Sweden, one of the few countries in Europe which has managed to withstand the economic and political challenges of the region, finds itself in a crisis as the country prepares for a re-election just three months after it went for national polls. A political indifference over the country’s immigration policy last week forced Prime Minister

to call for re elections. The crisis was triggered as the opposition right wing Swedish Democrats voted against the budget that would retain the country’s liberal immigration policy, among other welfare measures. Last time Sweden saw such a situation was in 1950. As none of the opposition parties seem to be in the mood to negotiate, an election in March 2015 seems inevitable.

Now coming to F!, what was the need to start a political party with a feminist perspective, considering that Sweden has a terrific record (at least in popular opinion) when it comes to gender equality?

StefavnLofvenHowever, the re-election opens up an opportunity to the country’s smaller parties to try their luck in getting into Swedish parliament. One of them would be the Feminist Initiative (F!), Sweden’s first feminist political party, which has increased its vote share in the national elections since it was launched in 2005.Linda Hiltmann, from F!, who was elected to south Sweden’s Malmo City Council this year, talked to Divya Rajagopal about the party’s strategy for the coming election, its view on immigration policy, and the need for a feminist politics. Below is an excerpt from the interview. Part of this interview with Linda was conducted over email (the recent election development) the other part was conducted when the reporter was in Lund University, Sweden for an academic course in Social Innovation in a Digital Context.Well that is not correct, the budget fell through as the liberal and right wing parties were not willing to make agreements with the government. When the parties form in two "blocks", the Swedish Democrats (SD) get the tipping vote role - this could have been avoided if the liberal parties had been more willing to cooperate with the government in separate issues. This would also create a much more democratic climate. Also, SD said that they would overthrow any budget that did not take their demands on immigration. So yes, I think Prime Minister Stefan Lofven and (his) government made the right choice: Let’s call for a new election and ask the citizens which politics (budget- the one which calls for liberal immigration policy or the one which calls for restriction on immigrants) they would like to vote for.F! is the only party that understands and promotes the importance of open national boundaries (or no boundaries). We talk about the free movement of people. (Sweden this year announced permanent residency to all refugees from Syria). None of the other parties promotes this, as they are stuck in the economic frame and ask "what would the cost be? Is this really possible?” We don’t think that policies about people's right to protection should be calculated in economic terms. Every human being has an equal right which is right to work, to health, right to education and equal value, so we should/will frame our policy proposals on those principles. If we don't stand up for and implement fair policies that meet at least the basic human rights, we are directly responsible for the people who are dying on the way to Europe.To gain access to power. If you are lobbying you are always connected to something or someone else. So Gudrun Schyman , Founder and leader of F! was one of the strongest advocates for a feminist politics and for clear gender-based analysis of issues. She realised that she couldn’t leave the leading (feminist) position, and along with activists and academia, she started this party.So this election our strategy was to reach out to groups standing close to us and when we gain them we move forward. We do not try to convince our complete opponents, but those who are sort of interested in our politics, so when they get it, they become our ambassadors. So a lot of young people are interested in working with a feminist perspective, which is a good sign.For 2013 the total difference in pay between women and men was 13.4% (men earned 13.4% more than women). But the figure is not absolute and correct for all sectors, and when we take into account differences in working time, we lose sight of the fact that women work part-time much more than men. In 2013, 30% of women worked part-time (men 11%). Women also stay home with children to a higher degree (women 75% and men 25%), which of course affects the development of career possibilities and level of pay.We organised something called the “Home Parties”. So we have been in existence for 10 years and we haven’t had any resources. People were asking Gudrun if she could arrange a talk about feminism to just raise awareness. So Gudrun was like 'all we have is ourselves'. (It was only last year we got an office in Malmo; we have been sitting at homes and working)- So she went to people’s homes where like about 20 people would gather to understand about our perspective. At first Gudrun's visits to people's homes were for a couple of days in a week, then it became twice, thrice a day in a week, she was giving talks in the evening, two times in the evening so it was all across. So the home parties which started off as once a week event would happen every day. Those home parties gave her access to a lot of people.We will have the same strategy for campaigning like using social media, home parities, etc. I do not know and we have not decided on any other general strategies - the re-election has taken us by surprise. What I do know is that many of the candidates to national parliament also went for the city councils, and a lot of us (me included) will not campaign for the national election.We did a great campaign last summer, and set much of the political agenda. For example, the new government called itself “feminist”, on basic grounds of representation, and they chose a foreign minster who declared the importance of feminist policy. Of course there are several things that we learn from and change, but in general I would say that the strategies we had are still valid. That is to meet people in informal settings to discuss feminism and politics. What we always need to do, and which is the hardest, is to speak of feminism and power in a way so people understand the interconnectedness of power structures and how they affect every day life.It is really important to move into the sphere of politics to change it. We should reflect on the experience that we have with these political institutions. So they look different everywhere, and you have to decide if you want to enter electoral politics, or stay outside and lobby for change. So as a party/movement ask yourself whether you believe that you can change from inside? Is this good for me? Could I cope with it? And can we build an organisation that can cope with it?