Probably Brahmins or the right wing of the Chancellery are a problem within the left movement. Can the authorities understand the small people when the class divides shine?
At the same time, a lot of workers work for 20000-25000 full time. While many graduates earn 60000 a month or significantly more. The number of dollar millionaires in Sweden increased from 142 in 000 to 2019 in 575. The number of dollar billionaires remained constant between 000-2024 at 2019 in Sweden. But in 2024 we had around 43 billionaires in Sweden. It gives completely different opportunities to buy private insurance when the government dismantles social insurance. It also gives completely different perspectives on market rents and poor pensioners. I doubt that a deregulated LAS threatens the well-paid as much as it threatens the low-paid worker.
Moralism makes it difficult in unequal societies
Then there are many academics who, like Brahmins, work to create increasingly detailed moral requirements in society. Now I really want us all to be as kind as we can to each other. However, I have learned at university that if we have an equal society, more or almost all can become good enough but never fully rational. It is in an egalitarian society. Now we have one of the most unequal societies in a long time.
Then there are some workers who belong to the labor aristocracy and earn around 35-50000 a month and many graduates who earn less than these.
But many workers put a very heavy strain on society with low wages, unsafe conditions, a high degree of workplace alienation and extreme demands for obedience and productivity. For these, the demands of the Brahmins of the Left are tough.
Formation also important for the fight
But on the other hand, I share what I perceive to be Lars Ilshammar's defense of Hjalmar Branting's opinion against August Palm that public education is part of the struggle. In particular, people need to be made aware that the laws of economics do not defend extreme class divisions or austerity policies. More people should read Stephanie Kelton's works on economics and Mariana Mazzucato's opus about how we can afford research. Indeed, many people should read Peo Hansen's book about how we can't just afford immigration but how we also often profit from it.
So it's probably important to have influence even for the small people in politics and that the class gaps become smaller. And it's not just workers who need to earn more.
More to read:
Energy populism from the right-wing government
No government deficits – society's unnecessary straitjacket
The important thing is that the academically educated do not dominate the movement discussion and silence the non-academically educated.
Which has been happening for a long time. When Ingemar Lindberg and Olle Sahlström at LO Idédebatt made contact with LO members, it was extremely slow. "I guess nobody cares what we think" was a common response. And it was correct – Ingemar and Olle were fired, and the academics resumed their dominance. That is, Idédebatt was replaced by Tiden, and the professional writers.
A cross fertilization would be most welcome - from both sides I would think. But then this has to be organized. And who does that?
It leaves a lot of room for workers who want to be oppressed as well.
There is nothing as oppressive as when others speak in one's own name. Like when a political party is run by middle-class functionaries yet claims to be a workers' party.
As I said, preferably a breadth, but you have to live up to what you are called.
PS. Incidentally, Brahmin is the wrong word. Brahmin power is entirely hereditary, and nobility was effectively abolished in the early 1900th century. The correct word is mandarins: the power of the educated functionaries over the laity.
The power of the mandarins began to be established within the labor movement already in the 30s, says Lena Hellblom in her – violently reviled by social democrats – doctoral thesis From Primitive to Organized Democracy from 1985. Those who claimed that the union was the members' arena that the ombudsmen allowed to rake were beaten by those who claimed that the union would provide service to the members but that the ombudsmen would have the power.
Those who asserted the power of the members were not only laymen with a syndical background, but there were also pampas such as Metall's chairman Johan Olov Johansson. But, as I said, they were beaten anyway.
Why I chose Brahmin is because it preaches not only knowledge elitism but also a moral hysteria that most people do not fit into.
Mandarins are probably so moralistic, see https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konfucianism