Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Radicalisation of Functional Socialism 1968–80

  • Chapter
Democratic Socialism in Britain and Sweden

  • 16 Accesses

Abstract

By the late sixties the relative calm in relations between workers and employers in Sweden was breaking down. Relative deprivation was increasing, less as a consequence of stagnation in incomes and rising unemployment, but more as a consequence of the very policies that the unions had themselves pursued which had entailed very high rates of mobility and consequent disruption to patterns of life. By the mid-seventies this sense of disillusionment and relative deprivation was intensified when the Swedish economy began to go into recession. Commitment to full employment delayed the impact of the world recession for some time but ultimately real incomes began to fall and the more so as a result of the commitment to full employment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. Apple, Higgins and Wright (1981), p. 210.; Martin (1978), p. 109.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Martin (1978), p. 109.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Anderman (1967), p. 211.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Anderman (1967), p. 211.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Martin (1976, 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Korpi (1983), p.51.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Anderman (1967), p. 257.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Martin (1978), p. 12.; Hancock (1979), p. 324.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Helenius (1969), p. 215.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Elvander (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rosenblum (1980), p.280.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Martin (1978), p. 110; Apple, Higgins and Wright (1981), p. 219; Korpi (1978b), p. 324; Stephens (1979), p. 14; Esping-Anderson and Friedland (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Apple, Higgins and Wright (1981), p. 220.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hufford (1973), p. 28; Ohlin (1974), p. 136.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hancock (1979), p. 326.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Thimm (1979), p. 156.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Thimm (1979), p. 157.

    Google Scholar 

  18. The fact that the white-collar union federation, TCO, had also called for greater industrial democracy and were in broad agreement with LO on the issue made it a particularly powerful demand which the Social Democrats could not ignore.

    Google Scholar 

  19. For a summary see Landsorganisationen (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Himmelstrand et al (1981), p. 270.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Landsorganisationen (1979), p. 11.

    Google Scholar 

  22. For details see Landsorganisationen (1979), pp. 12–15 and Choate (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  23. For details see Martin (1976); LO (1979), pp. 18–19.; Broström (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Martin (1979); Landsorganisationen (1979), pp. 20–24.; Thimm (1979), pp. 161–64. For an interpretation of the form of co-determination in Sweden compared to other countries see Stephens and Stephens (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Forsell (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Korpi (1983), p. 138.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lindbeck (1975), p.27.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Otter et al (1982), p. 17; Heclo (1974), p. 249; Ohlin (1974), p. 139.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Childs (1980), p. 57. For the historical background to the idea of wage-earner funds see Eidem and Öhman (n.d.). This is a translation of the first section of a ‘study report’ of the Commission on Wage-Earners’ Funds and Capital Formation, entitled Löntagarfonder: Bakgrund, Problem och Möjligheter. See also Meidner (1978b). This is a translation of the essential part of the revised report adopted by the LO Congress in 1976, Kollektiv Kapitalbildning Genom Löntagarfonder.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Korpi (1983), p. 139.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Meidner (1978a).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Asard (1980), p. 378.

    Google Scholar 

  33. The original report of 1975 was entitled Löntagarfonder.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Åsard (1980), p. 378. Others argue that it is hardly credible that Meidner was motivated solely by the desire to solve the problems arising from the solidaristic wage policy question but that this masked a real concern for the issue of power and control in industry. Such a view was expressed by Berndt Öhman, Chairman of the Commission on Wage-Earner Funds, to the author in a personal interview in Stockholm, September 1982. Even if this were true the fact remains that it was presented at the time as a solution to the wage solidarity problem and rather differently later on.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Meidner (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Meidner (1980), pp. 353–54.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Meidner (1980), p. 357.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Apple, Higgins and Wright (1981), p. 226.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lindbeck, for example, said the funds were a ‘death sentence for pluralism’ and referred to the nightmarish society they would, in his view, create as ‘Meidnerland’. Quoted in Apple, Higgins and Wright (1981), p. 243.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Åsard (1980), p. 378, who rather overstates, however, the differences between the 1975 and 1976 versions.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Meidner et al (1977), p. 243.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Berndt Öhman also expressed the view that it was Meidner’s personal contribution that shaped the proposals in the radical way that emerged in 1975 and that they were not necessary to solve the problems he had been asked to investigate. Whatever might be the truth of this claim the fact

    Google Scholar 

  43. that LO adopted his ideas in 1976 so enthusiastically demonstrates the radical tendencies that had emerged within the union movement by this time.

    Google Scholar 

  44. For details see Eidem and Öhman (n.d.), pp. 45–46.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Johansson (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Programme of the Swedish Social Democratic Party, 1975, translated by R. G. Tanner.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Programme of the Swedish Social Social Democratic Party, 1975, p. 17.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Sainsbury (1981), p.288.

    Google Scholar 

  49. The Liberals supported the government in this in return for agreement on certain changes in the taxation system.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Korpi (1983), p. 139.

    Google Scholar 

  51. For a discussion the various views see Stephens (1981b); Elder (1979). The latter believes that rather than votes being lost due to the radicalisation of policy, a secular decline was not held in check mainly because of rising inflation rates.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Petersson (1978). Korpi challenges the argument that embourgeoisement has produced a long-term decline in support for the Social Democrats pointing out that this was at its highest in the affluent sixties. Korpi (1978a).

    Google Scholar 

  53. A survey carried out by the conservative paper Svenska Dagblad showed that two thirds of voters were against the funds and one half of LO members were against them. Kelman (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Sarlvik (1977), p. 123.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Kelman (1977); Elvander (1979), p. 28; Asard (1980), pp. 379–80.

    Google Scholar 

  56. On the contradictory nature of the fund proposals as far as class support is concerned see Madsen (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Korpi (1978b), (1983), pp. 143–44; Stephens (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Madsen (1980), p. 282.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Elvander (1979), p. 28.

    Google Scholar 

  60. For a criticism of this type see Meyerson (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Einhorn and Logue (1980). Wage restraint has, in Denmark, been stated as the price that the unions would have to pay to get the funds. This element has not been absent from the argument in Sweden as Einhorn and Logue report. See also Öhman (1982), pp. 221–29.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Apple, Higgins and Wright (1981), p. 243.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Landsorganisationen (1982), pp. 12–13.

    Google Scholar 

  64. For a discussion of the proposals see Himmelstrand et al (1981), pp. 263–68.

    Google Scholar 

  65. The secretary of the official commision at the time, Berndt Öhman has since said that he was forbidden to write or comment on the issue of power and control by the Chairman, Hjalmar Mehr and members of the government, before the official report was issued. Interview Stockholm, September, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Himmelstrand et al (1981), p. 264.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Asard (1980), pp. 385–84.

    Google Scholar 

  68. For a summary see Öhman (1979) and Skog (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Åsard (1981), pp. 384–85.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Korpi (1983), p. 144.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Rosenblum (1980), pp. 275–76.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Höglund (1982), p.4.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Otter and Soder (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  74. Leijon (n.d.), p. 12.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Reading, UK

    Malcolm B. Hamilton (Lecturer in Sociology)

Authors
  1. Malcolm B. Hamilton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1989 Malcolm B. Hamilton

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hamilton, M.B. (1989). The Radicalisation of Functional Socialism 1968–80. In: Democratic Socialism in Britain and Sweden. University of Reading European and International Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-09234-5_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation