<p>The Swedish Prime Minister, Tage Erlander, made a speech on the 22 of August 1961 in which he dismissed speculation that Sweden was seeking to abandon its neutral stance and non-alignment in foreign policy with a view to requesting membership of the European Economic Community. The reason was that the EEC was supposed to have a political part where a connection with NATO should have existed. This speech led to a domestic discussion which has been called the most intense debate of foreign affairs in recent history. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the reactions of the other parliamentary parties to Erlander’s speech. The theoretical points draw from social constructivism, which is being operationalised into states’ identity and interests. These interests are states’ physical survival, autonomy and economic well-being. All of these three interests were present in Erlander’s speech.</p><p>The study shows that the Centre Party (Centerpartiet) was in agreement with Erlander’s stance and coincided that it was impossible to reconcile membership of the EEC with the state’s neutral stance. Both the Social Democrats (Socialdemokraterna) and the Centre Party gave priority to the interest of autonomy over economic well-being. However, there were aspects of the interest of physical survival in the opinions of the Social Democrats, which might be connected with their role as the government party and therefore having the ultimate responsibility. The biggest critics were the non-socialist parties: the Liberal Party (Folkpartiet) and the Conservative Party (Högerpartiet). The latter two believed that the country should seek the oppurtunity to make an exception to the neutral stance when applying for membership and then evaluate whether it would be possible to reconcile it with non-allignment. They both had economic well-being as their major interest. Further criticism came from the Communist Party (Kommunistpartiet), who were opponents of any aspect of European cooperation. They even drew parallels between the EEC and Hitler’s vision for Europe. The Communist Party included interests of physical survival and autonomy in their argumentation. All parties were consistent in keeping to their interests throughout the period of this research.</p>

The Swedish Prime Minister, Tage Erlander, made a speech on the 22 of August 1961 in which he dismissed speculation that Sweden was seeking to abandon its neutral stance and non-alignment in foreign policy with a view to requesting membership of the European Economic Community. The reason was that the EEC was supposed to have a political part where a connection with NATO should have existed. This speech led to a domestic discussion which has been called the most intense debate of foreign affairs in recent history. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the reactions of the other parliamentary parties to Erlander’s speech. The theoretical points draw from social constructivism, which is being operationalised into states’ identity and interests. These interests are states’ physical survival, autonomy and economic well-being. All of these three interests were present in Erlander’s speech. The study shows that the Centre Party (Centerpartiet) was in agreement with Erlander’s stance and coincided that it was impossible to reconcile membership of the EEC with the state’s neutral stance. Both the Social Democrats (Socialdemokraterna) and the Centre Party gave priority to the interest of autonomy over economic well-being. However, there were aspects of the interest of physical survival in the opinions of the Social Democrats, which might be connected with their role as the government party and therefore having the ultimate responsibility. The biggest critics were the non-socialist parties: the Liberal Party (Folkpartiet) and the Conservative Party (Högerpartiet). The latter two believed that the country should seek the oppurtunity to make an exception to the neutral stance when applying for membership and then evaluate whether it would be possible to reconcile it with non-allignment. They both had economic well-being as their major interest. Further criticism came from the Communist Party (Kommunistpartiet), who were opponents of any aspect of European cooperation. They even drew parallels between the EEC and Hitler’s vision for Europe. The Communist Party included interests of physical survival and autonomy in their argumentation. All parties were consistent in keeping to their interests throughout the period of this research.

This thesis intends to do an analysis of the socialist ideology in former Yugoslavia and Sweden during the time 1948 until 1962. The analysis is done on 8 political speeches each, from the former president of Yugoslavia, Josip Broz Tito and from the former prime minister of Sweden, Tage Erlander. We have specified our analysis on five certain policy areas which are: labour market, welfare, foreign policy, democracy and national identity. The aim of the study is to find what kind of similarities and differences that can be found in the speeches, in relation to socialist values. The reason for analysing the views from these two politicians’, is because both claim to be socialist. The study shows that the socialist ideology in Sweden and Yugoslavia, have both similarities and differences. Both Erlander and Tito stem from a Marxist idea tradition which is evident in how they advocate for economic socialism, the labour theory and for the overall implementation of socialism in their respective nation. The main differences that is evident from their speeches is how they look upon the control of government, something which makes them very different in terms of socialist values. Erlander is advocating for a social democratic socialist model which is controlled by the people in a democratic manner, whereas Tito is advocating for a revolutionary, soviet-like socialism that is controlled by himself and the party he represents. The differences and similarities in the socialist values becomes apparent in the different policy areas. Where in some areas, the socialist values differ a lot and in some, less.

This subject of interest in this paper is the ideas expressed and formulated in the making andinauguration of the Branting-monument at Norra Bantorget in Stockholm. The initiative for a monument honoring the late Social Democratic leader Hjalmar Brantingwas taken at the Swedish Social Democratic Party Congress in 1928. In 1935 the party board decided to give the task of designing the monument to the much renowned artist Carl Eldh. A national fund-raising campaign for the monument was also initiated. In1942 the model of the monument was completed, but because of the war it was stored in a shelter. On June 2, 1952 the monument was inaugurated with great ceremony. Old working movement songs and anthems were played and sung and speeches were made by the Prime Minister Tage Erlander, Stockholm City Council President Carl Albert Andersson, and three foreign guests: Salomon Grumbach, Camille Huysmans and Paul LöbeIn the Social Democratic daily press reporting on the inauguration and in the speeches from the inauguration one can track several important recurring themes. It is clear that they were eager to define Branting as a prudent reformist and anti-communist. It also points out that both Branting was a big Swede that the whole nation stood behind, but also a great European and internationalist. But it also adds time to let different people describe Branting on a personal level, thus both strengthening the heroic image of Branting and making the image of Branting more personal. Even liberal newspapers adopted much of this rhetoric. The only newspaper that in the true sense took a fairly critical stance in relationship to the inauguration was the communist Ny Dag.

Dissertation--Stockholms universitet, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 367-384) and index.

Cette thèse analyse les formes et les effets de l’utopisme qui sous-tend le projet politique du SAP (parti social-démocrate suédois) entre 1932 et 1986. Dans le cadre d’une approche conceptuelle du politique nous nous interrogeons sur le pouvoir des idées, des symboles et de l’imaginaire dans la constitution d’un roman national original, mais aussi à travers la mise en oeuvre de l’action publique. A partir d’un important corpus inédit de discours et d’écrits rédigés par les trois leaders qui se sont succédés à la tête du gouvernement pendant un demi-siècle(Hansson, Erlander, Palme), la thèse s’efforce de mettre à jour « la cristallisation sémantique » qui a structuré le lexique politique du SAP. En son coeur figure la métaphore du Folkhem qui fonctionne comme un mythe mobilisateur pour la nouvelle société, avant de se transformer en élément essentiel de l’identité nationale et de la culture politique de la Suède. Autour du Folkhem, se noue le contrat social suédois, et la notion se transforme en source etressource de légitimité politique. L’histoire des récits du Folkhem permet de mieuxcomprendre les origines du modèle suédois et les modalités récentes de son évolution. Par son extrême plasticité, le Folkhem continue de nos jours à faire l’objet d’appropriations politiques nombreuses et diverses, confirmant ainsi son rôle fondateur d’institution de sens. / This thesis relates the forms and effects of the utopianism that underlies the SAP (Swedish Social-Democratic Party) political project between 1932 and 1986. The power of ideas,symbols and imaginary in politics is our theoretical base. The political discourse of the SAP leaders and the importance of words in the creation of public policy are studied. Our corpus consists of a vast archive material. Guided by utopianism, the leaders express their will to create a new society. The Folkhem political metaphor, narrative at the heart of the political glossary of the SAP, is in the centre of this utopianism. The notion is used as a mobilizingmyth for the new society and it works as a social contract for the Swedes. The Folkhem narratives help us understand the Swedish model and contemporary Sweden. By its extreme plasticity and by being part of the Swedish identity, the notion is still a source of political legitimacy and continues to produce meaning.

Based on the concept of rhetorical situation, the purpose of this study is to compare and describe the three Socialist leader's May Day speech from the years 1954, 1978 and 2011. The results of the analysis showed that there is a big difference in how the leaders chooses to appeal to the rhetorical audience. Erlander, 1954, never appealed directly to his audience which Palme, 1978, did both initially as repeatedly throughout his speech. Juholt, 2011, has a personal and frequent appeal which is repeated throughout his speech, which is interpreted as a sign of the intimization of the public language. It proved difficult to discuss the Socialist rhetoric as one unified form. The rhetoric realm is influenced by too many external factors, such as the media, which makes it impossible to speak of it as one. The analysis revealed that the language of the 1th may-speeches is characterized by the people who use it. It is inevitable that the speaker puts his utmost emphasis, in both language and speeches. It would require a larger and more comprehensive analysis to allow any conclusions about a social-democratic language.Keywords: Rhetorical situation, genre, ethos-logos-pathos, 1th May, the Swedish Social Democratic Party, Tage Erlander, Olof Palme, Håkan Juholt

<p>Abstract</p><p>Title: DREAMING OF A UNITED ‘NORDEN’ (The North)</p><p>– Four central Nordic actors about the progress and extent of Nordic cooperation</p><p>The Nordic cooperation are often spoken as in terms of a peaceful international cooperation that is built upon a wide range of similarities among its members, such as a common culture, language similarities and a related kind of political system etc. But in spite of the fact that these so called propitious factors are present, many of the attempts that has been made trying to bring the states of the North (Norden) closer together has turned out unsuccessfully. Therefore no far-reaching Nordic cooperation has come to be implemented. The aim of this essay is to find out what the main reasons could be why this has been the case.</p><p>I have chosen to take a closer look at the motives given by the former Nordic Prime ministers Tage Erlander (Sweden), Karl August Fagerholm (Finland), Einar Gerardsen (Norway) and Mauno Koivisto (Finland). To find out their thoughts on this subject I have studied their (political) memoirs. The reason I have chosen these actors is because they have been personally involved in the attempts to deepen the Nordic cooperation, for example in such fields as economics and military defence. When trying to find out what can explain the extent of the Nordic cooperation I’m also interested in finding out if there is a certain kind of motives that are more dominant then others. Is it common culture, interests or leadership which is the most dominant category of motives? These three mentioned categories are taken from arguments given by different schools of international relations theories such as realism, liberalism etc.</p><p>After analysing the memoirs I have been able to come to the conclusion that it according to Erlander, Fagerholm, Gerhardsen and Koivosto are motives concerning interests that have been the most determining factor when talking about motives that can explain the extent of the Nordic cooperation. Further we can conclude that these interests have been of both domestic as well as of international nature. But it also seems like we can’t ignore the case specific conditions when we’re trying to understand international relations, such as the Nordic cooperation.</p>

Abstract Title: DREAMING OF A UNITED ‘NORDEN’ (The North) – Four central Nordic actors about the progress and extent of Nordic cooperation The Nordic cooperation are often spoken as in terms of a peaceful international cooperation that is built upon a wide range of similarities among its members, such as a common culture, language similarities and a related kind of political system etc. But in spite of the fact that these so called propitious factors are present, many of the attempts that has been made trying to bring the states of the North (Norden) closer together has turned out unsuccessfully. Therefore no far-reaching Nordic cooperation has come to be implemented. The aim of this essay is to find out what the main reasons could be why this has been the case. I have chosen to take a closer look at the motives given by the former Nordic Prime ministers Tage Erlander (Sweden), Karl August Fagerholm (Finland), Einar Gerardsen (Norway) and Mauno Koivisto (Finland). To find out their thoughts on this subject I have studied their (political) memoirs. The reason I have chosen these actors is because they have been personally involved in the attempts to deepen the Nordic cooperation, for example in such fields as economics and military defence. When trying to find out what can explain the extent of the Nordic cooperation I’m also interested in finding out if there is a certain kind of motives that are more dominant then others. Is it common culture, interests or leadership which is the most dominant category of motives? These three mentioned categories are taken from arguments given by different schools of international relations theories such as realism, liberalism etc. After analysing the memoirs I have been able to come to the conclusion that it according to Erlander, Fagerholm, Gerhardsen and Koivosto are motives concerning interests that have been the most determining factor when talking about motives that can explain the extent of the Nordic cooperation. Further we can conclude that these interests have been of both domestic as well as of international nature. But it also seems like we can’t ignore the case specific conditions when we’re trying to understand international relations, such as the Nordic cooperation.