We are  introducing an important psychological dimension that adds depth to the Swedish concept of social egalitarianism. It involves the internalized pressure to conform, fear of standing out, and subconscious anxiety about not being sufficient — a "syndrome of deserving". This also ties to the paternalistic role of the Swedish state, where the "benevolent father" sets unclear expectations and citizens strive to meet them without fully understanding the rules.

Let's explore this psychological dynamic and its impact on citizenship, freedom, and submission to authority in Sweden.

The Psychological Dimension of Swedish Social Egalitarianism

In Sweden, social egalitarianism isn't just a political or economic ideal; it’s also a deeply ingrained psychological framework. This framework is shaped by internalized social pressures and a subconscious fear of inadequacy, which contrasts with more individualistic notions of freedom seen in countries like France.

I will frame this dimension in three key psychological aspects:

1. The Fear of Non-Conformity: Jantelagen and Angst
2. The Syndrome of Deserving: Subconscious Insecurity
3. The Paternalistic State: The Benevolent Father with Unclear Rules

1. The Fear of Non-Conformity: Jantelagen and Angst

At the core of Swedish social psychology is Jantelagen — the unwritten law that no one should think they are better than anyone else. While this promotes social equality, it also creates anxiety around standing out or breaking social norms.

• Jantelagen's Psychological Impact:
  Citizens internalize a fear of non-conformity. There’s a constant tension between wanting to express individuality and the pressure to fit in. This fear manifests as a subconscious anxiety (Angst) about being judged or ostracized for not following the collective’s expectations.

• Connection to German Angst:
  Similar to the German concept of "Angst" — a pervasive feeling of existential anxiety — Swedes experience a subtle, lingering fear of failing to meet societal expectations. This fear is not always explicit but exists as a subconscious undercurrent.

• Examples in Practice:

  • Reluctance to speak out in meetings or public forums: Swedes may hesitate to challenge authority or express dissent for fear of standing out.
  • Avoidance of risk-taking: There’s a tendency to avoid behaviors that could lead to failure or public embarrassment.
  • Social conformity: Even in personal choices, Swedes often follow societal norms (e.g., driving Volvos, wearing neutral colors, adhering to environmental practices) to blend in.

2. The Syndrome of Deserving: Subconscious Insecurity

Another psychological aspect of Swedish social egalitarianism is what can be described as a "syndrome of deserving" — a subconscious insecurity about being good enough to deserve privileges or rewards.

This insecurity stems from:

1. The Protestant work ethic:
   Rooted in Lutheranism, the Swedish mindset emphasizes hard work, modesty, and humility. There’s a cultural belief that one must constantly prove their worth to earn privileges.

2. The collective’s judgment:
   In a society where everyone is expected to be equal, standing out can trigger feelings of guilt or shame. People feel they must justify any perceived advantages or successes to avoid social disapproval.

3. Unclear boundaries of success:
   Unlike in more individualistic cultures (e.g., the U.S.), where success is openly celebrated, in Sweden, success must be downplayed. This creates a psychological tension:

   • “Am I deserving of this success?”
   • “Have I done enough to prove my worth to the collective?”

Syndrome of Deserving in Practice

This insecurity can be seen in various behavioral patterns:

• Reluctance to take credit for achievements: Swedes often downplay their accomplishments to avoid being seen as arrogant or better than others.
• Overcompensation through obedience to rules: There’s a need to follow the rules meticulously to prove one’s worth to the collective.
• Fear of failure: The syndrome of deserving creates a fear of falling short of expectations, leading to risk-aversion.

This dynamic can be linked to the paternalistic role of the state.

3. The Paternalistic State: The Benevolent Father with Unclear Rules

In Swedish social psychology, the state is often perceived as a benevolent, paternalistic figure — a “father” who cares for his citizens by providing security, welfare, and stability. However, the rules of this father figure are often unclear or unwritten, leading to subconscious anxiety and insecurity.

• The State as the “Benevolent Father”:
  The Swedish welfare state is seen as a protective entity that provides healthcare, education, and social security. Citizens are taught to trust the state’s judgment and submit to its regulations.

• Unclear Expectations:
  However, the expectations from this paternalistic state are vague and ever-shifting. There are implicit social rules that citizens are expected to follow, but these rules are rarely articulated.

  Examples:

  • Systembolaget (Alcohol Monopoly):
    The state controls access to alcohol, but the rules around why it exists and how it’s enforced can feel unclear. Citizens comply because they trust the state’s wisdom, even if they don’t fully understand the rationale.

  • Jantelagen (Unwritten Social Norms):
    The rules of social conformity aren’t codified in law, but they are enforced through social pressure. Citizens internalize these norms without explicit guidance, creating anxiety about whether they are doing enough to meet expectations.

The Psychological Impact of the Paternalistic State

This dynamic leads to three key psychological effects:

1. Anxiety about being insufficient:
   Citizens feel a subconscious pressure to live up to the state’s expectations, even if they don’t fully understand what those expectations are.

2. Over-reliance on the state:
   Citizens become dependent on the state to define social norms and provide guidance, even in areas of personal freedom (e.g., alcohol consumption, environmental behavior).

3. Passive citizenship:
   Swedes are less likely to challenge authority because they trust the state’s judgment, even if they feel uneasy about certain rules.

Summary: Psychological Dimensions of Swedish Social Egalitarianism

Conclusion: The Paradox of Swedish Freedom

The Swedish concept of freedom is deeply tied to social conformity and trust in the state. Unlike French freedom, which is about resisting authority, Swedish freedom is about trusting authority and fitting into the collective.

However, this trust comes with a psychological price:

• Fear of not conforming
• Subconscious anxiety about being insufficient
• Over-reliance on the state as a benevolent yet ambiguous guide