Popular, religious and social movements: Recent research approaches and qualitative interpretations of a complex of historical problems

Popular, religious and social movements: Recent research approaches and qualitative interpretations of a complex of historical problems[Folkelige, religiøse og sociale bevægelser: Nyere forskningstilgange og kvalitative fortolkninger om et komplelis a f historiske problemer]Af Vagn WåhlinEn H. C. Andersens og en S. Kierkegaards verdensberømmelse til trods er N. F. S. Grundtvig alligevel den samfundsborgerlige enkeltperson fra det 19. århundrede, som har påvirket Danmark og danskerne mest 130 ar efter sin død. Han er os under huden - også nar vi ikke selv er os det bevidst. For tiden hores dette i positiv fællessang af hans salmer hver søndag i kirken og ses dette ugentligt i de indædte og mangesidede opgør med den gamle i medierne foretaget bl.a. af nutidens globalister, europaister, menneskerettighedsværnere og kristelige fundamentalister, som finder hans religiøse og nationale og folkelige arvegods at stå dem så massivt i vejen for deres nutid og deres fremtidsvisioner. Men hvorfor slå en fortidslevning, en død mand ihjel? Naturligvis, fordi han aldeles ikke er død, trods alle fjendernes bestræbelser. Hvad er det da, som gør, at han direkte gennem sine sungne og laste tekster og indirekte gennem de folkelige institutioner den dag i dag har indflydelse ikke blot inden for en snæver egen kreds, men også ned gennem efterfølgende generationer og ud over hele landet? og vil det vare ved?Skønt andre lande også kender til politisk-ideologiske folkelige bevægelser og økonomiske co-operative strømninger og kollektive oplysningstanker, så har disse tiltag i indbyrdes vekselvirkning og i fællesskab ikke noget steds samlet nået en sådan indflydelse, styrke, udbredelse og langvarig bærekraft som i Danmark ca. 1800 til 1970.Dette har sin fortid under den lange fred 1721-1801 sammen med en heldig kombination af arven fra først den lutherske tro og skole dernæst fra oplysningstidens samfunds- og agrarreformer – indbefattet velvilje fra de fleste godsejere - hvor disse reformer i vort dominerende landbrugssamfund i løbet af 1800-tallet og helt til o. 1970 bl.a. skabte en middel-klasse af gårdmand, som sad pa 75 procent af landbrugsjorden.Denne økonomisk stærke, agrare middelklasse havde ingen interesse i, at hverken spændingsforholdet mellem land og by eller den erkendte spænding mellem samfundsklasserne - de rige over for de fattige - nåede sådanne højder, at en fredeligt fremadskridende samfundsudvikling afgørende blev hindret, for den var helt klart til fordel for dem selv samt også til gavn for hele samfundet. Kun den nationalpolitiske konflikt mellem dansk og tysk kunne ikke undgås, men den krig var også mere fremprovokeret af de liberale og by-borgerskabet såvel i nord som i syd end af gårdmændene som klasse.Det var ind i dette religiøse, markedsøkonomiske, klasse-politiske og folkeligt-nationale monster, at Grundtvig fremtrådte som den rette mand, pa rette tid, pa rette sted og med det rette program. Ind i en trekant af vekselvirkninger mellem stat, marked og den civile borger fremtrådte de folkelige bevægelser som bindeled og formidlere.Enkeltborgeren stod via bevægelsens organisation og institution konkret ikke alene over for stat/kommune eller over for økonomien og markedet eller over for andre mere magtfulde borgere i civilsamfundet. Efter en vagere begyndelse pa det religiøse plan o. 1820, hvor bonden fra lagmandskredsen kunne lytte til et frelsens ord, kunne han senere i 1800-tallet via den lokale sparekasse låne penge uden om købstadsbanken, via andelsmejeriet kunne han fa sin malk forædlet og som smør og ost solgt pa egne og ikke købstadskøbmandens betingelser, via friskolen kunne han fa sit barn opdraget i Grundtvigs og Kolds and, i valg- eller frimenigheden eller i missionshuset kunne han hore Guds ord efter sin mening, i lokalavisen kunne han læse politik efter sin opfattelse osv. Fra o. 1900 kom husmand og by-arbejdere med i tilsvarende bevægelser, foreninger og institutioner, der ofte matte kampe, endda hårdt, for en plads i solen med de etablerede gårdmandsbevægelser, men klart lærte af disse og blev organisationsvante og samfundsmæssigt bevidst medansvarlige medborgere fra efter 1. Verdenskrig - også ud over deres egen klasse. Sporten og idrætten fangede i organiseret form bade land og by og blev snart den største bevægelse især blandt de unge. Kvinderne lærte sig, at medindflydelse pa eget liv forudsatte bevidsthed, organisation og stadighed ikke blot i den politiske verden, men bredere ud, ligesom bekæmpelse af drikfældighedens problemer ikke løstes af sig selv, men krævede falles vilje, organisation og samspil over mange ar.Da Danmark 1960/70 som agrarsamfund i løbet afkort tid afløstes af et industrisamfund for derefter gennem 1970’eme at glide over i det postindustrielle og postmoderne samfund, som vi endnu befinder os i, forsvandt en del af logikken i den sociale sammenbindingskraft gennem dels de folkelige bevægelser, dels de politiske partiers klassetilhørsforhold.Den nu efter 2000 pa visse felter klarere kristne og nationale bekendelse i samfundet kan fore til en øget interesse for samspillet mellem fornyede folkelige bevægelser og andre sider af Grundtvigs virke og arv - eller til hans endelige begravelse. Dog, da ikke ved hans fjenders magt, men ved hans venners svaghed.[Den fulde artikel kan læses pa dansk i Grundtvig-Studier 2003: “Folkelige og sociale bevægelser. Nyere forskningsretninger og kvalitative forståelser”.

Folk, dannelse og styreform: En anmeldelse af Ove Korsgaard, Kampen om folket (2004)

Folk, dannelse og styreform: En anmeldelse af Ove Korsgaard “Kampen om folket” (2004).[People, Education and Government: A Review of Ove Korsgaard ‘The Battle over the People’ (2004) ]By Vagn WåhlinOve Korsgaard, Kampen om folket. Et dannelsesperspektiv på dansk historie gennem 500 år [The Battle over the People: A Perspective of Education through 500 years of Danish History] (Gyldendal, Copenhagen, 2004), 672 p.From the day of its publication, Ove Korsgaard’s brilliant dissertation has had much influence on the Danish understanding of Denmark’s 500-year process of establishing the concepts of individual, society, people, and democracy. The author distinguishes between demos, the general population of the state, and ethnos, that part of the population which has inherited and accepted rights and obligations as far as and beyond a constitution and written laws. These latter are folket, the people.This primary division leads to a similar distinction between state and nation as well as a parallel distinction in government between representative government and democratic, self-organization of the citizens. A special focus of the book is the interaction and mutual dependency of the specified categories in an historical perspective of change from a late feudal society to a modem democratic welfare state. Essential institutions in this long societal process have been (a) the Lutheran Church; (b) from 1814, the municipal local schools for all, including girls; (c), for centuries, the patriarchal household; and (d) the rising centralized power of king and state. These four institutions formed the ideological and practical base of society until, through the slow effect of the Enlightenment, the individual and the people as such, within a national and democratic framework, took over in the period 1870-1900 and became the ideological basis of society with special and defined rights and duties attaching to every adult male and, from 1920, female. After the pre-1814 ethnic and cultural Danish-Norwegian-German conglomerate state finally broke down with the loss (1814) of Norway to Sweden and (1864) the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein to Pmssia, Denmark became the most ethnically and linguistically homogeneous state of Europe. Not until then could the ethnic concept of ‘the p e o p l folket, finally take over the indisputable role as the rock of the Danish society - a role which was further strengthened by the German occupation of Denmark 1940-45.Before 1870, 75% of all cultivated land was worked by the owners of medium-sized family farms, and some 75% of the population made their living in the agrarian sector of society. Agriculture produced the necessary surplus to pay for Denmark’s imports. From 1870, when the farmers began to organize effectively, they gained a higher economic, cultural and political status in Danish class-structured society which they were able to maintain for a hundred years. Up to 1870-90 Copenhagen was the only urban-industrial centre of any great significance, and from the 1890s the organized industrial capital and its workforce rose in influence; but not until the 1960s and 70s did these succeed in outdoing the fundamental influence of the agrarian sector on a national scale. Regrettably, this economic perception of the lower middle-class appearance of Danish society has been under evaluated in Korsgaard’s book, and the reader may thus miss a vital factor in the development of the democratic understanding of the Danish ethnos.The labour unions and the labour movement in politics never became revolutionary to any great extent and from 1916-29 renounced any such tendency and won a national position as a trustworthy partner in a coalition with other political and social forces. They graduated from expressing purely class interests to representing the whole population of Denmark. This led to the formation of a general welfare state for all after the Second World War. All political parties and national movements took part in building a welfare provision from cradle to grave, covering 80-90% of the population, which led to an embracing of both ethnos and demos.From the post-industrial and post-modern society of 1970 until today no leading classes in coalition with other groups have been able to formulate a common ideology and political guidelines for the future. So the Danes collectively are insecure about the future, and divided as to whether they want globalisation, Muslim newcomers, the EUconstitution etc.All in all, this book is a fascinating and well-written contribution to the current debate: Where do we come from? Who are we? And where are we heading

Folkeoplysning og ungdomsliv - et indlæg ud fra Søren Ehlers, Ungdomsliv (2000)

Folkeoplysning og ungdomsliv - et indlag ud fra Sorens Ehlers, ‘Ungdomsliv ’ (2000)[‘Folk’-Education and Youth: Reflections upon Soren Ehlers, ‘Ungdomsliv ’ (2000)]By Vagn WahlinSøren Ehlers, Ungdomsliv. Studier i den folkeoplysende virksomhed for unge i Danmark 1900 -1925 [The Youthful Years: Studies in the ‘Folk’- Education of the Young in Denmark 1900 - 1925] (Alinea, Copenhagen, 2000), 281 pp.In January 2000 there was considerable media discussion and an unusually vociferous gathering at Danmarks Padagogiske Universitet [The Danish University of Education] over university lecturer Soren Ehlers’ public defence of his thesis, where Ehlers convincingly demonstrates that the influence of Grundtvig and the Grundtvig legacy upon the education of Danish youth has been overrated seen in relation to the influence of relevant initiatives and trends at home and abroad. The book also offers an introduction to new approaches in educational research.This article critically addresses some major points arising from the study. In general, Ehlers’ readable presentation of an impressive quantity of comprehensive material and data deserves praise: firstly, as a solid introduction to and outline of a complicated educational debate and secondly, as a much needed platform for further investigations in the matter of upbringing, educating and morally influencing young people.Regrettably, the author’s approach is by the uncritical introduction of ill-fitting theory (I) from UNESCO’s concepts and categorisations (formal/non-formal/informal) of educational patterns; (II) from relatively recent Danish ethnological-anthropological theory about three dominant life-forms, namely (a) the self-employed - such as farmers, shop-keepers and minor craftsmen; (b) the wage-earning - such as industrial workers, unskilled workers and lower functionaries; and (c) the vocational – such as teachers, clergy, businessmen; and (III) from relatively recent Danish political science which divides society into four chief sectors, namely (a) the public - covering state, municipal and political organisations; (b) the private - profit-dominated businesses, factories and co-operatives; (c) the voluntary - non-profit-making organisations such as local sports associations, charities and Christian associations; and (d) the family and other social and local networks.All theories, I-III, are used in a pell-mell manner, with a stiff logic unconstrained by proper qualifications; and thus they weaken rather than illumine the study. What is worse: although, as Ehlers rightly argues, there is indeed need of a higher level of theoretically based research in the humanities and religious studies, it is to be feared that this book will rather scare researchers away than convince them to cultivate that theoretically-based approach

Grundtvig i politik op til 1830

Grundtvig in Politic until 1830-1831By Vagn WåhlinVagn Wåhlin discusses the Grundtvig text, .Political Considerations., re-printed above, which was written in the year of the 1930 revolution. In the Danish United Monarchy the European revolutions gave rise to a demand for a wider citizen participation in politics through parliamentary institutions and a demand for a solution to the national problem of the position of Schleswig between the Kingdom and Holstein. In addition, the debate led to a discussion of and a demand for an extension of the civil rights, including in particular a specification of the character and extent of the freedom of the press. The present article discusses Grundtvig’s treatment of these and other political subjects in the pamphlet mentioned.In the article, the concept of politics is defined as the attempt by an individual or a group to influence the authoritative distribution of the material and spiritual wealth of the society, a definition that comes close to Grundtvig’s own view. The article does not intend an exhaustive account of Grundtvig’s political views, but aims to show how Grundtvig’s attitude in a number of earlier writings has emerged through his occupation with current events and considerable social philosophers. The decisive thing for Grundtvig, before and especially around and after the time of the pamphlet discussed here, was to present and promote a form of government, on a historical and pragmatic basis, for the benefit and welfare of the whole people, where freedom and power balanced each other, where the rulers were responsive to the voice of an enlightened citizenry, and where confidence, love and responsibility rather than selfishness prevailed among the members of the society and determined the purposeful actions of the whole people - all under Divine Providence. It is pointed out how Grundtvig takes account of the character of the Danish society as an agrarian society by emphasizing the peasantry as ideally the fundamental and stabilizing element in the state. Consequently Grundtvig stresses the primary production as the foundation of society, structured through the mutual love in freedom and the folk culture of the people - traits common to the nation - as the basis of the interaction of the citizens and hence the balance between their equality and freedom. Grundtvig doubts the general possibility or desirability of equality, and is of the opinion that inequality is a natural condition of life, but that this condition is counterbalanced by the mutual fellow feeling of the citizens. Grundtvig uses the social pact idea in his definition of the distribution of power between the consultative function of the people, expressing the general will of the public, and the executive power of the King. The consultative power of the citizens finds its expression through the public media, dependent on freedom of the press, and Grundtvig brings up the concrete proposal that the Schleswig question should be solved by letting the Schleswigers give expression to the general public will in the public press. Grundtvig defends the right of the citizens to revolt the moment their rights, for example their right of property, are violated, but he dissociates himself from revolutions which, in his opinion, lead to tyranny, the opposite of freedom. The article explains how trust in God’s Providence together with love is the condition of the King’s and the people’s trust in the viability of the above-mentioned relationship. Grundtvig’s political views have their foundation in his emphasis on the importance of Christianity for the universal-historical development and for a people’s fulfillment of its own destiny in it

Grundtvig og hans virkningshistorie til international debat

Grundtvig and his effect story to international debate. Om Paul Röhrig (ed) »Um des Menschen willen - Grundtvigs geistiges Erbe als Herausforderung flir Erwachsenenbildung Schule, Kirche und soziales Leben«, s. 1-336, Deutscher Studien Verlag Weinheim 1991. ISBN 3-89271-252-2Reviewed by Vagn Wåhlin

Grundtvig og folkeviljen, Hal Koch og Krogerup Højskole

Grundtvig and the will of the people, Hal Koch and Krogerup folk schoolBy Vagn Wåhli

Folkelige og sociale bevægelser. Nyere forskningsretninger og kvalitative forståelser

Folkelige og sociale bevagelser. Nyere forskningsretninger og kvalitative forstaelser[Popular and Social Movements. Recent Research Approaches and Qualitative Interpretations]By Vagn WahlinHowever fascinating Grundtvig himself is as a central figure in 19th century Denmark, we, the citizens of the Third Millennium, have to ask why and how he is also interesting today and how his word, work and influence spread. Part of the answer to that fundamental question lies in the fact that he was the right man at the right place at the right time, with the right tidings to tell some clergymen and many peasant farmers on their dominant, middle size, family farms that they were the core of the nation. But part of the answer is to be found in the fact that his followers managed to elevate him to the influencing position as an inspirer and prophet of a broad popular movement that lasted for generations after his death. This popular, national and Christian movement of the Grundtvigians interacted in the social and political development of more than a hundred years with the other broad popular and ideological movements of Denmark such as the Labour Movement, the more Evangelical movement of the Home Mission, the Temperance movements, the Suffragists and women’s organizations, the associations of the world of sport, the political and youth organizations, etc. They were all active on the local level and soon also on the national level and, from the 1880s and onwards, established more firm organizations and institutions to deal with practical matters such as schools, boy scouts, community houses, soccer stadiums, magazines, newspapers, political associations, trade unions, as well as organized economic and anticapitalistic activities by co-operative dairies, breweries, slaughterhouses, export companies etc. As long as the agrarian sector of society (until around 1960-1970) dominated the national export to pay for the large import of society, that pattern of popular movements, also in the urban industry, influenced most of Danish history and life - and is still most influential in today’s post-modern society.During absolutism (1660-1848), organized social activities and associations were forbidden or strictly controlled. Yet a growing and organized public debate appeared in Copenhagen in late 18th century, followed by literary and semi-political associations amongst the enlightened, urban bourgeoisie. Around 1840 the liberals had organized themselves into urban associations and through newspapers. They were ready to take over the power of the society and the state, but could only do so through an alliance with the peasant farmers in 1846 followed by the German uprising in 1848 by the liberals in Schleswig-Holstein.In Denmark there existed a rather distinct dividing line - economic, cultural, social and in terms of political power - between two dominant sectors of society: Copenhagen, totally dominant in the urban sector, in contrast to the agrarian world, where 80% of the population lived.In the urban as well as in the agrarian sectors of society, the movements mostly appeared to be a local protest against some modernization or innovative introductions felt as a threat to religious or material interests - except for a few cases, where the state wanted an enlightened debate as in the Royal Agrarian Society of 1769. Whether the said local protesters won or lost, their self organization in the matter could lead to a higher degree of civil activity, which again could lead to the spread of their viewpoints and models of early organization. The introduction of civil liberties by the Constitution of 1849 made it more easy and acceptable for the broad masses of society to organize. However, with the spread of organizations and their institutions in the latter part of the 19th century, an ethical and social understanding arose that the power of the organized citizens should be extended from the special or vested interests of the founding group to the benefit of the whole of society and of all classes.So everybody who contributes positively, little or much, to the upholding and development of Danish society should be benefited and embraced by the popular movements. Around 1925 the Labour Movement as the last and largest in number and very influential had finally accepted that ethical point of view and left the older understanding of the suppressed army of toiling and hungry workers. The people, the ‘folk’, and the country of all classes had then been united into ‘Danmark for folket’ (a Denmark o f by and fo r the people).So while a social movement may be an organization of mere protest or vested interests or a short-lived phenomena, a ‘folkelig bevagelse’ (popular movement) became what it was at first - in the understanding of the majority of the Danes, but not in the eyes of the 19th century bourgeois and landowner elite - a positive label. It is still so today, though it is now questioned by many of the more internationally-minded members of the new elite. The word ‘folk’ in the term ‘folkelig bevagelse’ is so highly valued that nearly all political parties of today have included it in their names. For the majority of people, Danish and popular and movements stand for the organized societal activity of those who accept the language, history, culture including religion, landscapes, national symbols, etc. of Denmark and who incorporate all this as a valid part of their self-understanding just as they actively take part in the mutual responsibility for their fellow countrymen. This general attitude is most clearly demonstrated when it is severely breached by some individual or group.With the addition of the Church and the Christian dimension, we have what is the essence of Grundtvig’s heritage. Without this source of inspiration, the popular movements up to a generation ago would have been different and perhaps of less importance, and without the popular movements, Grundtvig’s influence would have been less important in Denmark of the last hundred years. We may best understand this as a process of mutual dependency and of a mutual societal interaction

Claus Bjørn, Grundtvig som politiker - Udgivet af Thorkild C.

Claus Bjørn, Grundtvig as politician - published by Thorkild C. LybyReviewed by Vagn Wåhlin and Kim Arne Pedersen

Politiske betragtninger med Blik paa Danmark og Holsten med noter

Political views with eye for Denmark and Holsten. With notesBy Vahn Wåhli

Ole Vind: Grundtvigs historiefilosofi. (Gyldendal, 1999). 645 s., 300 kr.

-