What Makes Scandinavia Different?

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
47,642
Reaction score
9,313
Location
Aboard the Nostalgia For Infinity
What accounts for the Nordic countries’ strong welfare states? Hint: it’s not white homogeneity.

There’s a reason the Scandinavian welfare states are still the envy of many across the world. Even decades into a neoliberal project to reform them, Scandinavia sports relatively high income equality, large, tax-financed welfare programs, powerful unions, and relatively low unemployment rates.

Neoliberal textbooks tell us that the only way to societal prosperity is through low tax rates, deregulated business, and cut-throat competitive labor markets. Yet despite failing to meet the metrics of the Anglo-American variety of capitalism, Scandinavian countries stubbornly continue to prosper, and regularly come out on top of the global indexes of happiness and quality of life.

It is no surprise, therefore, to find neoliberals and conservatives devoting considerable intellectual energy to delegitimizing the “Nordic Model” of public welfare.

Earlier this year, the Institute of Economic Affairs, a British neoliberal think tank, devoted an entire book to Scandinavian “unexceptionalism.” The aim was to explain away the success story of the Nordic welfare states, arguing in classical Hayekian fashion that the success of the Nordic countries predates the era of public welfare, and that anything exceptional and successful about it has vanished since then.

Meanwhile in the US, where the Bernie Sanders campaign has thrown ideas of Nordic social democracy into the political mainstream, National Review’s Kevin Williamson has adopted the opposite strategy. In a couple of recent pieces he acknowledges the continuing exceptionalism of the Nordic experience and admits that the Nordic countries have indeed been relatively successful until very recently.

But in a strange plot twist Williamson also racializes the Nordic experience, tying the success of social-democratic policies to the alleged whiteness and homogeneity of the Nordic countries, thus undermining its credibility as a source of inspiration for American progressives committed to antiracism.

Rest in link.

Haven't been able to read it all yet, but quite an interesting piece.
 
Hint: it’s not white homogeneity.

These politicians are very politically correct to the point of stupidity, these countries are suffering under their own liberal bs, These people that biatch & complain don't integrate, they expect society to adopt their norms and there are quite a few dumb fsck politicians supporting this. If you say anything about this you get labeled rasistiskt, you get exposed, you lose your job. These people are so afraid to just speak their mind & cower in fear when any accusations are leveled at them.
 
These politicians are very politically correct to the point of stupidity, these countries are suffering under their own liberal bs, These people that biatch & complain don't integrate, they expect society to adopt their norms and there are quite a few dumb fsck politicians supporting this. If you say anything about this you get labeled rasistiskt, you get exposed, you lose your job. These people are so afraid to just speak their mind & cower in fear when any accusations are leveled at them.

The new McCarthysm....
 
I'm curious OrbitalDawn, have you ever been to and spent significant time in any of these countries? I have, I also have friends there and family so I get my news and information about these countries directly from people that live there. I'm also going to be moving to Finland so I've done my homework.

I know exactly why their social system has worked in the past and why the government of Finland is being forced to consider welfare reforms.

Things are not so rosy in these countries as you would like to think. Despite that, I still love Finland and the Finnish people.
 
So, can someone give a short answer? Why is it not white homogeneity ?

BTW, if I could land a job in Norway, I'd be there yesterday.
 
I'm curious OrbitalDawn, have you ever been to and spent significant time in any of these countries? I have, I also have friends there and family so I get my news and information about these countries directly from people that live there. I'm also going to be moving to Finland so I've done my homework.

I know exactly why their social system has worked in the past and why the government of Finland is being forced to consider welfare reforms.

Things are not so rosy in these countries as you would like to think. Despite that, I still love Finland and the Finnish people.

I've been in Germany, Switzerland and France. Heading to Scandinavia on holiday soon. Also have friends, ex-colleagues and family spread out over Europe, including Scandinavia.

Getting anecdotal information "directly from people that live there" doesn't mean much, frankly. The authors of the article are also from there, btw.

And there's nothing wrong with reforms if they're necessary and make for a more sustainable system.

Congrats on going to Finland, btw. Looks like an awesome country. :)
 
I'm also going to be moving to Finland so I've done my homework.

I know exactly why their social system has worked in the past and why the government of Finland is being forced to consider welfare reforms.

Things are not so rosy in these countries as you would like to think. Despite that, I still love Finland and the Finnish people.

Finland isn't a part of Scandinavia. Scandivavia is only Denmark, Sweden and Norway. The article does refered to "The Nordic Countries", which Finland is a part of.
 
So, can someone give a short answer? Why is it not white homogeneity ?

BTW, if I could land a job in Norway, I'd be there yesterday.

This was my view for many years, but not limited to Norway, as I'd only been to Denmark and Sweden before then...and yeah, when the opportunity knocked on my door I couldn't let it go by.

I hear Voicy is looking for a Man Servant.

:D

Also, I pay a metric f#%¤ton of tax here, but I don't mind it because it doesn't go to Nklanda & I dont need medical aids or armed response or theft insurance or any of that nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Maybe people who believe Scandinavia has been such success regarding high taxes and a welfare state should read this:

Free-market policies and pre-existing cultural norms were responsible for the economic and social success of Scandinavian countries. Contrary to popular belief, high taxes and extensive spending on welfare then stunted economic progress and eroded the region’s previously strong work ethic.

In Scandinavian Unexceptionalism: Culture, Markets and the Failure of Third-Way Socialism, Nima Sanandaji debunks the belief commonly held by those on the political left, that the impressive social and economic outcomes of the Nordic region is justification for increased welfare spending and higher taxes.

The desirable aspects of Scandinavian societies, such as low income inequality, low levels of poverty and high economic growth predated the development of a generous welfare state and the explosion of taxation over the 30 years from 1960 had a damaging effect on business and job creation.

Key figures:

Sweden fell from 4th to 13th richest nation in the world between 1975 and the mid-1990s

Annual working hours in Denmark fell by 32 per cent between 1950 and 1990
Between 1950 and 2000, Sweden’s net job creation in the private sector was zero despite a population increase of two million
Wealth inequality in Sweden exceeded that of the UK, US and Canada in 2008
Before the development of the welfare state in Sweden – from 1870-1936 – Sweden was the fastest growing economy in the world.

Key findings:

Business and job creation – Economic growth in the Nordic region was dampened by high levels of welfare spending and a heavy tax burden. Despite a population increase in Sweden of two million between 1950 and 2000, net job creation in the private sector was zero and the rate of business formation has been weak at best.

Taxation – Until 1960, tax levels in Sweden were similar to elsewhere in the developed world. Over the past five decades Scandinavia has seen a substantial escalation in both direct and indirect taxes. Between 1965 and 2013, the level of direct tax in Finland rose from 30 to 44 per cent of GDP and the level of taxes raised indirectly rose from 8 to 22 per cent in the same period. A similar trend can be seen in Denmark, Norway and Sweden.

Social outcomes - A generous welfare state has led to a deterioration in the population’s impressive work ethic and individuals have become increasingly dependent on state welfare. Since the early 1990s, around one-fifth of working age Swedes have been supported by unemployment, sick leave or early retirement benefits. Despite being a country with unusually good health, Norway spends on average 5 per cent of GDP on disability and sickness benefits compared with 2.4 per cent in the UK.

Health outcomes – Social democrats argue that Scandinavia’s health outcomes are a result of the extensive welfare state. There is no evidence for this. Before the development of the extensive welfare state in the 1960s, Scandinavian countries occupied four of the top five places in the OECD mortality league table. By 2005, after 40 years of extensive welfare provision, they had slipped back dramatically relative to other countries.

Inequality – Scandinavia enjoyed low levels of inequality long before the introduction of a large public sector, high levels of welfare and high taxes. The belief that high spending on welfare leads to greater equality fails to stand up to scrutiny as countries such as Slovenia and the Czech Republic enjoy even income distributions whilst having lower taxes. Furthermore, in 2008 Sweden exhibited a higher level of wealth inequality than the UK, US and Canada.

Social norms – The welfare state has eroded social norms. In the 1981-1984 World Value Survey, 82 per cent of Swedes agreed with the statement that “claiming benefits to which you are not entitled is never justifiable”. By the 2010-2014 survey, only 55 per cent agreed with this statement.

Migrant workers – The development of the welfare state has eroded opportunities for migrants. Even the most qualified immigrants struggle to find suitable jobs in Scandinavian countries. Highly educated immigrants in Finland and Sweden have an unemployment rate over 8 percentage points higher than native born Finns and Swedes of similar educational background. In Anglo-Saxon countries, the unemployment rates of the respective groups are similar.

Comparisons with emigrants – It is a consistent finding that descendants of Nordic migrants to the US have higher incomes and lower poverty rates than those who remain.

http://www.iea.org.uk/in-the-media/...is-not-due-to-high-taxes-and-welfare-spending
 
These politicians are very politically correct to the point of stupidity, these countries are suffering under their own liberal bs, These people that biatch & complain don't integrate, they expect society to adopt their norms and there are quite a few dumb fsck politicians supporting this. If you say anything about this you get labeled rasistiskt, you get exposed, you lose your job. These people are so afraid to just speak their mind & cower in fear when any accusations are leveled at them.

Yes - well many Scandinavians are waking up to the liberal BS being peddled bu their politcians.

For example, the Danish People's Party came 2nd in the recent Danish general election: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-Peoples-Party-surge-in-general-election.html
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X