The 1991 Swedish election produced the victory of a coalition of four bourgeois parties dedicated to bringing about a ‘system shift’. Their preparedness to break with the Swedish social-democratic model stands in marked contrast to the bourgeois governments of 1976–82. The change can be understood only in relation to the deep crisis of that model of development. This crisis is not simply one of the model’s economic institutions and political compromises. It is also a crisis of representation, involving the detachment of the represented from the organizations that have long represented them. As such, it is a crisis of an earlier paradigmatic consensus about the very ‘who’ and the ‘why’ of the Swedish model.footnote1
This article explores the current crisis of representation in Sweden. In doing so it focuses on the characterizations of the inhabitants of the ‘People’s Home’, which is now in disarray.footnote2
There are two distinct stories of postwar Sweden.footnote3 The best-known one is
‘Bringing gender in’ is necessary not only as a means of righting the historical record. Disputes over gender representations and gender power are assuming political centrality today, just as are those over class.footnote6 As the Swedish labour movement finds it more difficult to continue to assert a class-centred definition of political identities and sustain long-standing practices, some on the Left are coming to see women wage-earners as potential ‘saviours’ of the social-democratic project.
The Swedish model—so long considered the one in which reformist strategies had the most potential for transforming class and even gender relations—is thus in crisis. The People’s Home was the product of a set of political compromises worked out from the 1930s through the 1950s. The familiar policy results of these were an elaborate welfare state, supported by economic policies which transcended the limits of