I don´t really believe in this review, I was just "thinking aloud" about our present dire predicament. Reposted for archival reasons only.
This is a curious anthology of
articles and poems by Swedish poet Göran Greider, back when Greider still had
something interesting to say. He was the editor of the magazine TLM (at first
called Thélème), which despite its name was leftist, not Satanist. Uniquely on
the left, Greider and TLM supported traditional Social Democracy, defending the
welfare state against both neo-liberals, the right-wing of the Social
Democratic Party, and leftists of the "self-management" stripe. I
believe they even published an issue defending the police, seeing it as the arm
of Society and Democracy. Greider eventually became editor of a Social
Democratic daily paper, Dala-Demokraten, but judging by his regular column in
the apolitical daily Metro, his views have developed in a more typical leftist
direction. Animal rights, climate change, opposition to U.S. intervention in
Afghanistan and Iraq...these days Greider sounds more like the Left Party,
albeit with an heavier accent on class rather than "identity
politics". He has even eulogized late Iranian Marxist Mansoor Hekmat!
"Det levande löftet" (only available in Swedish) was published in 1994, during Greider's orthodox Social Democratic period. The title means "The living promise". I'm not sure where the title originally comes from, but it sounds like a typical Swedish Social Democratic sound bite. The living promise is, I presume, the welfare state. The contents of the anthology are varied: a review of P C Jersild's novels, a strange meditation on the Swedish suburb, an article on Bachtin's view of the carnival, an attack on Swedish poet Gunnar Ekelöf (who didn't like the living promise of the welfare state) and a parody of one of Ekelöf's poems.
The main article is a surprisingly forthright and unapologetic defense of the welfare state.
Greider quite explicitly supports centralization, advanced technology, social engineering, "a conscientious bureaucracy", the idea that the public service sector is "productive" and the principle that pure majority rule is better than checks and balances. All social issues should be de-privatized and brought into the public limelight, where they will become subjects of "democratic decision making" (i.e. majority rule and social engineering). Interestingly, Greider defends the quasi-corporatist traits of Swedish democracy, where powerful special interests such as labor unions and employers' organizations are drawn into public decision-making. Presumably, he believes that this mostly benefits the unions. An interesting point made by the author is that Swedish democracy was more or less co-terminous with the industrial revolution, giving it a Social Democratic stamp, while democracy in the United States existed already before the industrial revolution, giving it a very different character.
The author attacks decentralization, self-management, individualism, the civil society, volunteer work and charity, tradition, neo-liberals, and confused leftists who oppose Social Democracy and its welfare state. Greider views the welfare state as the pinnacle of "the modern" and the "idea of progress", since it welds together egalitarianism "in both senses of the term" (both equality of opportunity and actual equality) with democracy and collectivism. I have seldom seen such an explicit defense of, well, creeping socialism. I admit that I used to believe most of this myself once!
Today Greider feels dated. We can discuss the merits and demerits of his Social Democratic vision, but it's difficult to see how "the living promise" can survive in a post-peak oil world. Just as its Western neo-liberal or conservative competitors, the welfare state was dependent on huge amounts of cheap energy generated by fossil fuels, dams and nuclear power. The rank opportunism of the Swedish establishment (including the Social Democrats) which kept Sweden out of both world wars and "neutral" during the Cold War, probably has something to do with the Swedish success story, too. In a world marked by climate change, peak oil, the failure of Keynesian stimulus, rampant terrorism and increased tensions between the great powers, it's difficult to see how the welfare state can survive, except in a highly modified form. Perhaps Greider rejected communitarianism and "the civil society" a bit too soon?
Greider's article also feel naïve. The author-poet pretends not to notice, or perhaps really doesn't notice, that even egalitarian, collectivist and democratic Sweden had its elite groups, including a Social Democratic elite. Well, at *one* point he does say that there are two elites in Sweden, Social Democracy and the business community, and at another he implies that minority action might be needed in order to get the egalitarian-democratic ball rolling, but overall, he really seems to believe that there are no more elites, and that the common man is in charge. Yet, the politically astute seamstresses mentioned by Greider at the start of his article, are surely not representative of the Swedish working population at large! They constitute a kind of working class elite, and it's easy to imagine that their sons and daughters might have become middle class or conscientious bureaucrats...
Greider also has major problems disproving the cynical observation that most workers join unions, not due to deep political convictions, but because they confer very tangible material benefits on their members. Nor can Greider explain why the welfare state (as he saw it) was crumbling during the 1980's and 1990's (in reality, it's still all around us, although admittedly not in perfect mint condition). Where were all these enlightened, modern, politically astute seamstresses when the Social Democratic Party veered "to the right" or when neo-liberal Carl Bildt was elected prime minister in 1991? The working class seems to have been beheaded the moment its "elite" decided that its interests lay elsewhere... Somehow, this doesn't chime with the super-strict egalitarianism of the author.
I don't claim to have any "solution" to our present predicament, but unfortunately I think the living promise, while hardly a nightmare (come on, I live tolerably well over here) is nevertheless an anachronism today, and that some other formula for living must be sought. Promises be damned.
"Det levande löftet" (only available in Swedish) was published in 1994, during Greider's orthodox Social Democratic period. The title means "The living promise". I'm not sure where the title originally comes from, but it sounds like a typical Swedish Social Democratic sound bite. The living promise is, I presume, the welfare state. The contents of the anthology are varied: a review of P C Jersild's novels, a strange meditation on the Swedish suburb, an article on Bachtin's view of the carnival, an attack on Swedish poet Gunnar Ekelöf (who didn't like the living promise of the welfare state) and a parody of one of Ekelöf's poems.
The main article is a surprisingly forthright and unapologetic defense of the welfare state.
Greider quite explicitly supports centralization, advanced technology, social engineering, "a conscientious bureaucracy", the idea that the public service sector is "productive" and the principle that pure majority rule is better than checks and balances. All social issues should be de-privatized and brought into the public limelight, where they will become subjects of "democratic decision making" (i.e. majority rule and social engineering). Interestingly, Greider defends the quasi-corporatist traits of Swedish democracy, where powerful special interests such as labor unions and employers' organizations are drawn into public decision-making. Presumably, he believes that this mostly benefits the unions. An interesting point made by the author is that Swedish democracy was more or less co-terminous with the industrial revolution, giving it a Social Democratic stamp, while democracy in the United States existed already before the industrial revolution, giving it a very different character.
The author attacks decentralization, self-management, individualism, the civil society, volunteer work and charity, tradition, neo-liberals, and confused leftists who oppose Social Democracy and its welfare state. Greider views the welfare state as the pinnacle of "the modern" and the "idea of progress", since it welds together egalitarianism "in both senses of the term" (both equality of opportunity and actual equality) with democracy and collectivism. I have seldom seen such an explicit defense of, well, creeping socialism. I admit that I used to believe most of this myself once!
Today Greider feels dated. We can discuss the merits and demerits of his Social Democratic vision, but it's difficult to see how "the living promise" can survive in a post-peak oil world. Just as its Western neo-liberal or conservative competitors, the welfare state was dependent on huge amounts of cheap energy generated by fossil fuels, dams and nuclear power. The rank opportunism of the Swedish establishment (including the Social Democrats) which kept Sweden out of both world wars and "neutral" during the Cold War, probably has something to do with the Swedish success story, too. In a world marked by climate change, peak oil, the failure of Keynesian stimulus, rampant terrorism and increased tensions between the great powers, it's difficult to see how the welfare state can survive, except in a highly modified form. Perhaps Greider rejected communitarianism and "the civil society" a bit too soon?
Greider's article also feel naïve. The author-poet pretends not to notice, or perhaps really doesn't notice, that even egalitarian, collectivist and democratic Sweden had its elite groups, including a Social Democratic elite. Well, at *one* point he does say that there are two elites in Sweden, Social Democracy and the business community, and at another he implies that minority action might be needed in order to get the egalitarian-democratic ball rolling, but overall, he really seems to believe that there are no more elites, and that the common man is in charge. Yet, the politically astute seamstresses mentioned by Greider at the start of his article, are surely not representative of the Swedish working population at large! They constitute a kind of working class elite, and it's easy to imagine that their sons and daughters might have become middle class or conscientious bureaucrats...
Greider also has major problems disproving the cynical observation that most workers join unions, not due to deep political convictions, but because they confer very tangible material benefits on their members. Nor can Greider explain why the welfare state (as he saw it) was crumbling during the 1980's and 1990's (in reality, it's still all around us, although admittedly not in perfect mint condition). Where were all these enlightened, modern, politically astute seamstresses when the Social Democratic Party veered "to the right" or when neo-liberal Carl Bildt was elected prime minister in 1991? The working class seems to have been beheaded the moment its "elite" decided that its interests lay elsewhere... Somehow, this doesn't chime with the super-strict egalitarianism of the author.
I don't claim to have any "solution" to our present predicament, but unfortunately I think the living promise, while hardly a nightmare (come on, I live tolerably well over here) is nevertheless an anachronism today, and that some other formula for living must be sought. Promises be damned.
No comments:
Post a Comment