Why does socialism work in sweden

For many years, one of the main political issues across Europe has been large-scale immigration from non-western largely Muslim cultures. International Policy Analysis, Berlin, dec. With the global rise of "Islamic terrorism" from groups like ISIS, this anti-immigrant sentiment has gained popularity. In , Sweden's integration policy entitled all permanent residents, including immigrants, to the same rights as Swedish citizens. Social Democracy in Sweden.

The SAP's idea of multiculturalism has now left a lot of Swedish citizens feeling unprotected against the "perceived" threat of the growing Muslim communities within Sweden's borders. This has resulted in higher levels of discrimination against these communities.

Many immigrants are now finding it hard to enter the labor market. Immigrant unemployment further weakens the welfare state because, instead of contributing to the tax system, these communities are largely dependent on its tax driven welfare benefits.

Despite Europe's waning support for social democracy, if Americans were to adopt this form of government a great portion of its society would be lifted out of poverty. The problems plaguing American society today, such as high unemployment, homelessness, and wage stagnation would be drastically reduced if Americans were to implement this system. If Americans looked past their fear of socialism, turned away from capitalism, and embraced the Swedish model, American society would finally experience freedom.

Not the kind of freedom that comes from military action, but the kind of freedom that comes from not having to choose between paying for groceries or paying for medicine. The narrative that Americans are constantly taught is that the United States was founded under capitalist ideals and that any form of socialism would undermine it. The 's' word: a short history of an American tradition New York: Verso, The more the country moves toward socialism, the farther away from the founding principles they will go.

This, however, couldn't be further from the truth. American politicians use the word socialism as an insult. They constantly talk about the dangers of socialism, despite their lack of knowledge of what socialism really is.

Fox News constantly runs stories about President Barack Obama's alleged socialist takeover of America. This type of fear-mongering in America is not new. Even President Harry S. Truman was accused of being a socialist, for proposing an anti-lynching law which addressed the unlawful killing of African Americans in the south in Any time a politician proposes a change to the status quo, the standard "insult" is to label them a socialist.

Despite this propaganda, America has always had a history of socialist and social-democratic thinking. This is not to say that America is a socialist nation, because it is not, but the belief that socialism has never been used throughout its history is false. From the founding fathers through the current day, America has constantly been shaped by socialist ideals and activism.

One of these founding fathers was Thomas Paine. Thomas Paine was instrumental in America's victory against the British during the revolutionary war. Paine believed in socialist ideals before the idea of socialism was created. Thomas Paine wrote many books. One of these, "The Rights of Man", outlined his idea of a socialist society. In it, he discussed budgets for social security, child welfare programs, public housing, and earned income credits. Above all, Paine believed in social justice.

He explained that those with property owed a debt to society, a debt that should be collected and then redistributed to those lacking property. These ideas were hardly popular at the time, and are certainly not popular now.

However, one of America's most famous founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, had this to say about this socialist. This brings us to America's sixteenth president, Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln is often regarded as one of America's greatest presidents. What most Americans don't realize is that he was heavily influenced by socialist ideals. He also quoted Karl Marx in many of his writings and speeches.

During Lincoln's first inaugural address, he stated, "Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. This is one of the core beliefs found in the Communist Manifesto written by Karl Marx, who is considered the father of the socialist movement.

Lincoln was well versed in Marx's ideas, because he constantly read the New York Tribune. This was the foremost left-leaning paper at the time. Karl Marx wrote articles for the New York Tribune.

Lincoln was such a fan of this paper that he even referred to the editor, Horace Greeley, as "friend Greeley. Lincoln's ties to Marx didn't end with the New York Tribune. He also became good friends with some of Marx's closest associates after they escaped Europe as political refugees. These included Joseph Weydemeyer and August Willich.

He even commissioned them as officers in the Union Army during the Civil War. This means that two noted socialists helped preserve the Union during the American Civil War. Throughout Lincoln's presidency, he routinely sought counsel from socialists. Lincoln was so closely associated with socialists that, when he won re-election in , Karl Marx wrote him a letter of congratulation, which Marx said in his own words, "Lincoln so courteously answered.

The socialist counsel Lincoln received can also be seen in some of the policies he enacted. This is evident with his desire to free the slaves, but also in the creation of the Homestead Act of , which promised "Land for the landless. This Act allowed any adult citizen to claim a acre parcel of land in the public domain, for free. If asked, Abraham Lincoln would never have called himself a socialist. However, America's sixteenth president, who epitomizes the American ideal, kept an inner circle of socialist friends, constantly read Karl Marx, and led an administration influenced by socialism.

Socialism was such a major theme of Lincoln's presidency that history can safely say he was a socialist. Following this trail of American socialism takes us to the election of This was considered a realigning moment in US politics. The country started moving away from limited federal and state involvement in economic affairs and embraced a more human and democratic approach to government.

The great depression had consumed the country. FDR was the first president to fully embrace the socialist model. Coincidentally, he was also the only president to win an election four terms in row. It seems America's most socialist president was also its most electable.

FDR won a landslide campaign by securing Compare that with one of America's most right-leaning presidents, George W. Bush, who actually lost the popular vote to runner-up Al Gore in FDR understood the will of the people. FDR constantly read election statistics, so he understood that these socialist policies were very popular with the people.

Thomas and Rosner were socialists who frequently contributed to The Nation magazine, a socialist publication at the time.

FDR's New Deal created social security, unemployment compensation, jobs programs, and agricultural assistance. These ideas were borrowed from the socialist platform. Once again, history has shown that socialism works, and when used correctly is very popular with the American people. While FDR's New Deal got all the credit for socialist ideals at the national level, millions of Americans continued to vote in the s and s at the state level for socialist politicians.

La Guardia followed FDR's example and hired many prominent socialists to his staff. Another state-level politician elected on the socialist platform was Daniel Webster Hoan, who won the mayoral race of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. According to Hoan, the best impact a socialist could make was at the municipal level.

Once elected, he immediately went to work developing municipal programs to feed the poor and to provide them with housing. Under Hoan's leadership, Time magazine described Milwaukee as "perhaps the best governed city in the U. This brings us to one of the most important examples of socialism's effect in America, the fight for freedom of speech.

Amendment I, Bill of Rights. President Woodrow Wilson's administration actively engaged in government censorship. Wilson's administration constantly suppressed domestic dissent. His decision to enter into WWI was very unpopular. In response, his administration passed the Espionage Act of This act made it a crime to express views or to convey information that could be construed by the government as any sort of threat to the war effort.

Censoring opposition to the war was the law's true intent. Journalists were arrested all over the country for writing anything negative about the war or Wilson's administration. Punishments ranged from two years upwards to twenty years. The Christian Science Monitor in stated, "What appeared to be an excess of radicalism Victor Berger, founding member of the Social Democratic Party of America, and editor to The Nation , quickly became the target of Wilson's administration.

As the editor, Berger was cited for "twenty-six overt acts" of delivering public speeches or publishing newspaper articles that were against the war effort. Despite his conviction, Berger was so popular with the people that they elected him to a seat in Congress. He was not allowed to sit, however, due to his conviction.

It wasn't until the next president, Warren G. Harding, took office that Berger's indictment was dismissed. This allowed him to finally sit in Congress, when he was elected for a third time. While in office, Berger campaigned for free speech and a free press, and proposed that "Congress put teeth into the first amendment.

His work ensured that state sponsored censorship would always be a violation of the constitution. It is hard to believe that modern news stations like Fox News owe their ability to openly criticize the president to a socialist. If Woodrow Wilson had won in his fight against free speech, stations such as Fox News would not exist today.

Instead of criticizing socialism, Fox News should be thanking it. Freedom of speech and freedom of press may have been given to America by its founding fathers, but it was a socialist politician who made sure that it could never be taken away. A true democracy will take every one of its citizens into account when making decisions. The best definition of a democracy would be:.

A society where, based on a belief in the inherent equality of all, all society's members are entitled individually and collectively to determine their own destinies, subject to principle of equitable sharing that requires all the benefits and detriments of social life to be fairly distributed among society's members.

Equitable sharing, distributing the benefits and detriments of democratic society. Lanham: Lexington Books, American society falls short of this definition. Money is the true political voice in this country. Those with the most money make the most decisions. This is an oligarchy. An oligarchy can never be a democracy.

An oligarchy is a government in which a small group exercises control. Often time, that control is for corrupt and selfish purposes. The basis of the case was that freedom of press prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by non-profit corporations.

The Supreme Court of the United States extended those benefits to "for-profit" corporations. This decision effectively transferred power away from ordinary people towards extremely wealthy corporations. It violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now it's just an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president of being elected president.

And the same thing applies to governors, and U. Senators and congress members. So, now we've just seen a subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect, and sometimes get, favor for themselves after the election is over. At the present time the incumbents, Democrats and Republicans, look upon this unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves. Somebody that is already in Congress has a great deal more to sell. Jimmy Carter is Correct that the U.

The Huffington Post, New York, aug. American politics will never be the same. Meanwhile, a substantial segment of the population lives in poverty. The average American's voice will never be heard over any of these corporations. While all Americans suffer the effects of poverty, African Americans and Hispanics are the most affected. Despite improvements over the years in racial and ethnic equality, economic inequalities are at their highest level since before the Great Depression.

Even more alarming is the lack of social mobility that these groups have shown. These economic inequalities are so entrenched in these minority groups that their ability to achieve upwards social mobility has diminished over time.

With this much income disparity in American society, it becomes readily apparent that the ordinary citizen, despite the guise of "we the people", has little say when it comes to the decisions that are made each day in this country. This inequality is anathema to democracy. If America has any hope of getting back to democracy, equality must be the goal.

America's current system of capitalism encourages a "winner takes all" mentality. It's this mentality that indirectly legitimizes the social economic divisions which are apparent today. The socialist way, social democracy in contemporary Britain. New York: I. Tauris, This system makes it easier to justify the huge economic divide between those who succeed and those who don't. Because socio-economic starting points are so unequal it has become impossible for individuals to achieve their full potential.

Equality is also vital for the survival of the planet. This is because societies with higher levels of equality produce lower carbon footprints.

The health of the planet is important because those living in poverty are less able to effectively deal with the adverse effects of global climate change. Equality creates a sense of unity. When great divides between rich and poor are fostered, each side will begin to inhabit different worlds. The wealthy tend to segregate themselves from the rest of society.

This makes them less likely to recognize the common citizenship of the people living in poverty. Even worse, because they are separated from it, they begin to believe that poverty is not even an issue that needs to be addressed. The divide between the rich and the poor in America has never been more apparent. According to a Pew Research Center Report on average, today's upper-income families are almost seven times wealthier than middle-income ones, compared to 3.

Think Progress, Washington, dec. When compared to lower-income family wealth, upper-income family wealth is 70 times larger. Until this equality is addressed, America will never be a true democracy. Given the direction that democratic socialism has taken in Europe, its future as a political system is not certain.

Whether it will continue to decline or return to its former glory is hard to say. However, I am not prepared to discuss that topic at this time. What I am prepared to discuss is why it is imperative to bring a system such as this to America. The Heritage Foundation, Washington, jan.

This is unsurprising, given the fact that Congress has allowed the government to shut down multiple times. With this much dissatisfaction with the status quo, it is hard to make the statement that this is a government "for the people and by the people.

As stated previously, the American government claims to be a democracy. Again, this is not the case. However, if the United States were to follow the lessons of its founding document, The Declaration of Independence , then it would have no choice but to become a true democracy. Two of the most important themes of The Declaration of Independence are that "all men are created equal" and that the people have a right to practice democratic self-determination.

This calls for a society where everyone is treated the same and is allowed to live their life as they see fit. Currently, the system in place in America favors those with money. Capitalism, America's current political and economic system, ensures that "no men are created equal". Only those with the most money matter; often times these are wealthy corporations. The average American stands no chance of having their voice heard over them. For example, on paper, everyone has the right to vote. However, if money buys access to government officials, then all anyone gets to vote on are the policies that were suggested by the corporations in the first place.

The blind trust towards this system is misplaced. Most Americans, liberal and conservative alike, actually prefer a more equal society, like the one proposed here. A survey conducted by The Atlantic demonstrated this. The Atlantic, Boston, aug. In this study, participants were asked to pick between two fictional countries, where one was modeled after America and the second was modeled after Sweden. This study highlighted the fact that, despite what Americans are taught to say, their beliefs tell a different story.

There are, no doubt, things that the rest of the world could learn from the region. The system always works for the people who run the system. So maybe, in that respect, it gets closer to the aims of socialism than actual socialism ever has! Things like medicare for all, a functional justice system, an effective government, wealth redistribution policies, etc. No, it is indeed because every far left idiot claims the Scandanavian countries are socialist.

Your arguement is absurd. Why would anyone bring the argument to the table that a well run, non socialist country is socialist when arguing against socialism?

The only possible reason for a conservative to mention these countries would be in response, not as an initiator. The problem with American politics in a nutshell.

Each side thinks the other side are idiots, lunatics, and traitors. How can we work together for a common cause when we hate each other? I grieve for my country.

I too grieved for my country it has gone totally against God and ALL that is good in our constitution I am so sad our grand children and great grandchildren will be communist and will have nothing due to be taught lies from grade school up through college and the media that is brainwashing them I am shocked by people that are old are falling for this as they should have leaned in school the truth and now just believe all of the lies.

You completely missed what he said. He said, rather than argue the label, leftists adopted it and now use it as incorrectly as conservatives do. Yes of course but, why even attempt to explain something beyond the contrarians reading level? Most likely a, what do you call them? The very sticky drone like argumentative ignoramuses. Elitist much? Was your remark thought to sound clever or condescending, Sandy? Only an asshole would write something that arrogant and pretentious.

What Scotty says is absolutely correct, that conservatives peg anything, like a single-payer health system, which they do not like, as socialist. A single payer health system and extending the free education from K to K does not really make a country socialist — it is still capitalist, by every definition. Mostly people like farrrrrrr left a. That socialism only makes everyone equally miserable and that it gives the democrats all the power!

And here lies another problem with your comment. Extreme left do not want fossil fuel production in the US at all. We are for the first time completely non-dependent on foreign oil and selling our oil to other countries.

They just want control and communism. The left never wanted communism. They control most of the wealth in the country, so conservatives are fat and happy. The right always wants to paint others as the bad guys. They are against a living wage, cancel the only healthcare coverage that much of the poor and middle class can afford, bend the tax laws for the very rich and big corporations that hand out their money to politicians.

Our country has fallen away from the ideas the founding fathers put forth and is full of corruption, starting in the White House. Did you miss the part where he stated that the Democrats would be against off-shore drilling to pay for their expanded safety net. The USA does not have a set amount of wealth. Liberals believe there is only one pie too be divided. So maybe the people that feel left out and underfed should look to their rich democrat leaders.

They have already censored free speech and now aiming to do it Globally. Sounds like they are on the road to Communism. How does the government and citizens of Denmark feel now that there is a push globally, among major players, To eliminate fossil fuels and replace them with clean energy sourced from solar and wind. The government of Denmark has part ownership in their oil trade. The US government has no ownership in our energy, however industries are subsidized with federal dollars.

This push is all to save these earth from global warming. Our president has already destroyed thousands of jobs with his cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline. It will be transported in oil tankers transported over roadways and on railroads.

To see the direction of where some globalists want to take us, just look at the most recent event The world economic forum held in Davos at: weforum. Take a look at the participants in the heads of state and government. Also take a look at leaders from international organizations government agencies and central banks.

Is this our future? These types of energies are intermittent power and have to be used when the winds blowing or the suns out! Look at Roscoe Texas and the Texans that froze this winter, because of turbines freezing! Then you have morons like a. I also agree with the fact that our current president if you can call him this, is going about it the wrong way! America might be able to add wind turbines and solar to help the grid, but never be able to sustain enough electricity to solely use these methods!

The democrats and Biden should have kept the other things like drilling and fracking going! The pipeline I kinda agree with, due to the fact of this way of oil production is by far the dirtiest!

This type of oil is like sand blasting it through pipes and it eats away at the pipeline causing big messes! Where they refine it of the gulf of Texas it also causes trouble by leaking into the gulf and produces twice the amounts of carbon emissions then other ways of refining oil! This makes no sense. Capitalism pays for socialism. Norway is one of the most socialist countries in the world.

It was makes Norway the envy of the world. You guys have, free university education, your education system has a good reputation, you have free healthcare, and Norwegian healthcare is excellent. Socialism in the prison system has proven to work. Norway has the lowest reoffending rate in the world. The standard of living in Norway is incredibly high.

I could go on, and on. It would help, a lot if the leftists in America did not have a two tiered justice system. Leftists are allowed to riot, burn cities and buildings, murder, assault,, blind and maim police and innocent civilians and businesses. But illegally incarcerated people marching for the Constitutional Right to audit elections, before they are certified. The left tries to erase and rewrite their own warped version of history.

This has created a great distrust in this current government, which is against balanced and civil discourse. And we should have school choice, to allow children in poorer areas to go to better schools. And we should have kept our energy independence, which keeps utilities lower, price of all goods and services lower and wages higher.

My son and his family moved to Oslo about 8 years ago from the UK. Since then they have had two daughters.

The first thing to mention is the maternity and child care benefits. My daughter-in-Law had more or less a year on full pay each time. Then there is the heavily subsidised Barnehagen from age one.

These benefits together with the outdoor lifestyle in Norway have certainly made them happy! Other capitalist societies seem to base life on amassing as much wealth as possible, often at the expense of others. Wealth is only amassed at the expense of others if it is acquired dishonestly or by force. If it is amassed legally then every single penny represents a voluntary exchange of value. Transactions are 2 way, not 1 way.

Your comment is clearly biased nonsense. Your son is living a happy life and good luck to him. USA that would be plain bull due to the psychology that has built their economy on the exploitation of others throughout history. I own a business and exploit no customer or employee for personnel gain but rather have empathy and desire to create a better community which then reflects in my gain.

Not everyone is greedy and it is actually not normal but rather conditioned. I agree. I spent ten days in Sweden visiting my grandson who was in the military. Infrastructure was top notch. Travel on underground tram safe at all hours. One of drivers we had said that the difference between the US and Sweden is that Swedish citizens know where their tax money goes.

Budget is balanced annually. He spoke of the paid maternity leave, child care, paid sick leave, and not worrying about healthcare, as everyone has basically the same plan, and the rich pay more in taxes and do so willingly. He talked about the holidays everyone takes and their importance. Everyone is educated through college, and everyone works and you receive assistance in finding employment.

When I think of what we are going through right now with our elections and the dishonest, divisive ads everywhere, I think the nordic way of life might be a refreshing change. Life in those countries works because of population control and limited to no illegal immigration.

In the U. Other Countries send us their poor, tired, and needy. And still, the U. Lord help us. Thank you for your laughable and ridiculous comment. I literally spit my tea out reading it. Your just a poooor victim in this world, Mr. Lord help YOU to get over your ethnocentrism. Also I have visited Sweden a number of times. What I have learned is that generally they appreciate the benefits they have even though the taxes are relative high. Sorry to be brief but must sign off at this time.

There are more people in my state of North Carolina about 11 million , than in the whole country of Norway. The USA population is very high compared to Nordic countries.

The Nordic way my implode on itself eventually. These systems have to be funded somehow. I live and work in Denmark. There are lot of cultural reasons that the polices work here. Danes are, on the whole, very intense about work with a strong work ethic and a desire to do really good work. Even the simplest of jobs is done well and with pride. I have really enjoyed that part of being in Denmark.

Danes, on the whole, are a also a very disciplined people and laying about on unemployment for a moment longer than necessary is highly frowned upon.

Drawing on social benefits is seen as an absolute last resort for anyone of working age and considered to be fairly shameful if it goes on for any length of time. Retirement age is also mandated with no or very limited options for continuing employment once retirement age is reached, effectively forcing people out of the work force.

The USA is diverse, multiple cultures, complex. We are not like the people in Denmark or Sweden. We do not trust in our government. Some groups of people have a strong work ethic, attempt to remain as independent and functioning, share with and willingly help others in the community. Other groups of people have poor work ethics, are not concerned about others, feel everyone owes them.

Many social programs in these countries are great and work! As the article states it is a dual relationship, culture, way of life. Because you will be the first to yell at the taxes, your work hours, what is expected of you. These societal qualities predate — and are independent from — the formation of the modern welfare state.

Indeed, on that foundation, a prosperous economy was built before the welfare states we know today were established. During the following century, Sweden introduced extensive economic laissez-faire reforms deregulating the financial sector and promoting free enterprise, free competition and free trade. During the following 60 years of prosperity - during the first half of the 20th century - tax rates were generally lower than in other European countries and in the U.

The 30 years to come were characterized by the expansion of the generous cradle-to-grave welfare state that Sanders admires, characterized by government intervention, an increase in tax rates and the re-regulation of previously free markets. In Sweden was the fourth-richest member of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development OECD club of industrial countries, but had dropped to 13th in A subsequent financial crisis in the s saw the growth of the gross domestic product sink and unemployment spike, while the government raised interest rates to a staggering percent in an effort to avoid devaluing its currency.

There was no other way to go than market reform. Since then, Sanders and his supporters should be aware, Sweden actually worked to revise its economic model based on lessons drawn from its recession. State-owned companies were sold and financial markets were deregulated; public monopolies were replaced with competition.