| Summary: | The aim of this essay is to investigate and evaluate the arguments made by municipal politicians in Ulricehamn, regarding the planned Knowledge and Culture Centre. A part from the search for these arguments, I also investigated the attitudes among politicians regarding municipal culture investments in general. I furthermore investigated whether any national, regional, or local culture-political strategies were important in the local debate. The time frame within which the local political culture debate was investigated was from 1997 until present time 2002. The investigation methods used were partly a study of official documents such as political protocols, two articles from the local newspaper, and a clean copy from a web chat, and partly a qualitative study I sent a question regarding the planned Culture Centre to every political party active in the Ulricehamn municipal assembly. The question was sent and mainly answered via email. I have chosen the knowledge-sociological theory, where the principle consists of the belief that our knowledge correlates with our interests. My results indicate that the main positive arguments regarding the proposed Culture Centre were the presumed good and positive content of the proposed Centre, the Centre would contribute to the development of the municipality, and the proposed Centre would educate the members of the local community. The most common negative arguments made were the lack of information regarding the project, and a concern over the cost. I have also come to the conclusion that culture-political strategies only played a very moderate part in the local debate. In my study, searching for the different persisting attitudes regarding municipal culture investments, I found three parallel outlooks. I call them Culture as pleasure, Culture as identity, and Culture as education. === Uppsatsnivå: D
|
|---|
