Question for PPP (or other Swedish forum members)

[Jebus]

Although Sweden used to be a very religious country, it now has the world's highest percentage of atheists. In light of this, I was surprised to see that nearly all the public holidays are still Christian holidays, such as Christmas, Easter, Pentecost, Christ Ascension etc. Has this been debated at all in Sweden? I can imagine many Swedes don't see the point in keeping these holidays and would prefer to dedicate the holidays to the memory of great Swedes, such as Olof Palme.

This is probably the case in other predominantly atheist countries also, so please comment if this applies to your country as well.

[PPP]

Indeed a very good question. The debate about getting rid of them all hasn't been taken on a state level yet, as far as I know, but it IS still ongoing amongst the Swedish people and although the holidays are for the most part based in a Christian tradition they have clearly evolved into something else nowadays (the Swedish wiki for Easter, for example, is divided into Christian Easter and Swedish Easter). An example of the double standard: Schools have closed on many of the above mentioned holidays but they are not allowed to celebrate them as we are secular by law.
I would agree with you Jebus that many Swedes feel we should rid ourselves from these dated legacies. I can only speculate about why we have not already: that awful wording "but it's a tradition" + people get a day off and sometimes free sh*t and food....
I think it will happen in a not too distant future though. The trend is that they are gradually getting fewer. In 2004 we took away Whit Monday in favor of our National Day as a public holiday. As recent as earlier this year a leading newspaper had a suggestion about turning the holidays into an extra holiday week, in it's debate/people's comment section.

[Jebus]

Very interesting and thanks for the reply. I can see why Christmas and Easter are deeply ingrained in the Swedish tradition, but Pentecost??? I bet most Swedes don't even know the biblical events behind that holiday.

[PPP]

I would say the younger generations don't know the biblical events behind -any- of the holidays.. I hope we rid ourselves of them all soon.

The holidays, not the kids....

[Jebus]

Indeed PPP. I like to put Sweden forward as a shining example of how a religious population can achieve reason in only a couple of generations. What might the reasons be for such a transition? A strong education system, for sure, but what might some of the other reasons be?

Is it because many of the most religious emigrated?
Is it somehow correlated to lack of patriotism (religious people are usually very nationalistic (patriotic) but I don't think this was ever the case in Sweden.
Comparatively weak extended family ties (I don't think Swedes have been as close to their uncles, aunts and cousins, as people in other countries)

[PPP]

I've given this matter some thought and at first I went about it in a manner trying to explain how the Swedes became secular; with the shift of power and money from the, then catholic system, to the king and state (Gustaf Vasa did it for the money - mainly) and a protestant religion.
But I think the question shouldn't actually be how we did it - but rather why haven't the USA? As the US seems to be an example of a rich country where religion isn't on as steep a decline as it should be. Here's an article that I think proposes one possible explanation:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the ... -religious

[Jebus]

That's a pretty good article. There is no doubt that there is a negative correlation between economic growth and religiosity. The U.S. has historically had one of the largest income gaps in the developed world while Sweden has had one of the smallest. However, what I fail to understand is why there are so many religious rich people in the U.S. The same is true where I live in Mauritius.

I like the final paragraph of the article: "It has often been pointed out that poor people in America tend to vote against their economic interests by voting for Republican politicians who are interested in further concentrating wealth in the hands of the affluent. They do so, in part, because the Republicans appeal to their religious propensity. That propensity is further fed by the increasing insecurity in the lives of the poor."

[miniboes]

Perhaps it is exactly what is described in that last paragraph. The US is honestly a terrible democracy, for due to the way electoral colleges work there are only two parties that people will actually vote for. Both parties happen to be on the right side of the political spectrum, therefore prefer financial freedom over income equality. Low incomes keep people religious, high religion makes them vote for conservatives, conservatives keep income disparity high. There seems to be a vicious cycle here.