This article brings forward a set of examples from the “Swedological” literature that had its golden era circa 1930–1980 – i.e. non-Swedish interpretations of Swedish society (or features of it), done in order to fight ideological wars on non-Swedish soil, using Sweden as a case in point. The theme of Sweden as a peaceful nation, both in its internal developments and in its role in the world, was a crucial feature of the genre from the outset. It has been possible to interpret Sweden’s neutrality policies (including heavy production and exports of arms) in different ways. This has also been the case with Swedish attempts to take responsibility in the world, showing global conscience (e.g. through criticism against international bullies or through foreign aid). The theme of peaceableness has, over the decades, been a tool in fights between “Swedophiles” and “Swedoclasts,” both sides applying a certain “logic of debunkery” in their mutual attempts to disclose the opposite camp’s depictions as myths.

For decades “Swedology” was a rich and polemically charged genre. “Swedophiles” and “Swedoclasts” were quite as eager to deploy images of Sweden as weapons in foreign contexts as they were inter- ested in the country as such. A telling example is the genre’s early clas- sic, Marquis W. Childs’s Sweden: The Middle Way from 1936. With the backdrop of Dwight Eisenhower’s attempt to get back at Childs by branding Sweden as an extreme society in 1960, this essay aims to see Childs’s book as an argument in its original context during the New Deal. Rather than initiating the 1930s’ American wave of Swedophilia, Childs phrased his argument as an implicit polemic against its appar- ent exaggerations. Sweden was not a Utopia; the point in studying its example was on the contrary the pragmatism shown in the Swedes’ attempts to solve everyday problems in a reasonable and genuinely democratic way, negotiating and compromising. As a text implicitly supporting the Roosevelt agenda, Childs’s book was far from encour- aging federal dirigisme, expert rule and central planning (“social engi- neering”): on the contrary the message to other New Dealers was to shun such things in favor of grass-roots activities and initiatives. The predominant theme – the consumers’ cooperation movement’s central role in counteracting monopolies, thus creating economic efficiency and turning Sweden into the world’s only truly working laissez-faire economy – harmonized with Childs’s commitment to projects like the federal rural electrification program, which in a “Swedish” manner was founded on co-ops and a vision of popular self-determination.

Artikeln presenterar motiven bakom, förebilderna för, och karaktären av det arbete som bedrevs inom Centralförbundet för socialt arbete (grundat 1903) under de första åren. Den avvisar myten om CSA som en specifikt liberal åsiktssammanslutning för "socialpolitik" i trängre mening (dvs. med exklusiv inriktning på offentligt beslutsfattande). I stället presenteras CSA som en i politisk mening brokig sammanslutning, med vänsterliberaler i rollen som "värdar", med stark förankring i arbetarrörelsen (inom ramen för tidens vänstersamverkan för allmän rösträtt), samt med icke obetydlig förankring också till höger om det "tuschstreck" som präglade det politiska landskapet under decennierna före det demokratiska genombrottet. CSA:s arbete med att genom kunskapsinsamling och informationsspridning främja lösningar på "sociala frågor" var pluralistiskt till sin karaktär, vilket inte minst innebar att det lika ofta inriktades på privata aktörers möjligheter (t.ex. filantropiska inrättningars, folkrörelsers - inklusive konsumentkooperationen och fackföreningsrörelsen, eller industriföretags möjligheter) som på statens eller kommunernas. CSA var inte en liberal tankesmedja, inte heller Sveriges "Verein für Sozialpolitik", utan en överbryggningscentral efter modell från USA och Frankrike, som uppvisade en unik förmåga att skapa utbyte mellan krafter av olika karaktär och kulör i sin tids samhälle.