Upperclass vs underclass Safari in Stockholm.Feb 2012.A new action plan against
extremism by the government wrongly suggests that a number of
extra-parliamentary movements are prone to violence. In doing so, its
guidelines risk having a negative influence on young people’s trust in
democratic engagement. Civil disobedience is not the same as violent extremism,
fifteen leading academics say (see below for the signatories).
In two commentaries
published in Dagens Nyheter some of
the signatories criticized the most recent government report on violent
activism. Their criticism addressed among other things suggestions that
teachers and educators should be transformed into officers policing opinion.
This, they say, risks undermining young people’s belief in democracy, by
placing a question mark next to the most fundamental democratic rights in
Sweden.
Now that the report has
been translated into practical guidelines, published online and inviting
discussion, we can confirm that the fears raised by these critics are fully
realised. Parts of the instructions that the Swedish state is sending to
teachers, educators and other citizens who are in touch with young people seem
flagrantly hostile to democracy. The guidelines addressing everybody working
with or otherwise in contact with young people are published as part of the
Government’s national action plan for protecting democracy against violent
extremism, initiated by the previous minister for democracy Birgitta Olsson
and now directed by Mona Sahlin. The material is meant to help unveil signs of
violent extremism among young people (even before any violent actions are
executed), but also as a tool to develop different responses.
Major problems emerge
in the definitions and concrete examples given. Various political groups are
identified as violent. However, the short descriptions used to identify groups
are also offered as ways to guide the reader in being able to identify similar,
other groups besides the one sidentified. The most obvious problem emerges when
the category of “violent leftist extremism” is defined. The material points at the
Revolutionary Front (Revolutionära Fronten) and Anti-Fascist Action (AFA) as
capable of violent behaviour as confirmed by direct quotes from the activists.
However, the organization Everything for Everybody (Allt åt Alla) and the
Swedish Anarcho-syndicalist Youth Federation (Syndikalistiska ungdomsförbundet,
SUF) are mentioned in the same breath although without any substantiating
evidence. Everything for Everybody is mainly known for their direct action
called Upper-Class-Safari in Stockholm, but they are not known for any violent
activities.
In a debate with Mona
Sahlin, Aftonbladet ( a leading
evening newspaper) explained that the only confirmation that the group supports
violent actions is their expressed solidarity for Kurdish troops defending
themselves against IS. How did they end up on Mona Sahlin’s list? Probably
because they – like SUF – advocate direct action, which is considered an
indicator for violence in these government guidelines.
Instead of drawing
mainly on sources from the Swedish Secret Service (Säkerhetspolisen Säpo), the Swedish
National Council for Crime Prevention (Brottsförebyggande rådet BRÅ) and
journalists focusing on “extremism”, the authors should have considered some
mainstream Swedish democracy and social movement research. There they would have
learned that direct action is a rather usual term for a number of different
extra-parliamentary political actions not to be equalized with
anti-parliamentarian actions. It is even used for activities of groups that
have an explicitly non-violent approach. Examples that come under this heading are
completely legal activities such as Everything for Everybody bus trips but also
illegal activities such as peaceful occupations of empty houses or the hiding
of refugees. As an active supporter of civil disobedience during her time as
chairwoman of the Liberals Youth Organization Birgitta Olsson could have ended
up on the list of government prohibitions and a candidate for its surveillance
measures.
Direct action in the
form of civil disobedience is based on openness. It is a symbolic action that
points out injustices or oppression with the goal of starting a debate and
changing society in the long-run. These kinds of activities have been an
important element not only in fighting dictatorships. Western democracies as
they are today have partly been built on movements that employed direct action
in order to broaden democracy and participation, for example – the labour,
feminist, civil rights, LGBTQ and environmental movements.
It is against that
background that leading political philosophers like John Rawls and Jürgen
Habermas have always considered civil disobedience a necessary element of a
vibrant democracy, an analysis that was confirmed by the concluding remarks of
the Swedish Democracy Report from 2000 (only one member of the liberals
(Folkpartiet) disagreed). It is important to quote these insightful words:
“There has to be an acceptance for these groups, their engagement has to be
taken seriously. We should not confuse enemies of democracy with its critics.”
Direct actions have
historically been small steps towards a broader democratic space. By
categorizing organizations and movements that employ direct action as
(potentially) violent, the Swedish government is taking a big step in the other
direction.
Kristina
Boréus, Professor in Political Science, Stockholm University,
Joakim Ekman,
Professor in Political Science, Södertörn University,
Mattias Gardell,
Professor in Religion, Uppsala University,
Håkan
Gustafsson, Professor in Law, Karlstads University,
Björn Horgby,
Professor in History, Örebro University,
Carina
Listerborn, Professor in Urban Studies, Malmö University,
Heléne Lööw,
Associate Professor in History, Uppsala University,
Irene Molina, Professor in
Cultural Geography, Uppsala University,
Diana Mulinari, Professor in Gender
Studies, Lund University,
Nora Räthzel,
Professor in Sociology, Umeå University,
Adrienne
Sörbom, Associate Professor in Sociology, Södertörn University,
Håkan Thörn,
Professor in Sociology, Göteborg University,
Stellan
Vinthagen, Professor in Civil Resistance, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Mattias
Wahlström, PhD in Sociology, Göteborg University,
Aleksandra Ålund, Professor
in Ethnicity, Linköping University