. "History will remember this day and everyone who lent themselves to this," writes outgoing Climate and Environment Minister Annika Strandhäll (Socialdemocrat). Märta Stenevi (spokesperson for the Green Party and former minister) in turn believes that the government is "a killing blow for Sweden's democratic voice in the world"

 Sure, I can laugh at the overreactions, but I also bring up the above because I think several of them have a point – our democracy is more fragile than you might think. Just not in the way the hysterics claim, but in the opposite way

 The most common framing for the discussion of democracy concerns how it is challenged by right-wing populists, or Nazi-fascists to use a more popular term. But the opposite movement, from unelected technocrats, bureaucrats and other gray eminences, is instead to limit the will of the people in area after area. Ahead of Italy's parliamentary elections in September, Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, warned Italians of "consequences" if they were to vote for the right-wing coalition parties. "We have tools," she threatened.

 One can debate what the winner Giorgia Meloni and her party want to do going forward and the roots in fascism, but unlike von der Leyen and her commissioners, the incoming Italian government is elected by the people in Italy. When Lina Stenberg, former editorial writer at Aftonbladet (a major Swedish newspaper), tweets that she "wants to constitutionally protect democracy", it is of course not about our existing constitution. In the first paragraph of the form of government it is clearly stated that "All public power in Sweden emanates from the people".

 No, Stenberg wants to limit the will of the people. Her definition of democracy is that put forward by the Civil Rights Defenders, which she emphasizes herself, where the emphasis is on the rights of various minorities, migrants and individuals, rather than on the voters' ability to vote for change.

 The authoritarian, anti-democratic part shows itself most clearly in those who complain about the election results. It is an unhealthy dynamic that plays out in Sweden, but also around Europe. Populations are trying to vote back influence over their nations, over migration and the economy, while technocrats and the establishment try to strengthen their grip on power.

 There are of course different ways to measure how well a democracy works. One is to see how well the elected officials' opinions match those of the voters. Since the 2002 parliamentary election in Sweden, the representativeness of opinion between voters and elected officials has become increasingly better, political scientists Patrik Öhberg, Henrik Oscarsson and Jakob Ahlbom show in "Folkviljans forverkligare" (The realization of the will of the people). This is mainly explained by the fact that the difference in opinion on migration issues has reduced radically:

 "Overall, therefore, the entry of the Sweden Democrats into the Riksdag and the repositioning of parties and voters has meant an improved representation of opinion if we look at just these dimensions. [...] It is clear that the period before the Sweden Democrats' electoral success was characterized by a large representation gap in conflicts of values ​​that established parties in the Swedish Parliament chose not to make the subject of political battle."

 Democracy has, at least in this respect, not been weakened but on the contrary strengthened by the Sweden Democrats' increased voter support and influence over politics.