Politisoiva ja epäpolitisoiva patriotismin retoriikka 1860-luvun Ruotsin valtiopäiväreformikeskustelussa

Kirjoittajat

• Jussi Kurunmäki

Abstrakti

“Patriotism” was a contested concept during the debate on Parliamentary reform in Sweden in the 1860s. The meaning of the concept gained different kinds of interpretations, but at the same time the concept was a sort of common rhetorical agreement in political discourse. It became important for political actors to be able to speak from the patriotic position. For those who supported reform “patriotism” was connected to “public opinion” and “time” and it was used in a future-oriented manner. Instead, for those who supported estate-based representation the concept was linked with honour, responsibilities and loyalty towards the country and the King. They complained about the “current use of language” and they were not sufficiently capable of using the rhetoric of “patriotism”, “public opinion” and “time”. The conceptual history of “patriotism” shows that the concept has contained both political and apolitical elements. In republican political thought a patriot has traditionally been a political citizen who has duties towards the self-governing polity. On the other hand, a patriot has often been loyal to whatever political order. This attitude has been based on the assumption of common origins and shared experiences of the members of a “fatherland”. In the Swedish debates in the 1860s both elements of “patriotism” were involved. The radical national liberal political actors had a somewhat political interpretation of “patriotism” including some republican undertones, but nevertheless they mainly used the rhetoric of patriotism in a way that referred to the togetherness of the members of the Swedish nation. This rhetoric of togetherness was a basis for the rhetoric of obligation. A patriot citizen was more or less an apolitical member of the community who was well rooted in society. This apolitical aspect of “patriotism” served to limit the political potential of Parliamentary reform. While the principle of an individual political citizen broke through the organic understanding of political community remained virtually unchanged.