An arm’s length distance to culture has long been a cross-block principle in Swedish politics. In practice, this means that politicians should give a damn about the content of the culture.
However, since SD’s entry, the principle has begun to loosen up more and more. Instead, we’ve had to get used to recurring culture wars: against gangster rap, against story times in libraries and this summer against the booking of the Northern Irish rap group Kneecap by the city festival Way Out West. Despite local protests from outraged Gothenburgers, however, the organizer Luger stood his ground, and the band delivered one of the strongest performances of the summer.
Autumn is coming Kneecap to Stockholm. The scene is new, but the lament the same. 4 Still, he expects the organizer Banankompaniet to come to his senses and cancel the band, citing the city’s democratic conditions. The background is the band’s political positions in support of the Palestinian resistance and a dropped terrorism charge against the singer Mo Chara.
But the right’s war against culture does not end there. Recently, the same Fjellner considered it “rather inappropriate” and “problematic” that the Russian deathcore band Slaughter to Prevail was allowed to play on the same stage. According to him, the band spreads Russian propaganda, while they themselves say they condemn the war in Ukraine. Regardless, it is hardly the task of an opposition councilor to act as a cultural critic.
In Turkey, the band was stopped on the grounds that they had “poisoned the minds of young people” with “satanic propaganda”. What is considered dangerous culture obviously varies – but the will to stop it seems strangely similar.
When Stadsteatern invited Magdalena Andersson (S) to a book talk in November, it was, according to Fjellner, “a complete disaster”. At the same time, he emphasized again that it is a “hugely important principle” that politicians do not get involved in culture. The principle seems to have been particularly important in 2023 when the own party leader Ulf Kristersson (M) was interviewed on the Stadsteatern stage, without any outraged objections from Fjellner.
But it matters not only about individual bookings and local developments. M’s collaboration with SD has reinforced an already established skepticism towards free cultural life and united the parties’ voters in their view of public service. The appointment of Parisa Liljestrand (M) as Minister of Culture, without anchoring in the cultural sector, and the launch of a cultural canon that brings to mind nationalist education rather than artistic freedom, is an expression of the same shift.
At the same time, resources are shrinking. According to Magasin K, the cultural budget’s share of the state budget in 2026 is the lowest since the turn of the millennium. The government “wants something different” and “prioritises differently”.
Basically, it is about the view of culture. Is it a shared space for criticism and identity – or a market commodity in the crowd? As the public sector withdraws, dependence on private interests and financial incentives increases. It does not necessarily mean censorship in the formal sense, but it favors a more cautious culture where the uncomfortable is allowed to take a backseat to the public-friendly and harmless.
Much of what we today regard as self-evident cultural heritage was once controversial, questioned or even commercially uninteresting. Public funding has functioned as a buffer that has made such risk-taking possible.
Therefore, the demands to stop Northern Irish rappers or Russian hard rockers are a test of the arm’s length principle in practice. Either we’re serious about politicians giving a damn about the content of culture, or we’re not. Getting into individual bookings because you dislike the message is not protecting that principle. It is moving the boundary of what politics considers it has the right to control. And it rarely ends well.
