sweden is a regular euro liberal country that still has a reputation of being a good socdem country because during the Palme years 40-50 years ago it was better than most euro countries, and somehow it’s still riding high on that reputation. since the 90s the whole social welfare system has been dismantled, public utilities have been privatized, and now it’s just another laughable euro country ruled by unholy coalitions of neoliberals, populists and blairites.
if you want to see a “socialist-capitalist” country, there are a couple of socialist countries in east asia that implemented some market reforms in the 80s/90s to build up productive forces while still having a socialist control of the economy. they seem to be doing okay.
Sweden is social democratic, which is just capitalism with some extra crumbs given to the poor. It’s not socialist as the workers do not own the means of production nor is there any large scale political machine pushing to do that.
Capitalism with broader safety nets is still Capitalism, not Socialism. Definitely far from Communism, yes, but also far from Socialism. This isn’t about “ideological purity” or other such nonsense, there is a material difference in trajectory that impacts the whole of society.
Can you explain why the fundamental control of society has changed hands in the Nordic Countries from the people with the most wealth and ownership of Capital, to the workers? If not, it’s still Capitalist.
The way the layman uses the term communism to describe a political movement or a hardcore version of socialism makes me cringe
When I don’t like something it’s socialism. And if I like it even less, it’s communism.
SexUnderCommunism
Is it very incorrect to consider socialism as a deliberate pathway to communism? Asking sincerely
You mean socialism = soon to be communism? Sweden is a socialist-capitalist country, very far away from communism.
sweden is a regular euro liberal country that still has a reputation of being a good socdem country because during the Palme years 40-50 years ago it was better than most euro countries, and somehow it’s still riding high on that reputation. since the 90s the whole social welfare system has been dismantled, public utilities have been privatized, and now it’s just another laughable euro country ruled by unholy coalitions of neoliberals, populists and blairites.
if you want to see a “socialist-capitalist” country, there are a couple of socialist countries in east asia that implemented some market reforms in the 80s/90s to build up productive forces while still having a socialist control of the economy. they seem to be doing okay.
Sweden is social democratic, which is just capitalism with some extra crumbs given to the poor. It’s not socialist as the workers do not own the means of production nor is there any large scale political machine pushing to do that.
Capitalism with broader safety nets is still Capitalism, not Socialism. Definitely far from Communism, yes, but also far from Socialism. This isn’t about “ideological purity” or other such nonsense, there is a material difference in trajectory that impacts the whole of society.
Can you explain why the fundamental control of society has changed hands in the Nordic Countries from the people with the most wealth and ownership of Capital, to the workers? If not, it’s still Capitalist.
Governments and doing stuff, etc.