the phd Thesis from Mälardalen university has not received any major titles. But in my world, is the epoch-making, sensational.
Lecturer Karin Sandberg has investigated how the Swedish elvaåringar look at the Swedish history. If you come to Sweden as small, or have two parents who were not born here – how easy is it to see yourself as a Swedish? More specifically: If you read about how the swedes fought against the russians two hundred years ago – can you then think that ”we” got beaten up at Poltava, or is it ”they”, the swedes, who were shot apart by the other ”they”, the russians?
but is in fact central to, and crucial for our future in general and integration in particular. Anyone who thinks that the nation state, a value must also see the importance of the nation’s citizens in any way identify with it.
This is, in turn, together with phenomena such as trust, loyalty, will to defend the nation, tax compliance, and a thousand other major and minor invisible structures that together determine how the country of Sweden is today and as long as the nation-state is composed. You must, of course, does not see the event in Poltava as a ”we”, however, one must want to and be allowed to be included in the diffuse collective that is ”we swedes”.
So how does elvaåringarna in Karin Sandberg’s study? How do they look at the Swedish history? They regard it as ”our” history. It is in my eyes an indication of something very big.
as part of several different ‘we’ without it interfering with their identitetsuppfattning. They talk about ‘we’ when they talk about the Stockholm bloodbath, or the Gustav Vasa at the same time that they’re talking about ‘we’ when they talk about themselves as, for example, dark-skinned,” says Sandberg for research.see.
”They attribute to themselves several different historiekulturer at the same time, that overlap and complement each other seamlessly. Elvaåringarna simply see no conflict in that belong to several different ‘we’ at the same time.”
It is the same approach as the far-right has: ”once blatte always blatte”.
In times of rasifieringsdebatt, narrow nationalism, and the SD’s successes, this is the best news I have heard in ages.
There is a view of some of the radical left as ”immigrants” should have some opinions. The too mörkhårige american voting right and do not buy the theories about, for example, structural racism, collective guilt, and vithetsnormer dismissed in these circles as husblatte and uncle Tom.
because it is the same approach as the far-right has: ”once blatte always blatte”, it is mathematically impossible to be one hundred percent Swedish, one hundred percent, assyrians, iraqi or afghan.
As if the emotions and sense of belonging was mathematics. As if they are descendants from Italy, Ireland, the Middle east and Sweden, who died on the Normandy beaches in 1944 at the same time was one hundred per cent americans, to take a hackneyed example from history.
But to take up just the USA in this context is of course relevant. Just like Sweden today, was the united states at the turn of the last century an immigration country. Just like this closed ethnic and religious groups, suspicious of mainstream society, together in residential areas, associations and communities.
from their homelands and created sometimes the breeding ground for crime and the parallel legal system. Just as it flourished racism and prejudice – but also strong counter forces.
Nordamerikanerna learned to live together, accept each other’s differences and unite in similarities. The more new arrivals learned to keep parts of their culture of origin, yet embrace the new, ever-changing. They became americans and remained italians, irish, arabs and swedes.
Now the Swedish society make the same journey. It seems to me that elvaåringarna in Karin Sandberg’s study is in the middle of it, with our luggage full of historical experiences from several cultures, with identification as swedes and something else. Without conflict, without controversy.
Sweden’s future hangs to the not-so-small part that we manage to go from ”us and them” to ”we and we”.
