Weird Sporting with Double Edged Swords: Understanding Nasty Rhetoric in Swedish Climate Politics

Growing power of far-right parties in Sweden and other European countries has led to a more divisive politics on climate change. A far-right populist nativist party is currently holding tangible powers, dictating the ambitions, content and process of Swedish climate politics. In less than two years, Swedish climate politics have turned into an antidemocratic politics with increasing greenhouse gas emissions. This paper analyses the increasingly divisive nature of Swedish climate politics, with focus on the use of hateful and threatening rhetoric – nasty rhetoric. Based on empirical data from 114 newspapers, magazines, radio, television and social media, as well as insights from research in neurobiology, psychology, sociology and political science, this paper explores and explains the use and nature of nasty rhetoric, using contemporary Swedish climate politics as a case study. It is found that leading (far) right-wing politicians portray climate science as “a point of view”, green politicians as “strawmen” that should be “killed”, female climate journalists as “left pack” and “moron hags” that “will be raped”, and the climate justice movement as “totalitarian terrorists” and “a threat to Swedish democracy” that should be “sent to prison” and “executed”. Nasty rhetoric is used not only by anonymous trolls in social media, but openly by the prime minister, cabinet ministers and leading parliamentarians educated in libertarianism or affiliated with the far-right populist party. Their use of nasty rhetoric can be described as a double-edged sword, aiming to silence the opponents to the current paradigm shift in Swedish climate policy, but also for mobilising followers through conspiracy theories of symbolic threats and expand the weird sport of nasty rhetoric. People persuaded to follow and continue using nasty rhetoric are influenced by social processes but also determined by dark personality traits. The opposition is also using hateful rhetoric, but of a less aggressive nature, to reveal far-right populist climate policy and politicians as a naked emperor.