Book review: En värmländsk Hitler (A Hitler from Värmland)

 I just finished reading Anna-Lena Lodenius book "En värmländsk Hitler - Birger Furuguråd och de första svenska nazisterna" (A Hitler from Värmland - Birger Furugård and the first Swedish nazis). This book deals with a often forgotten character in Swedish political history Birger Furugård (1887–1961), who from the early 1920's until the early 1940's was a leading member of the Swedish nationalsocialist movement. The book mainly focus on his activity between the years c.1923–1941, when nationalsocialism was rising in Germany and the outbreak of the war. Even though it is a popular science book, it is still worth a read from two perspectives. 

Firstly, I think that a well-done biography not only contributes to the understanding of a historical actor but also the social climate that they lived in. Lodenius book does exactly this, where she departs from Furugårds personal archives and the works further in situating him both in a Swedish political context as well as a north-European one. Through reading this book we do not only get to known Furugård a bit better, but the tales of how was often mocked in the press also tells us something about the political climate of the time. It is thus both a tale of how Swedish nazism came to be a atleast discussed phenomena as well as the resistance invoked by it. 

Secndly, I think that Lodenius focus on primary sources is quite sucessful. When I as a professional historian holds a popular science book in my hand, one of the key questions is if this is written by secondary sources (i.e. previous literature) or by the writer own work with the archive. Since this is a case of the latter, the risk for misstakes is significantly lower and it therefore contains less dubious arguments. This intersection between utilizing secondary literature and the historical sources works particularly well in Lodenius work, where she manage to keep both the individual and the structure at the same time. 

Did I learn something whilst reading this book? Absolutely. The book is filled with interesting often forgotten cases, such as that Furugård kept his own private army (it was even called the SA) and that this often took somewhat drastic measurements in order to protect his party. It also contains interesting notions of how even though the general public would not embrace the nationalsocialist politics, many people from the leading parts of society - such as the police and the army - actually quite willingly took part in both creating the party as well as advocate for it's cause. 

Another key aspect of Lodenius book is that it challenges often made assumptions about Swedens past during the heydays of nazism. In public schools it is often taught that Sweden was rather pro-nazi during the second world war, but this assumption is challenged. In her presentation of the elections it becomes clear that the Swedish nazi-parties did not gain many votes and also that their politics invoked a deep resistance from both the rising workers movement and liberal newspaper. On the otherhand it is also described how Furugård somewhat was allowed to be part of the "finer parts of politics", such as writing an editorial for a swedish leading news paper following Hitlers election to germanys chancellor in 1933. It is these often double line that Lodenius catch rather well, were on the one hand society condemend nazism but on the other hand were also keen to discuss it. The latter part is perhaps of the zeitgeist of the time, where the nationalsocialists ideology where not fully seen as implented yet, and thus created a interest in the ideology.

If one would be critical towards Lodenius book it can mainly be criticized for how she describes Furugård and his movement. Starting with the movement, Lodenius goes not into a discussion of what nationalsocialism meant in a  Swedish context and instead only focus on it's highlighting of domestic movements rather than transnational dimensions. This becomes a hard line to maintain, since Lodenius also shows a transnational dimension through numerous examples of how Furugård met Hitler. When it comes to how she handles Furugård it can be stated that biographies often is something that is hard to write, due to the risk of the historian falling in love with their object. This is something I have somewhat of experience with in my writing on a contemporary to Furugård, Hinke Bergegren. Lodenius does however not fall into this trap but remains critical towards Furugård throughout the book. Sometimes this critique however goes to far, where she often describes his rethorics as rambling and hard to follow. But. This rethoric also lead to him actually gaining followers, and one can thus ask themselves if this is an entirely true description. 

Despite these shortcomings, it is still a book well-worth a read for those curious to another another narrative on Swedish nationalsocialism than that is often discussed in general debate