Globally speaking, parliamentarians tend to be more highly educated than their average constituent. In some countries, such as Great Britain and France, there is also a clear link between political power and some certain educational institutions, such as Cambridge and Oxford, which have become important roads to a successful political career. The Swedish political elite differs from this pattern. Even though Swedish parliamentarians generally have a higher education than the average Swede, having an academic education has not been a necessity for a successful political career. This is particularly evident in the Social Democratic Party, which is Sweden’s largest party. Non-academic educational pathways have been of great importance. Historically, popular education, particularly certain «folk high schools», have served as an alternative educational portal for politicians. Is this still the case? What forms of education and knowledge are currently important portals for entering the political elite in Sweden? This paper explores these questions, using interviews with Social Democratic MPs and data from Statistics Sweden on MPs' educational background. Bourdieu's concept of symbolic capital is used to analyze how different skills and educational experiences confer value within the Social Democratic Party. The results show that there are a number of different types of knowledge and experience that are considered of great value. The value of academic knowledge exhibits a great deal of ambivalence. In terms of exchange value (e.g. academic degrees), academic knowledge is conferred low value and is often downplayed narratively. At the same time, however, in terms of use value, academic knowledge is acknowledged to have considerable utility as academic education is seen to facilitate the reading of political documents that forms a large part of MPs' daily lives. The results also suggest that non-formal education still appears to be a highly valued educational pathway to political power in Sweden.

In Sweden, there are no specific academic paths leading to a political career and many local elected leaders develop the knowledge they need in other ways. The aim of this article is to find out which kinds of knowledge they value and how they develop these. Using the results from questionnaires and interviews with local social democratic leaders, four groups of knowledge that constitute symbolic capital in the field of Swedish local politics are identified: ideological, communicative, organisational and academic. Some types of knowledge are communicated openly, whilst others are hard to pinpoint and even contradictory, which tends to exclude some members. Both long-term members and newer members find attending party training useful to develop the knowledge they need to get elected and fulfil their political assignment.

Unlike many other countries, in Sweden there are more significant paths to political leadership than the university degree. Most Swedish political parties offer leadership training programmes that include practical and ideological content and several have a design rooted in the popular education movement. This article explores how party political training for leaders happens in practice, using data from interviews, surveys, text files and ethnographic field notes. Using reflection and ideology as theoretical concepts, the study shows how reflection is used for different aims, and how it can shape participants ideologically. Ideology, in terms of describing what is good, is communicated from the top down in these courses in a general way. In terms of showing what is possible and desirable to either legitimise or challenge, these programmes leave that open to negotiation among the participants, which implies a confidence in their competence by virtue of being elected. Allowing different interpretations risks undermining the party's ideological core; however, since popular education methods are not negotiated, participants are required to reflect deliberately and listen to each others views on the issues under discussion. This can be understood as a safety line as it most likely leads to self-sanitation from the party's perspective.