Our Terms & Conditions | Our Privacy Policy
Looking back twenty
years ago, Sweden was known as a country based on equality, anti-racism, and
nonviolence. But in 2010, this image started to erode.
Sweden experienced a
resurgence of far-right movements and extremist violence that, relative to its
population, is among the highest in Europe.
In 2015-2016, there
was a rise in anti-immigrant movements and hate crimes in the form of property
damage and arson attacks against asylum- and refugee housing.
The ironic tone made far-right ideas more acceptable to a broader audience.
On the internet,
racist and anti-immigration ideas became more commonplace. Communication campaigns
such as ‘Bevara Sverige Svenskt’ (Keep Sweden Swedish), and later ‘Gör Sverige Bra Igen’ (Make Sweden Good Again), with influence from Neo-Nazist
and global far-right movements, spread across the political sphere and public
arenas.
The anti-immigration party, Sweden Democrats, under the leadership of
Jimmy Åkesson, rose to be one of the biggest political parties in Sweden.
Why has this change
happened?
To understand why and
how far-right movements became more acceptable and widespread, one can look at
two aspects: the change in leadership and the change in rhetoric, especially in
the online landscape of social media and internet forums.
Neutral language as a
strategy
Let´s first take a
look at leadership. When Jimmy Åkesson assumed control of the Sweden Democrats
in 2005, the party experienced a transformation in rhetoric to align itself
more with mainstream views and to normalise its image.
In essence, through
their language, the party could employ neutral messages that cloaked their
far-right sentiments with open-ended questions and value-free statements,
replacing outright racist and anti-semitic words with ‘globalisation’ or ‘mass immigration.’
Similarly, social
media influencers started to adopt strategically neutral language instead of
being explicitly racist. This use of noncombatant rhetoric made their messages more palatable to everyday individuals who might otherwise be alarmed by explicitly racist words.
Under the guise of neutrality, far-right
influencers can spread their ideas to a broader audience across social media
and alternative forums.
Humour is a potent
tool
Next, let’s examine
the behaviour of regular users. While influencers and political leaders
generally adopted neutral language, humour emerged as a potent tool for
spreading far-right ideologies in the public sphere, especially through memes
based on satire.
Through satirical memes, individuals can ridicule concepts
such as ‘political correctness,’ the ‘elite,’ ‘liberals,’ and people of non-White backgrounds in easily digestible, ‘bite-sized’ formats.
Memes – whether images, videos, or
GIFs – are easily understood and spread easily across the Internet from anonymous
sources. Much like photographs, they are ‘worth more than a thousand
words.’
Memes of racist
satire in Sweden draw inspiration from fringe online communities like 4chan and
8chan/8kun, as well as white supremacist movements in the US and Germany.
They
have also been used by the extreme-right neo-Nazi organisation called the Nordic
Resistance Movement (NRM).
When NRM shifted their communication style by
embracing humorous memes, they moved away from traditional National Socialist
(Nazi) rhetoric and imagery. Instead, they adopted a more palatable and light-hearted form of
propaganda presented with entertainment, humour, and satire through images of
frogs and apes.
They introduced a layer of irony that renders far-right ideas
more appealing, legitimate, and acceptable to a broader audience. The strategic
deployment of memes infiltrates extremist ideologies into public discourse and
enables far-right ideas to transition from internet fringes to more mainstream
platforms.
“Just kidding” – when
jokes target marginalised groups
Satirical memes have
a dual function and nature. First, satirical and racist memes can create
an in-group for people who are ‘in on the joke.’ Racist jokes can
disrupt mainstream boundaries of reason by pushing the boundary of what is deemed ‘acceptable’ and provide an outlet for people to express violent and
racist fantasies that they would otherwise repress.
Not only do satirical
racist memes push the boundary of ‘normal,’ but they also function to
push people’s buttons. By blending popular cultural iconography with
stereotypes depicting homophobia, anti-feminism, anti-Semitic ideas, etc.,
memes can function as a type of ‘controlling humour.’
Controlling
humour inflicts conflicts in relationships by ridiculing someone, triggering
negative emotions, and signalling superiority. By ridiculing a ‘target,’ these jokes can keep people in line and motivate them to
adopt a behaviour to escape this ridicule. It can also motivate others to not
speak out for fear of being the new target of ridicule.
The other function of
satirical memes is to create an out-group. The structure of online racist
jokes normalises prejudiced attitudes toward ‘the Other’ while reinforcing
racist claims to ‘truth’ by contributing to the reduction of modern ambivalence
toward those who are ridiculed.
In the process of laughing at ‘the Other,’ it
can construct a racist order which introduces a power imbalance between those
making the joke and those laughed at.
Moreover, jokes targeting marginalised
groups are meant to be humorous, meaning a frivolity that deflects
accountability under the guise of ‘mere jokes,’ thereby making online advocacy
of political violence and exclusion more palatable to a broader audience.
Individual extremists
were protected by in-group
Understanding the
roots of Sweden’s adoption of far-right and extremist ideas requires a nuanced
examination of the political and societal events that shaped the nation
throughout the 2010s, and continue to impact Sweden today.
The neutral language
by far-right leaders alongside the widespread dissemination of satirical memes
online, allows extremist viewpoints to be normalised. It has created a sense of
nonaccountability, as those using this language can simply say: “It´s just a
joke” or “I´m not serious” when confronted with their controversial statements.
This becomes a rhetorical device that both shields individuals from scrutiny
through deflection while fostering solidarity within the in-group and
reinforces prejudiced narratives against perceived ‘outsiders.’
As
memes spread across the internet, be they funny memes or not-funny memes, these
ideas take on a life of their own.
References:
- Åkerlund, M. (2020).
The importance of influential users in (re) producing Swedish far-right
discourse on Twitter. European Journal of Communication, 35(6), 613–628. - Askanius, T. (2021).
On Frogs, Monkeys, and Execution Memes: Exploring the Humor-Hate Nexus at the
Intersection of Neo-Nazi and Alt-Right Movements in Sweden. Television &
New Media, 22(2), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476420982234 - Billig, M. (2001).
Humour and hatred: The racist jokes of the Ku Klux Klan. Discourse &
Society, 12(3), 267–289. - Billig, M. (2005).
Laughter and ridicule: Towards a social critique of humour. Laughter and
Ridicule, 1–272. - DeCook, J. R. (2018).
Memes and symbolic violence:# proudboys and the use of memes for propaganda and
the construction of collective identity. Learning, Media and Technology, 43(4),
485–504.
Share your science or have an opinion in the Researchers’ zone
The ScienceNorway Researchers’ zone consists of opinions, blogs and popular science pieces written by researchers and scientists from or based in Norway.
Want to contribute? Send us an email!
Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.
Aggregated From –
Comments are closed.