The present dissertation focuses on the appointment of clergy in the rural areas of Swedish province of Hälsingland during the period 1650-1800. The aim has been to analyse the practical process of clergy appointments as well as to discuss the development of the political culture of the said period in the way that it was reflected through the actions of the actors involved. The discussion concentrates on two aspects of the political culture, firstly on what kind of influence the parishes had in regard to the clergy appointments, secondly what the actions of the various actors in this context tell us about the local political culture. The study shows that the parishes did indeed assert their rights in connection with the clergy appointments. It is also shown that the parishes exerted a certain influence in terms of which clergyman to promote, but that this influence seems to have been limited to conditions dictated by the authorities. The clergy election reforms effected in the 1730's brought a significant change to the local political culture. Whereas the earlier legislation assumed that decisions were made unanimously, the elective reforms of the 1730's inaugurated the majority principle as election method, with the result that each voting parish member was now regarded as an independent actor. The investigation of the practice of clergy appointment in Hälsingland shows that the opinions reflected in the unanimous parish demands raised prior to the 1730's reforms primarily belonged to the most leading actors of the community. However, through the formalising of the decision-making procedure, the reforms made way for a broader participation in that process. All farm owners were entitled to vote in the clergy elections, which means that also women farm owners - primarily widows - had the right to vote. Nevertheless, as shown in the present study, the political culture was not as gender neutral as the legislation, seeing that, relatively speaking, the widows voted through proxies to a considerably larger extent than did the men. / <p>Diss. Umeå : Umeå universitet, 2003</p> / digitalisering@umu

I denna jämförande studie analyseras det partistrategiska handlandet i Sverige och Österrike gällande regeringsbildande med en jämförande ansats. Analysen av strategierna har gjorts med hänsyn till den institutionella och politiskt kulturella kontexten. Studien visar att de institutionella arrangemangen mellan länderna liknat varandra men att den politiska kulturen och partisystemen skiljt sig åt vilket påverkat det partipolitiska agerandet. En skillnad mellan länderna är att det i Österrike traditionellt bedrivits en koncensusinriktad och kompromissvillig politik medan det i Sverige präglats av konflikt mellan det socialistiska och borgerliga blocket. Vid det österrikiska valet 1999 infördes konflikt som en följd av det frihetliga antietablissemangspartiet FPÖ:s framgångar och det partistrategiska agerandet kom att ändras. Självbindningar och kompromisslöshet hade ersatt koncensus och samförstånd, och den traditionella ”stora koalitionen” mellan det socialdemokratiska och konservativa partiet ersattes med en regering bestående av det populistiska frihetliga partiet. Ett mönster som höll i sig vid det österrikiska valet 2002. Vad som varit nytt för dessa två val har varit att den socioekonomiska konfliktdimensionen fått större betydelse än tidigare och de politiska partierna har kommit att uppdelats i två block, ett röd-grönt till vänster och ett högerblock med de konservativa och de frihetliga. I Sverige har den socioekonomiska konfliktdimensionen varit den dominerande sedan 1930-talet. Den parlamentariska situationen var, efter 1998 års val, ny då den traditionella blockindelningen hade fått ett alternativ när en mittenbaserad regering diskuterades. Det visade sig dock att blockuppdelningens tradition, att inte ingå oheliga allianser mellan borgerliga och socialister, var stark. Socialdemokraterna bildade minoritetsregering med vänstern och miljöpartiet. Inför valet 2002 cementerades blockpolitiken ytterligare och samarbete över gränserna visade sig än mer otänkbara. Framtiden får utvisa huruvida den österrikiska blockuppdelningen kommer att bestå eller om en återgång till den traditionella stora koalitionen kommer att göras vid kommande val. I Sverige finns en förutsättning för en mittenregering i framtiden, vilket vore ett nytt inslag i svensk politik, men detta kräver en ny syn på blockpolitiken.

This essay is a contribution to the process of reconstructing the meaning of a concept that has been long forsaken and somewhat forgotten. It examines the way in which the Swedish nobility perceived the politically active peasantry during the 1740s as an expression of the prevailing political culture of the period. The aim of this study is thus to understand a bygone world of thought that once existed in a very turbulent political culture. I focus on the words formed and articulated in the halls and rooms of the Swedish estates by which the thoughts, opinions and power of the Swedish government came to the fore. In doing so it is possible to say something about how the nobility, in their relationship with the peasantry, constructed an object which represented their perception of the Swedish peasant and what this meant. In other words the persona that the nobility attributed the peasants. The new political culture of the Age of Liberty (1719–1772) allowed the peasants to enforce a political offensive that gave raise to new ways of expressing themselves, new ways of performing and new ways of positioning themselves in relation the other estates. This also meant a change in how the other estates perceived and acted in relation to the peasantry. The peasant persona was mainly characterized by negative traits and qualities. He was foolish, unqualified and naïve in his quest for increased political rights. However, he was also regarded as humble, benevolent and as a dedicated man. He was a Swedish citizen, just as the members of the nobility, and therefore he had an inherent value because of his love for his homeland. This made it possible for the nobility and peasantry to protect themselves against intruders, to strive forward and to live in harmony with each other. / <p>Författaren har bytt namn till Jakob Starlander.</p>

This thesis is a study of the norms and values of political culture during the 15th century.  The political culture gives the struggle for power in the Kalmar Union in the 15th century its characteristics.  The aim of this study is to identify the political culture and how it contributed to the political polarisation and disagreement within the Kalmar Union during the reign of King Karl Knutsson (Bonde) 1448-1470 and Regent Sten Sture 1470-1503. The theoretic approach is based partly on Eva Österberg’s definition of political culture, but mainly the theory is based on Harald Gustafsson’s thoughts and identified eight arguments for legitimising power used in political correspondence during the 16th century. These arguments are examples of how someone could express themselves to legitimise their power. The method used in this study identifies what non-vocal structures and values that are expressed in the official material of legal documents including treaties and open letters to or from the common people. Firstly, the context of the document is identified and information like who wrote it, when and why, secondly the study analyses how the operators’ addresses and use titles to one another. Thirdly the study identifies words and phrases that express positive values for legitimation. The values that has been found have been analysed in comparison to the law in order to identify if the values could be found in the laws as well. To conclude the study found that there are differences in how the operators expresses themselves and the emotional connection to the situation, although non-vocal structures like norms enforce the operators to apply a certain amount of respect. The political culture and the diplomatic mission creates the standards used in addressing their opponent. Therefore the choices of words are important and the study identifies five larger values that comes to light, they are law and justice, unity, assurances, commitments and duties and good characteristics. All of these can be identified during the entire research period and supported by the values expressed in the law.

The opposition against Gustavus III (1746–1792) had limited access to the printing press, but managed to spread a variety of political pamphlets through clandestine manuscripts. The main purpose of the dissertation is to analyse this communication and thereby enhance our understanding of the political culture of the period. The manuscript published oppositional works against Gustavus III have hitherto been little explored. With source material consisting of 120 manuscript libels, this study makes use of three interrelated methodological perspectives: media analysis, rhetorical analysis and analysis of ideas. The combination of media studies and classical rhetoric is inspired by the works of Peter Burke. Questions of production, distribution and consumption frame the discussions. The libels – published anonymously for fear of persecution – were spread through what Harold Love calls “user publication”. This means that many readers contributed to their distribution and through the act of copying also functioned as co-authors. The majority of the libels originated among the estate of the nobility and their political allies. The authors were often accomplished writers, skilfully using a variety of rhetorical strategies to interest and entertain their readers. When viewed in an international context, the Swedish material is revealed as relatively conservative. The arguments in the Swedish works were generally founded on established and traditional values and ideas, and treated Monarchy and Lutheran Christianity as given institutions which stood unquestioned. In comparison to French libels against royalty, Swedes were also more reluctant to use sexual slander. One explanation for this conservatism is that the authors were aiming for a wide audience, and therefore strove to ground their arguments in common values. Another explanation can be found in the fact that many of the works originated within the noble classes: a privileged group which had much to gain from the preservation of traditional social structures.

As our world globalizes and grows smaller, there is increasing concern about questions related to the future of liberal democracy. Following the breakdown of communism on the European continent and the ensuing emphasis on the universalization of liberal democratic values as ‘the end of history’, much research has been centered on understanding the crafting of stable democratic systems in East-Central Europe. Recently, the widely observed phenomenon of ‘illiberal backsliding’ has evoked considerable scholarly attention. However, the research community lacks a deeper understanding of the factors determining the prospects of sustainable democratic consolidation in a post-authoritarian environment. This case study therefore relates the problems associated with anchoring democratic governance in the post-communist states of East-Central Europe to a broader framework of democratization theories. It is argued that consolidating democracies is a far more complex task than has earlier been acknowledged, as it depends on a multitude of interrelated socio-cultural and political determinants. As is further proposed, the post-communist countries have largely been entrapped in an unsustainable state of incomplete democratic consolidation, evident specifically in the prevalent lack of civic culture and a deficient process of citizenship formation, entailing a serious risk of authoritarian backlash. A somewhat paradoxical hypothesis is suggested: that periods of illiberal government actually could be instrumental to generate the kind of social community needed for a long-term sustainable democratic society. In a concluding discussion on the prospects of consolidating democracy on a global scale, it is stated that the liberal democratic endeavor may be facing two future trajectories: while the first one is that of a global democratic decline in the face of authoritarian reaction, the opposite trajectory implies that liberal democracy may well have a universal future, although to accelerate to that point, it needs to overcome an initial state of instability requiring some setbacks.