I think because Sweden uses a form of proportional representation it gives more opportunity to a wider range of parties.
In regards to this party, it does sound alot like Marxism but with Marxism there are many different adaptations.
Sp o i l e r*
In my time at the university studying economics as my major, one course involved Marxism and it went very well. I remember I got more points at the marxism exam than the marxist and politically involved female candidating for the Riksdag (Parliament). She was also my opponent, didn't like me, and it was quite funny.
However, I have problems with a system where the state tells the citizens what is best for them in many aspects of life. In Sweden the most obvious field since the 60ies have been child care.
I have even more problems with a system that not only stops but punish the ambitious, skillful, talented ones. That's how it went at school and how I see it, my experience, and later even at work places.
In an ideal world we wouldn't need the state at all or as little as possible and everything or at least most of it would be private. Everyone should be allowed to think for themselves. Absolute noone should be homeless, and every basic need concerning some place to live, food and warm enough clothes had to be fulfilled. That should be an eventual government's main task, if any. If we used a value added tax system of some sort it should primarily be used on luxury items, not on food and housing. The basic standard of living should be ok for everyone and no need for any social benefits whatsoever. If some needed social benefits we could call it societal work instead and give them something to do, some task, to get it. Just to stop the enigma and stop people from being envy.
The system for taxation of companies should be looked at and simplified. In the ideal world everybody paid the same (small) tax. It's all about the laws and wealth distribution, a part of the government's main task.
It's sounds like an utopia, a fantasy world I know, where people actually cared and helped each other and the state made sure noone was forgotten.
On the other hand, the system with less working hours is unfortunately just as much an utopia.
I can mainly speak for Sweden. We have had (AI will stop it of course) as the main problem the value of working on the margin is worth less and less. Some of our political parties believe we should bring in 25 million immigrants so we totally get more from working. Of course it would give more in total, it would be strange otherwise, but per person it will be even worse. They are nutters who doesn't understand the basics.
If we have a cake and bake it just somewhat larger, not even make it double, and simultaneously triple our population, what is the outcome? Everyone has lost!
Here only the Left party V speak of shorter working days. I actually think it would be nice and AI will make it happen whatever we say. However when we don't get paid the same (if I understand their proposal), how the hell do they think people will cope?
A M (conservative party) representative once said "with a right wing government some people will be richer, but with a left wing government everyone will get poorer". She nailed it, since that is due to the engine of controlled capitalism.
The problem in Sweden among the masses isn't they have a too good time. The masses struggle to manage the day-to-day life on the margin, they just about get an income that covers what they need actually! Sweden has been the dream Paradise for the ultra rich, among one of the fastest growing income inequalities countries in the world in recent years.
Then the globalisation, we unfortunately are hugely dependent on. It is a problem if we work less hours. How can we compete on the markets then?
The best we can do (in Sweden) would be to stop immigration (and it doesn't matter where they come from), send back some IF they want to return (I don't support the idea sending people away if they feel they now have their roots here, it's inhuman) or send Swedes away (As I said I don't care where people come from) cause we simply have to decrease the population. Both groups can be tempted by a certain amount of money per person. "Maybe" some Swedes like to live in a warmer country (a lot actually). Send criminals (both swedes and immigrants) abroad since we don't have enough rooms in prison for them here and pay the receiver for it, exit EU to stop their policies affecting us far too much on a detail level and to stop the traffic of goods across borders (weapons, drugs, trafficking). All this to diminish our population, get more value on the margin per working hour. We would be better off definitely. Real wages rising. Afford to work less hours and possibly manage AI. And then increase our amount of money sent to poor countries in the world so they'll get an easier life.
"A shit load of stuff really", you wrote.
I wonder, how will all this be financed? Especially if "people are working way less and just for their basic needs", which in itself is a strange assumption, since (at least in Sweden) people work their socks of 40+ hours per week just for their basic needs, thanks to our real bad working value on the margin.
It was a German female journalist who wrote an interesting book about the end of capitalism a time ago, they spoke about it on tv in our literature program Babel on our commercial free national tv. At this moment I remembered I have to borrow and read it.🤠
*gawa, since you put it as a "Spoiler, click to show" I didn't just quote your post and just replied - since when I quoted your text was shown in my reply, and I didn't know if you wanted that. I'm not all that familiar with how spoilers work.