¹ See Huntington, Samuel P., ‘The Change to Change’, Comparative Politics, 111 (1971). 282–322.Google Scholar

² Toffler, Alvin, Future Shock (London: Pan Books, 1971), pp. 27–41.Google Scholar

³ Benn, Anthony Wedgwood, quoted in Observer, 26 05 1968.Google Scholar

⁴ Huntington, Samuel P., ‘Post-industrial Politics: How Benign Will It Be?’ Comparative Politics, VI (1974), 163–91, pp. 164–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵ Lasch, Christopher, ‘Towards a Theory of Post-industrial Society’, in Hancock, M. Donald and Sjoberg, Gideon, eds., Politics in the Post-welfare State (New York: Columbia University Press, 1972), p. 36.Google Scholar

⁶ Bell, Daniel. ‘The Measurement of Knowledge and Technology’ in Sheldon, Eleanor and Moore, Wilbert, eds., Indicators of Social Change (New York: Russell Sage, 1968), p. 152.Google Scholar

⁷ The division between ‘primary’ (agricultural), ‘secondary’ (industrial) and ‘tertiary’ (service) economies is discussed in Fourastie, J.. Le Grand espoir du XX^e siècle (Paris: Gallimard. 1949).Google Scholar

⁸ Galbraith, John Kenneth. The New Industrial State (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1967).Google Scholar

⁹ Huntington, , ‘Post-industrial Polities’, pp. 166, 190.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Reich, Charles A., The Greening of America (London: Allen Lane, 1971).Google Scholar

¹¹ Marcuse, Herbert. One-Dimensional Man (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1964).Google Scholar

¹² See Hayward, Jack, ‘Institutional Inertia and Political Impetus in France and Britain’ (Political Studies Association conference paper, Oxford, 1975).Google Scholar

¹³ Bell is the originator of the term ‘post-industrial’ society, Brzezinski's choice is ‘technetronic’ society, and Toffler, prefers ‘super-industrial’Google Scholar society. Despite differences in emphasis, their descriptions of socio-economic change are not radically different.

¹⁴ The Times, ‘Special Report on Sweden’, 24 10 1974.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Edgren, G., Faxen, K.-O. and Odhner, C.-E., ‘Wage, Growth and the Distribution of Income’. Swedish Journal of Economics, LXXI (1969), 133–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar The fact that the authors of this article are the chief economists of the three main industrial pressure groups, representing wage labourers, salaried workers and employers, is itself a fascinating example of Swedish elite consensus to be discussed below.

¹⁶ Data cited in Wheeler, Christopher W., ‘The Decline of Deference: The Tension between Participation and Effectiveness in Organized Group Life in Sweden’ (unpublished paper, Beloit College, 11 1972), pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Russe, Bruce M. et al. , World Handbook of Political and Social Indicators (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1964), pp. 184–6.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Field, G. Lowell and Higley, John. Elites in Developed Societies: Theoretical Reflections on an Initial Stage in Norway, Sage Professional Papers (London: Sage, 1972), p. 37.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Tomasson, Richard F., Sweden: Prototype of Modern Society (New York: Random House. 1970). pp. 291–2.Google Scholar

²⁰ Wheeler, . ‘The Decline of Deference’, pp. 12–31.Google Scholar

²¹ Meidner, Rudolf, ‘The Trade Union Movement and the Public Sector’Google Scholar, speech delivered at the twentieth convention of Public Services International (PSI), New York, 1973.

²² Meidner, , ‘The Trade Union Movement and the Public Sector’.Google Scholar

²³ See Hancock, M. Donald. ‘Post-welfare Modernization in Sweden: The Quest for Cumulative Rationality and Equality’Google Scholar, in Hancock, and Sjoberg, , eds., Politics in the Post-welfare StateGoogle Scholar, and Hancock, M. Donald. Sweden: The Politics of Post-industrial Change (Hinsdale, Ill.: Dryden Press. 1972).Google Scholar

²⁴ Hancock, M. Donald, ‘Elite Images and System Change in Sweden’, in Lindberg, Leon, ed., Politics and the Future of Industrial Society (New York: David McKay, 1976).Google Scholar

²⁵ Toffler, , Future Shock, pp. 105–7.Google Scholar

²⁶ Samuelsson, K., From Great Power to Welfare State (London: Allen and Unwin, 1968), chap. 5.Google Scholar

²⁷ Mukherjee, Santosh, Making Labour Markets Work, PEP Broadsheet 532 (London: Political and Economic Planning, 1972), p. 88.Google Scholar

²⁸ Quoted in Heclo, Hugh, Modern Social Politics in Britain and Sweden (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974), p. 139.Google Scholar

²⁹ Rehn, Gosta, Arbetet, 5 09 1959.Google Scholar

³⁰ Myrdal, Alva, Towards EqualityGoogle Scholar, First Report of the Working Party on Equality set up by the Swedish Social Democratic party and the Swedish Confederation of Trade Unions (Stock holm: Prisma, 1971), p. 56.

³¹ Myrdal, , Towards Equality, p. 62.Google Scholar

³² Mukherjee, , Making Labour Markets Work, p. 133.Google Scholar

³³ See Castles, Francis G., ‘The Political Functions of Organized Groups: The Swedish Case’, Political Studies, XXI (1973), 26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁴ Anton, Thomas J., ‘Policy-making and Political Culture in Sweden’, Scandinavian Political Studies, IV (1969), p. 93.Google Scholar

³⁵ For a polemic against the supposed socialism of Sweden, see Hufford, Larry, ‘Sweden: the Myth of Socialism’, Young Fabian Pamphlet (London: Fabian Society, 1973).Google Scholar

³⁶ This and the following paragraph are based on Castles, Francis G., ‘Swedish Social Democracy: The Conditions of Success’, Political Quarterly, XLVI (1975), 171–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁷ Stjernquist, N., ‘Sweden: Stability or Deadlock?’, in Dahl, Robert A., ed., Political Opposition in Western Democracies (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966), pp. 116–46.Google Scholar

³⁸ The peculiarities of Swedish political development are discussed in Castles, ‘Swedish Social Democracy: The Conditions of Success’, and also in Castles, ‘Harrington Moore's Thesis and Swedish Political Development’, Government and Opposition, VIII (1973), 313–31.Google Scholar

³⁹ This term is suggested by Stein Rokkan in his description of the Norwegian political system as one in which policy-making is as much a product of corporate pressures exerted through organized groups as of electoral pressures exerted through the ballot box. See Rokkan, Stein, ‘Norway: Numerical Democracy and Corporate Pluralism’Google Scholar, in Dahl, , ed., Political Opposition in Western Democracies, pp. 105–10.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Ruin, Olof, ‘Participatory Democracy and Corporativism: The Case of Sweden’, Scandinavian Political Studies, IX (1974), 171–84, p. 180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴¹ Hancock, , ‘Elite Images and System Change in Sweden’.Google Scholar