[Yetanfou]

The fact that central Stockholm is an oasis of order and prosperity is sometimes seen as a key factor in the developments in Sweden. Why? Because that is where a large majority of the politicians reside. Then they look out of their windows at the ordered world outside and think 'see, things are going just great in Sweden'. Meanwhile cars are burned every night just a few subway ('tunnelbana') stops away but since they never venture in these areas - which are known to be bad news - they do not see with their own eyes just what the result of some of their policies are.

[petriw]

Order and good living conditions is the norm in most of the country. Unless the politicians come specifically from these areas they will be accustomed to that version of Sweden regardless of where they lived most of their life. Even said areas are mostly calm except when the youths are on school breaks.

Plus, the areas you speak of vote for the left (S and V, not MP), aka the very politicians who supposedly don't understand those areas.

Tensta: http://www.val.se/val/val2014/slutresultat/R/valdistrikt/01/... Rinkeby: http://www.val.se/val/val2014/prelresultat/R/valdistrikt/01/... Husby: http://www.val.se/val/val2014/prelresultat/L/valdistrikt/01/... Vivalla: http://www.val.se/val/val2014/slutresultat/K/valdistrikt/18/...

[Yetanfou]

Given the low employment and high dependence on government subsidies it is hardly surprising that the majority of votes in these areas goes to those parties which are least likely to reduce those subsidies. In that respect these areas do not differ from other areas with low employment, even though some of those who traditionally would have voted for S (social democratic party) now vote for SD (Sweden democrats). Even that is not really surprising, given that the party program for SD is in many ways comparable to that of the social democratic party in the '50s and '60s, including the rhetoric about the virtues of a homogeneous society.