No description available.

Det folkvalda samiska organet Sametinget instiftades i Sverige 1993. Det var en viktig utveckling i samernas politiska mobilisering eftersom de inte tidigare haft ett nationellt representativt organ. Vid instiftandet blev organet både ett folkvalt parlament och en statlig förvaltningsmyndighet, vilket skapade konflikter mellan samernas vilja till ökat självbestämmande och statens strävan att kontrollera Sametingets verksamhet. I föreliggande kvalitativa undersökning undersöks därför de diskussioner som förelåg i den samiska tidningen Samefolket under Sametingets inrättande 1990-1994. Undersökningen visar dels hur ledande politiska representanter från de nybildade samiska partierna resonerade i frågan, dels hur andra samiska aktörer betraktade Sametinget. Vidare påvisar undersökningens resultat att diskussionerna förändrades under den undersökta perioden och att inre konflikter ökade till följd av Sametingets inrättande. Trots att en vision med Sametinget var att ena det samiska folket, visar föreliggande undersökning att organets tillkomst istället kom att splittra gruppen under den undersökta perioden. / The Sámi Parliament, a popularly elected Sámi organ was established in Sweden in 1993. This was an important process for the political advancement of the Sámi people, since they never before had had a nationally representative body. At the founding, the body became both an elected parliament and an administrative agency for the state. This created conflicts between the Sámi peoples' desire of increased independence and the goverment's need to control and rule. Therefore, the present qualitative study investigates the discussions that appeared in the Sámi magazine Samefolket during the Sámi Parliament's institutionalisation 1990-1994. The examination partly shows how the leading political representatives from the newly founded Sámi parties argued and partly how other Sámi actors regarded its institutionalisation. Furthermore, the results of the investigation suggest that the discussions changed during the investigated period and that the amount of conflicts increased following the institutionalisation of the Sámi Parliament. Even though the vision for the Sámi Parliament was to unite the Sámi people, the present study shows that the creation of this organ shattered the unity of the Sámi during the investigated period.

No description available.

This paper deals with how different operators use Sami history, what kind of use of history they apply. The material I have analysed are lesson plans from Samiskt informationscentrum, The Sami – an Indigenous People in Sweden by Sametinget and the government, brochures by Gaaltije/Sydsamiskt kulturcentrum and the journal Samefolket the years 1969-2018. The study answers two main questions: - Which use of history is made by the actors claiming Sami history? How do they use Sami history? - In what way are global historical references used in the writing of history? I have used a hermeneutic method as a tool in my analysis to try to understand in what aim the use of Sami history is made. My main conclusions are that there often are deep historical arguments that are used, where the authors in my material are trying to legitimize the presence of the Sami people as far back in time as possible. A genealogical perspective is used in all the material, where the history that is important for them is shown, as well as that the actions of the Sami peoples ancestor is often raised. This is connected with an ideological use of history, because arguments like “the Sami have been here as long as anyone can remember” are used. This is linked with the existential use of history where I see it as an aim to legitimize the rights of land, fishing, hunting and reindeer husbandry. There is also a moral use of history that are shown in connection with an existential use of history, where I see it as strive for remembering the history of the Sami, but also a reconciliation and restoration with the past. Often the moral, ideological and existential use of history is used together to achieve the same thing – more rights for the Sami’s. There is a political dimension of history culture that I see in my material where the history is used to legitimize, in this case, the rights of the Sami people. The use of global historical references is partly showed in Samefolket, some of the brochures and in one of the lesson plans about colonialism; where there are comparisons with how the Jews, the indigenous Americans and aborigines were treated.