Myra Åhbeck Öhrman: Our lives are online, yet the issue is completely absent from the election campaign

The Swedish AI Commission said in November 2024 that technological development is moving too quickly for society to wait for “total and complete knowledge.” Instead, it urged people to “navigate while underway.” Myra Åhbeck Öhrman questions who decided that society had to board the vessel in the first place.

She argues that technology companies increasingly present artificial intelligence as a force of nature, something that schools, healthcare, the labor market and democracy must simply adapt to. Nvidia’s chief executive recently compared AI with the early automobile, when cars were seen as dangerous to children until society built sidewalks and crossings. But, Åhbeck Öhrman notes, that history also involved decades of regulation, legal requirements and industry resistance.

That missing part of the story matters, she writes, because too few people focus on who owns digital infrastructure and sets the conditions for culture, social life and everyday existence. The same applies to the public conversation, which can be shaped by commercial platforms with their own business models and political interests. Yet internet policy has barely appeared in Sweden’s election campaign. Åhbeck Öhrman asks what kind of digital society the parties actually want to build, which freedoms they would protect and which forms of dependence and power they would refuse to normalize.

“

total and complete knowledge

She identifies two broad camps in Swedish politics. The Social Democrats currently support some of the most forceful measures, including a 15-year age limit for social media, restricted anonymity, protection against deepfakes and a national online police force. The Christian Democrats, whose party holds the digitalization minister’s portfolio, focus mainly on child protection. The Moderates emphasize cybersecurity, preparedness and Swedish control over data, while the Liberals move between technological optimism and calls to restrict children’s screen time and access to social media.

The Centre Party, Greens and Left Party more often argue from a privacy perspective, opposing mass surveillance, data collection and concentrated tech power. The Sweden Democrats defend anonymity, encryption and protection from platform moderation as matters of free speech, although the author says this position also reflects the party’s clear self-interest after prolonged conflict with traditional media and its unusually broad online reach.

“

navigate while underway