The purpose of this study is to examine the use of the concept utanförskap in the parliamentary debate focusing on the three largest parties socialdemokraterna, moderaterna and sverigedemokraterna. This study finds itself in the context after the refugee crisis of 2015 and in times where the values we thought where everlasting are being questioned. Where political tension in the fields of immigration and integration reach their highest level of political conflict and where immigration policy reaches its highest-level om importance during the 2018 election campaign. Immigration and integration are attached to the concept of utanförskap as the concept is used as an implication of earlier failed integration. This study uses a combination of methods where Kosselecks conceptual history and Faircloughs critical discourse analysis are applied to the empirical material of proposals in the parliament. Both rest on the theoretical foundation of constructivism. The main finding in the study is that the three parties use the concept differently. Moderaterna use the concept of economic utanförskap while socialdemokraterna use the concept of social utanförskap and lastly sverigedemokraterna use a combination of booth other uses of the concept. The analysis shows no signs of conceptual change based on the empirical material and the previous research from Davidsson (2010) between the time periods of 2003-2006 and 2016-2018. The discourses discovered in the use of the concept are the sub-class discourse and the inside/outside discourse.