here is sociologist Hans Zetterberg, longnof American residence, who spawned anparty campaign document hintingnthat the Moderates were riding thencrest of history. Turning Marx on hisnhead, Zetterberg suggests that the oldnpolitical system, resting on the 19th-centurynstress lines of industrialization, isnbreaking down, while a new system, rootingnin postindustrial, conservative values,nis being born. Zetterberg has recentlynmoved to TIMBRO, where he heads anmassive new social research project.nYet the party has a few skeptics in itsnranks, too. Particularly outspoken wasnRiksdag member’Margit Gennser. Angeneration older than most of thenBildt team, she worries that the primenminister’s advisers are “yuppies,” toonyoung and inexperienced, with annexcessive attachment to social theorynand technology. Citing her own hopesnfor reenergizing Swedish family life,nshe fears (shades of the Reagan coalition,ncirca 1981) that Bildt may have underminednthe government’s opportunitiesnhere by turning the Social Ministry overnto the civil libertarians and by puttingneconomics “first” on the agenda.nOne of the Moderates’ new coalitionnpartners—the Christian DemocraticnSocial Party—drew 7 percent of the vote.nFounded in the mid-1960’s in a protestnover elimination of religious education innthe schools, the party never reached then4 percent level of support needed to enternthe proportionally determined Parliament.nIn 1991, though, the party deemphasizednits anti-abortion messagen(“we’ll pursue education for now, with nonchange in the law”) and tripled its vote.nThe Christian Dernocrats have developedna distinctive agenda, but onenresting on a telling contradiction. Theirnbasic Idea Manifesto, for example, buildsnon the Roman Catholic concept of subsidiarity,nand urges defense of the familynas the first “natural community.” Thenparty also seeks fo restore traditionalistnfamily life, through social policies encouragingnmarriage and children. At thensame time, though, the party’s votingnstrength lies heavily in the PentecostalnChurch, where Catholic communitarianismnhas an alien ring. This new Swedishnexperiment seems to be a test of whethernPius XII and Pat Robertson can really coexist.nThe question is open whether thenChristian Democrats can become morenthan the Moderate Party’s symbolic “religiousnwing,” much as the pathetic statenLutheran Church once gave moral cov­n42/CHRONICLESner to the leftist posturings of Palme.nOne young Christian Democratic parliamentariannbelieves that real partynsuccess depends on a spiritual GreatnAwakening in Sweden, which no onensees coming soon.nThe more interesting new force innSweden is New Democracy, the rightwingnparty in Pariiament not included innthe coalition government. For a decade,na populist politics has been brewingnin Sweden, first seen in the politicalnshenanigans of the Kalle Anka, or DonaldnDuck Party. Regional parties grewnpotent in Skane, Sweden’s southernnregion, where anti-immigration, antitax,nand anti-Stockholm sentiments coalescednaround Skdne Partiet and thenSjobo Parti, both of which won seats in localnassemblies. This ferment gave rise, innearly 1991, to New Democracy, whichnwon 7 percent of the vote six monthsnlater and holds the balance of power innParliament, with 25 seats. Part of NewnDemocracy’s secret lies in its two leaders,nCount Ian Wachtmeister and BertnKarlsson.The former is a sharp-wittednaristocrat, with a gift for public speakingnand humor (one Swede dubs himn”Pat Buchanan with a title”). To seenthe party’s campaign video, featuringnWachtmeister dressed as a tree and anclown, or downing a glass of champagnenwith his bare feet plopped in a Stock-n_holm public fountain (illegal acts undernSwedish law), all to the potent beatnof the party’s pop-country campaignnsong, is to understand the neo-anarchynof New Democracy. The party’s dittynsays ” here comes a group which hatesnall paternalism,” one “gathering tonagitate and war against. . .bureaucracynand the welfare state, to cut taxes,” andnconcludes: “Here comes … a teamnthat will battle for a populist regime,nso Sweden might breathe happier andnpurer air.” Ehrenkrona, Bildt’s chiefnof staff, dismisses New Democracy withna hiss, citing their use at rallies ofncountry-western tunes as a sign ofnbeing out of touch with urbane reality.nYet he so misses the inner secret of thenparty’s success.nThe co-founder of New Democracy isnBert Karlsson. Short, burly, and bucktoothed,nhe is the physical antithesis of thenCount. Karlsson is also a self-made millionaire,ndeveloper of Sweden’s largestnamusement park, and a voice for Sweden’snsmall businessmen: the tme inventors andnentrepreneurs, not the managerial elitesnfound in Sweden’s cozy mega-firms. In­nnndeed, data shows that New Democracy’snelectoral base rests in the small citiesnand towns, among shopkeepers, the engineeringnshops, and the skilled craftsmen:na classic source of most populist movements.nPost-election analysts also reportednthat about a third of New Democracy’snvoters were right-wing SocialnDemocrats, with whom I had several goodnconversations. John Bouvin, a bulldozerndriver and steel mill worker, now sits as anNew Democrat in Parliament. With plebeianncharm and anger, he denounces anstate that seizes the majority of his income,nthat forced his wife—as a youngnmother—into the labor force, and thatntreats his children as state wards. A colleague,nelectrician Peter Kling, complainsnthat he has worked seventy to eighty hoursna week to support his wife and threenyoung children, only to see it all taxednaway. In his frustration, he once toyednwith the idea of coming to the UnitednStates as an illegal immigrant (friends herenassured him that it was easy), a plan vetoednby his wife. Kling also leads the NewnDemocracy charge against the state’snliquor monopoly and crushing “sin taxes,”nwhich amount to about three quartersnof the price of wine or beer (notnsurprisingly, he reports that 40 percent ofnthe liquor consumption in Sweden todaynis “on the dark side”). These men, quitensimply, represent Sweden’s “redneck” orn”Bubba” constituency. They seek a “livingnwage,” a wife at home with the baby,nand a couple of beers after a hard day’snwork, all goals sharply at odds with prevailingnstate policy. They also believe thatnthe Moderate Party is in thrall to corporateninterests, and that it doesn’t really carenabout people like them.nNew Democracy has further mobilizednsupport by questioning Swedish immigrationnand refugee policies. Looked atnobjectively, it’s hard to imagine a systemnbetter designed to create trouble. To beginnwith, members of the Swedish politicalnestablishment either claim solidaritynwith the oppressed peoples of thenworld or a Julian Simonish love fornenergetic newcomers, and generouslynwelcome “refugees” (even though onlynone out of ten actually qualifies for thisnstatus under already generous UnitednNations standards).nAccordingly, Sweden has recently takennin twenty to forty thousand “refugees”na year, from Iran, Iraq, Ethiopia, andnYugoslavia. However, rigid union worknmles prohibit these new refugees from gettingnjobs, while bureaucratic barriers stalln