Ask Prof Wolff: Is Nordic Socialism a Progressive Step?

A patron of Economic Update asks: "I wondered if you could give your critique of the Nordic model, as practiced in for example Norway, Sweden and Denmark. I've heard American socialists speak warmly about these countries, but they clearly want to go further. What do you think are some pros and cons about this model, do you think it is a progressive step towards socialism, and how do we go further from the Nordic model?" This is Professor Richard Wolff's video response.
Submit your own question to be considered for a video response by Prof. Wolff on Patreon: / community .
Ask Prof Wolff is a@democracyatwrk production. We are committed to providing these videos to you free of ads. Please consider supporting us on Patreon.com/economicupdate. Become a part of the growing Patreon community and gain access to exclusive patron-only content, along with the ability to ask Prof. Wolff questions like this one! Your support also helps keep this content free to the public. Spreading Prof. Wolff's message is more important than ever. Help us continue to make this possible.
_________________________________________________________________________
Learn more about Prof Wolff's new book, "The Sickness is the System: When Capitalism Fails to Save Us from Pandemics or Itself," available now at www.democracyatwork.info/books
“A magnificent source of hope and insight.” Yanis Varoufakis, Greek economist, academic, philosopher, politician, author of Talking to my daughter about the economy.
_________________________________________________________________________
Follow Wolff ONLINE:
Web: www.rdwolff.com
Patreon: / economicupdate
Twitter: / profwolff
/ democracyatwrk
Facebook: / economicupdate
/ richarddwolff
/ democracyatwrk
Subscribe to the EU podcast: economicupdate.libsyn.com
Shop our worker CO-OP made MERCH: democracy-at-work-shop.myshop...

[@AymanB]

Nordic countries are capitalist with a "democratic socialist" or "social democratic" model with worker unionisation and strong pro-worker legislation, a strong "welfare" net with imposed negotiation on employers but almost all European countries that thrived under that model are faltering, primarily because the socialist parties formed coalitions with centrists or drifted to the center legislatively. Of course this is all relative. If you start from further left and shift right, you'll still end up in a place which still looks "socialist" to an American. But to a native of that country, there are concrete consequences. And the shift is constant.

[@AudioPervert1]

Socialism or what-have-you. Less we forget, a huge part of Norway's wealth is based on extraction. Oil to be precise. Earlier (1600-1970s) it was totally based on Timber, Fur and Industrial Scale Fishing (Tuna). Now that very mindset in essence, is destructive, exhaustive and non-renewable. It's so boring, if not inconsequential these American verbiage about what is better - if this is socialist - or that is an chicken .. PS. Do not Pay Patreon. Vicious Hope Labour Casino.

[@maalf1304]

The real Americans are the brown people of Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Bolivia, etc.

[@SofaKingShit]

In Norway we have a specialized knife for cheese. It looks a little like a carpentry plane for slowly shaving down wood. It's called an osthovel (cheese plane) and that is is also what the conservative government calls it's welfare cuts: "osthovel kutt". They are mostly small cuts but every year life stealthily gets harder for those at the bottom of the economic hierarchy, all without causing any sudden outrage.

[@satyasyasatyasya5746]

Or in other words, "death by a thousand cuts" or that "frog in hot water" analogy.

[@Arbaaltheundefeated]

Because we have a right wing (by our Norwegian political scale anyway) government, yes... Not that the main opposition 'labour' party would be that much better, they're basically centrist at this point, a far cry from what our political left was say in the 70's - 80's and going into the 90's, there's been a definite shift to the right among all significant parties. Business sector influence I'd bet.

[@georgefurman4371]

You mean you have your own GOP in slow motion. A gradual slow setting locks and traps in the constitution patiently but relentless little changes that eventually will try to use to give a check mate to the rights of Scandinavian people ?? I am certain they are cunning and willing to get you close to the American way. We are a merchandise for a wealthy man firmly convinced they are on the right side of history. They are not.

[@georgefurman4371]

@@satyasyasatyasya5746 in some countries they use the slow motion fascist take over. The USA is an innovative method probably. This has been a gradual 90 years aprox rolled back of the new deal. In cunning little changes to the constitution give and take , step further and steps back process of smart political alliances and bribing the working class. Dividing and conquering the mind of the American people. There is the octopus style like germany, Spain or Chile. When you caught the octopus you either turn the head upside down like a bag on the outside exposing the inner side. The octopus gets in shock . then you get a rock and tenderize it on a high flat one while is fresh. Wash the tint in the process. Smash it hard with the rock and ready to boil. Or simply the Japanese style.. Cut the head while alive in a single smart motion and dismantle the octopus in parts divided in tentacles. Ready for suchi. The Japanese seem to like the tint. The murder of Allende in its brutality of the following military repression explains the Japanese style. The German is the first octopus.

[@asuka_the_void_witch]

that's good metaphor, Don!

[@joukokultima7810]

As a person from Finland, and person who studied lot of political history of Finland and power structures in Finland, I say that this answer is very good, excellent answer. Very truthful.

[@evilmarc]

Well he is an economics professor lol

[@emisunflowers]

I just realized that this channel is Democracy at Work, not in the sense of "the system of democracy is collectively hard at work [and I'm going to talk about it]" but actually "democracy in the workplace". I can't believe it took me this long to realize that, especially considering the ideas this channel covers. Guess we all miss some obvious stuff like that sometimes lol.

[@JohnSmith-vm8rx]

I feel like this channel should be a lot more popular than it is.

[@club882]

agreed.

[@satyasyasatyasya5746]

YT and Google buries stuff like this.

[@emhu2594]

This is why I am a Patreon supporter. The world needs to hear this.

[@zofiajaneczek184]

Indeed! People like to have the truth fed to them, all works well until most of your rights are diminished. People don’t want to hear the truth! Easier to distract oneself with TikTok, FB or any of the others.

[@thethirdgeneration1738]

That’s what capitalism does. It keeps people distracted with gaming, vices, Mindless TV programs, foodies, sports, social deadheads, “Bread and Circuses” to keep everyone away material like this that will awaken the masses! They don’t want the heard of sheeple awakened to the grift of the game afoot.

[@aleksanderbrygmann279]

As an Scandinavian resident, I would say partial decomodification is very useful. Not just directly for the workers, but also because it's almost impossible to reverse due to popularity. Also it spreads the idea of production/distribution for need rather than profit and normalise the concept. In conclusion, domestically sosial democracy is a helpful and important step towards our goal

[@aleksanderbrygmann279]

Imperialism and unequal exchange non withstanding..

[@voxomnes9537]

@@aleksanderbrygmann279 True.

[@musiqtee]

Sadly, the “Scandinavian model” is not what it once maybe was. Meaning that the general direction of our politics/policies is equally changed by neoliberalism as any “western” nation state. Yes, there is still a culture for a welfare society, but especially the last 25 years, increasing public funding moves over to the private sector. QE targets the private banking sector, and there is a constant austerity mindset in the public sector. Private health and pension insurance is growing and corporate taxation trends down. Financialization is a growing trend with even small (formerly family based) property owners, and buying a first home is really hard for educated well paid individuals. This has happened through the last six-seven coalition governments. Our Labour Party isn’t much more “socialist” than the present UK one, for example. Very few on the left (no one?) challenge the macroeconomic scope of our economy, still just the usual case to case pre election campaign “promises”. I’m not trying to “define” social democracy, just stating that its mere existence must be redefined here in 🇳🇴. 👍

[@chuckleaf8027]

Wolff doesn't seem to know much about the Nordic states 'stepping away" from their big welfare systems of the 70s and 80s. The Economist has a good article on the change called The Nordic Super Model, mentioning the privatization of government services, pension systems, the school choice vouchers, lower corporate tax rate, big reduction in the government spending to GDP ratio..no minimum wage in Sweden, Denmark and Norway. etc etc..all stuff that would make American progressives puke...if they actually did some research, instead of just parroting Bernie Sanders or AOCs cartoonish simplification of "social democracy" in Scandinavia. Wolff is clueless, as usual..

[@jaredgreenspan2263]

Thanks for the info. Do you feel like the youth are strongly to the left and pushing back against these neoliberal policies?

[@Xerxesjc28]

@@chuckleaf8027 The no minimun wage thing is bit misleading. From what I understand, the government does not itself impose minimun wage, however, unions do. And companies are required to negotiate with unions which then negotiate with each individual company a minimun wage for its union members in that company. " Denmark and Sweden use collective agreements as their only mechanism for setting minimum wages, while Finland, Iceland and Norway have also started to use extension mechanisms to cover all workers at industry level. Denmark and Sweden use collective agreements as their only mechanism for setting minimum wages, while Finland, Iceland and Norway have also started to use extension mechanisms to cover all workers at industry level. In Denmark and Sweden, the collective agreements are binding only for those parties that have signed them. This system covers around 89% of employees in Sweden, and about 84% in Denmark. Finally, in both Finland and Iceland, coverage of collective agreements is widespread, of about 90% of workers. " -www.ilo.org/global/topics/wages/minimum-wages/setting-machinery/WCMS_460934/lang--en/index.htm

[@thanqol]

@@chuckleaf8027 While it is true as you say, that the Nordic countries have been shifting away from socialistic policies since the 90's NPM and neo-liberalism, the Nordic model is still way more socialistic than other alternatives. It is all relative, and Wolff's description is still accurate, even though the Nordic model is less social than it used to be. I must also point out that your claim about no minimum wage in Norway is not precise. There is no universal minimum wage, but there is another form of minimum wage, where the wage floor is set for every unionized trade, through negotiations by the labor unions, employer organizations and the state.

[@chuckleaf8027]

@@Xerxesjc28 You're right.... no "national" minimum wage. Danish Kanslergade Agreement in 1933 and the Swedish Saltsjöbaden Agreement of 1938... set up the system of setting wages...kinda like collective bargaining I guess.

[@elainegoad9777]

We need a gazillion Prof. Richard Wolff's speaking out !

[@Miguel-jl4xk]

Thanks for your posts. Living in Scandinavia I use to share some of them as educational and "eye opening" bricks, especially among people lacking political-economical knowledge and/or those coming from places where the odds to comprehend the structures of capitalism are even higher than here.

[@torbjornjuliussen3556]

Sweden is an example of a promising country who was in the post ww2 on its way towards a social-democratic almost becoming a democratic socialist society, but went into a reverse in 1980. From then on everything have been moving in the wrong direction. All we can say is, listen to the professor, please!

[@ronzundell7394]

If happiness is any indicator of an economic system that positively impacts a society, then Nordic countries are miles ahead of American corporate capitalism. Cradle to grave security is much healthier for the population at large then the financial insecurity many Americans face throughout their lives.

[@aleksa1931]

Just because Nordic countries are some of the happiest in the world, that doesn’t mean it has a positive affect on society. The happiness of Scandinavian’s comes at the expense of those in Africa, Southeast Asia and South America. Nordic countries are just a capitalist welfare state, they still enormously exploit developing countries. So as for society, the Nordic model is horrible, as it only works for the people living within those countries, not outside.

[@systemicchaos3921]

​@@aleksa1931in what way does it cannibalise Africans and Asians?

[@antonywerner3018]

from my German perspective the Nordic country's have a full Developed Social democracy. And socialism it is only if the enterprises are run by the State apparatus and if the most enterprises are run cooperatively its syndicalism.

[@jaredgreenspan2263]

I heard that Denmark passed a law to help promote worker owned coops and even have public start up funding. Corbyn was campaigning on that but was unfortunately railroaded. I think Cuba has been focusing on private coops and small businesses as part of their liberalization

[@patricialongo5746]

Italy has these co ops. It looks like ordinary people taking the risks until the business takes off and is sold. The rich weren't taken out of the equation!

[@bjrnhjortshjandersen1286]

3 people can without any problems and with no capital requirements create an association or a cooperative in Denmark. And start doing business in a short time. We have many 1000 of this kind of unities and they may get public funding but not as a general rule. They have to apply and mostly put in some work or co-funding.

[@focusedeye]

@@patricialongo5746 "It looks like ordinary people taking the risks until the business takes off and is sold." If the co-op is operating successfully and the workers who are also the owners are earning a fair wage, why would they vote sell it off? How many co-ops would vote to outsource their own jobs? Here's an interesting link: coop.exchange/blog/9c7615e4-645b-11e9-bf70-06ceb0bf34bd/9-facts-about-the-amazing-italian-cooperative-sector

[@patricialongo5746]

@@focusedeye I guess they got an offer they couldn't refuse. Big money. Maybe it's fake news-. There's really no evidence that any overall consolidation of business is happening. My bad! Obviously the Free Market is Working and nobody ever voted to sell!

[@focusedeye]

@@patricialongo5746 I think your missing the point of a co-op. You and 19 others start a co-op business producing buttons. Your buttons were the highest quality and you had a consistently good market share for your buttons. In your co-op, everyone owns an equal 1/20th of your company with everyone involved having one vote per person on decisions. As fellow workers retired or quit, they would be replaced by new members. Why would you vote to outsource your job, making you and the other 19 worker/owners unemployed?

[@1VirginiaL]

Very clearly put, very helpful, ty

[@TheNguyenGiap]

Professor Wolf here in Denmark we do not have minimum wage. Rather we have something called 3-part negotiations where the government/unions/employer organisations participate. If things go as they should, unions and employer organisations will negotiate the salary for the period untill the next negotiation. If problems arise a state institution will try to negotiate a settlement both parties can accept, and if that fails then we are looking at general strike or a strike with several sympathy strikes in other areas but that is always last resort Oh and as a funny side note; the Social Democrats as been considered class traitors for at least 100 years by communists and socialists :)

[@asuka_the_void_witch]

Wollff, please stop referring to our countries as "socialist". they are not socialist. the gap between the poor and the rich is widening here in Sweden. more and more healthcare providers are being privatized. sure we have a lot of regime-subsidized programs and welfare, but it's not a haven. we are certainly the happiest nations on earth according to polls (I recall Finland is number one), but we are NOT socialist.

[@cosmicmusicreynolds3266]

There ll ve a shift back to the old days of socialism as time is running out for capitalism

[@nmavrantzas]

Keep in mind he's talking to Americans.

[@asuka_the_void_witch]

@@nmavrantzas that is absolutely a relevant factor. but the regimes of the nordics are largely centrist... there's nothing socialist about them

[@maalf1304]

@@nmavrantzas He is talking to gringos. The real Americans are the brown people of Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Bolivia, etc.

[@maalf1304]

the happiest nations are Thailand, Mexico, Colombia, etc. ....

[@JoseLopez-ys2oz]

This helped me a lot. Thank you!

[@clarus_tx]

Great video!

[@julianparks8485]

Perfect summation. I recently tried to find a book that introduces economics in general. All I could find was the typical Capitalist approach. Pablum for the masses.

[@zacrl1230]

The people need to own the means of production. I won't see it in my life, but maybe one day.

[@markdaniels4389]

Taxing and redistributing wealth via welfare state benefits is one aspect of the Nordic model that I think is more social-democratic (capitalism with benefits). But they also have a significant amount of State Owned Enterprises, which I would call a type of central planning. Although it's not indicative of the types of worker ownership and control advocated by Professor Wolff, their system of negotiating collective bargaining agreements with the state acting as a mediator between industrial unions and employers seems to give workers some real power within the system. Because their system depends on a high degree of employment to fund benefits through taxes, I'm curious to see how they withstand the coming automation of jobs. Something tells me they'll still adapt better than we will in here in the U.S. though.

[@Gigika313]

the Nordic model is based not only on exploitation and imperialism of Africa but also some of the Asian countries, thank you for your comment 👍🏼

[@aleksanderbrygmann279]

That is true, but the domestic policies are very effective. And can be replicated anywhere. Of course the wellfarestate and capital class can only co-exist through foreign exploitation. But that is an argument against the capital class, not the scientifically based political policy domestically.

[@beyond_modernity8554]

@@aleksanderbrygmann279 Exactly. The policies themselves aren't the problem. The problem is that in order for them to co-exist with all capitalist relations and the capitalist class, their exploitation and profiteering has to be exported somewhere with such policies lacking.

[@tomi213]

Nordic models are collapsing due to immigration from Africa and Middle-East. In Finland African or Middle-Eastern immigrant costs 800k€-1340k€ from cradle to grave. Do you really think that it's exploitation of Africa when ordinary Finns pay housing, schooling, healthcare, feeding for an African? Average Finn manages to gather around 180k€ net worth by the time he reaches retirement age. So it takes entire surplus of 4 to 8 Finns support one of these immigrants. Who do you think is being exploited here???? As a Finn I think your evidence free accusations of exploitation are insulting. We Finns built our own country.

[@tofolcano9639]

He didn't mention it did he?

[@tofolcano9639]

@@aleksanderbrygmann279 I don't think that they can be replicated anywhere. If the point of using imperialism in the Nordic system is to import capitalist exploitation from outside as to offload some of the local exploitation then how is any country that is incapable of being imperialists or who are being the victims themselves from the imperialist system supposed to implement the Nordic model? You admitted it yourself that it can only co-exist through foreign exploitation, therefore they simply cannot be replicated anywhere. And its reliance on imperialism is not only an argument against the capital class but also an argument against the Nordic model.

[@saikatbhattacharya8282]

Great explanation

[@commiehilfiger2545]

Professor Wolff is so articulate and concise with transferring his thoughts to words. He makes everything so clear to new people who want to be introduced to new ideas and material. A great political influence indeed.

[@minhng7208]

Thank you Prof Wolff.

[@sgn4899]

As long a social democratic or socialist party rule in the Nordic countries it works well, and the final step is to democratise the work environment, not to go the authoritarian route like the Soviets who just took over everything for the sake of keeping power, at the expense of democracy.

[@user-nv5ix3ib5b]

Huawei tried to democratize their company, but with a different style. May Prof Wolff talk a little about that?

[@StephanDallaPria]

He can't because in typical Chinese fashion, the true inner workings including financials of Huawei is obscured.

[@saikatbhattacharya8282]

Prob with western people is that they don't take into account non west when they think first.

[@petestanton1945]

Of course he can, via Patreon apparently. Meanwhile check the Jeff J Brown & Nathan Rich channels for that

[@SlabBulkhead]

Do you have a link to something we could read that discusses Huawei's efforts?

[@kobemop]

huawei is a worker coop

[@mrmuttley1]

I have watched Prof Wolff for years. Even at my age I am surprised at Prof Wolff's growth in the last ten years. In my 70s I see most of my demographic in decline. Here in Quebec we are a Secular, Humanist, Liberal Democracy. We regularly change governments because the law of the universe calls for constant change. The dairy co-operative that has created wealth and prosperity for Quebec's dairy farmers has turned them in to the greediest of capitalists when they sell their cheese to we the people. Government is there to create a balance between greed and need. Quebec is doing a credible job. Both our Provincial and Federal governments enjoy overwhelming support. We call it democracy. Our very popular Premier says he will retire at 65. We have done our job and we all say Amen.

[@anhedonic-voting]

Thank you 🌎 ✊️ 🌹 🗽

[@Gigika313]

Share this.

[@DeathToMockingBirds]

Prof Wolff has such a fervor when he speaks, I would love to see him or someone like him be up for elections, to dissiminate and normalize the notion of Democracy at Work.

[@petestanton1945]

idk, he's got the passion for teaching that all good college professors have. Fascist politicians had lotsa "fervor" : D

[@patricialongo5746]

Making sense on issues gets you blackballed from both parties.

[@petestanton1945]

@@patricialongo5746 usually sexboated (set up for scandal)

[@AudioPervert1]

Folks are caught up in fervor and froth. DUH MOCK cracy never at work - Socialism or what-have-you. Less we forget, a huge part of Norway's wealth is based on extraction. Oil to be precise. Earlier (1600-1970s) it was totally based on Timber, Fur and Industrial Scale Fishing (Tuna). Now that very mindset in essence, is destructive, exhaustive and non-renewable. It's so boring, if not inconsequential these American verbiage about what is better - if this is socialist - or that is an chicken .. PS. Do not Pay Patreon. Vicious Hope Labour Casino.

[@paulopaulo3774]

Please don't die yet, i love your videos

[@dustinjones8887]

Ironically, it's historically been conservative Wall St. and UK Prime Minister Benjamin Disreali who advocated most effectively for socialized utilities in the critical monopolistic sectors, to lower the cost of business for owners and consumers so our exports could compete in price throughout the world.

[@maximme]

would be great if you do a video on the Unique Singapore socialist system.

[@clavo3352]

Robert Heilbroner refers to a Phalanx company in the US that is like a socialist economically run corporation that functions and exists with the US. Social media might just be the catalyst that can make that succeed and spread like wildfire once a successful example begins to thrive.

[@humanistreason]

It is a nice situation to be in, but not sufficient. Social democracy is fragile to hardship. As soon as an economic crisis looms, those guarantees that workers enjoy are the first to go as the bourgeoisie has the means to fight to keep privileges. And sometimes a crisis is not even necessarily as there's always people fighting for the "right" to more directly exploit people for profit. Social democracy is is like an unstable equilibrium point in physics. Eventually it falls to one side, sometimes full socialism or, unfortunately more often, fascism

[@oscarcazarez2227]

Nomenclature & definition are always relative, always

[@luddity]

Isn't there another way that actually allows the state to wither away because it is no longer needed and power is equitably distributed?

[@Seten_Tomh]

What about markets and money?

[@infinitedonuts]

For the algorithm

[@Fieldoak]

We don't have a minimum wage but we have high wages (I'm Swedish). I don't feel like Wolf really understand how that works. Also we have low taxes compared to what Americans getting for their dollar's. However, I think it's a winning strategy to use our type of government type to change your system. It would be way better than what you have. Even though we (Sweden) is a extremely competitive and capitalist type of system.

[@asuka_the_void_witch]

detta

[@Fieldoak]

@@asuka_the_void_witch ja, precis 😜 Eller vad tänker du?

[@asuka_the_void_witch]

@@Fieldoak får USA någonsin en socialdemokratisk regim likt norden eller andra delar av europa, så kommer USA och resten av världen må betydligt bättre. så ja, det du sa.

[@tofolcano9639]

I feel like this analysis lacks a very important topic that wasn't mentioned, which is its reliance on imperialism. Making them not only incapable of transitioning towards a superior "type of socialism" like the ones with planned economies and social ownership of the means of production but also makes them vulnerable to losing all progress made and going back to a more harsh capitalist exploitation if (or rather when) the imperialist system collapses.

[@GregoryWonderwheel]

Another great synopsis of the spectrum of socialism.

[@katemc516]

as long as land is privately owned, socialism can only go so far, look at Japan under the rule of MacArthur

[@lylecosmopolite]

The Scandinavian nations are not socialist. Socialism requires that the state or own all large and heavily capitalised firms, including all banks. Long term employees may be given the right to elect some of the directors of a socialist firm. They are social democracies that used to be more generous than the rest of Europe, but I doubt that that is the case nowadays.

[@jjbwoy]

As far as I'm aware, the USSR did democratise the workplace but you had to be a member of the communist Party to get a vote which nearly almost every adult was. Saw it on an old documentary that focussed on Russia so don't know about the rest of the USSR.

[@jeff__w]

There was actually a movement to democratize the workplace in the Soviet Union within the Party about late 1989 but it (obviously) came about too late: _See_ “Turning Power into Money, the End of the Soviet Union - RAI with A. Buzgalin (4/12)” here on KZbin with Russian professor of political economy Alexander Buzgalin.

[@newcoldwar9785]

>nordic models are probably the best examples of functioning social democracies in the world, given the results they've achieved (*to make it even better they should add in worker owned co-ops to that system)...state controlled (everything) runs the risk of corruption & authoritarianism which, as we've seen in former USSR & current PRC, can lead to horrible working conditions, human rights violations, mass surveillance/propaganda/censorship, zero freedom of speech, zero property rights, 100% conviction rates, & aggressive expansionism towards neighboring countries (oldschool imperialism)

[@walterchin8832]

Why doesn't the US call the Nordic countries communist? I don't think China's socialism with a Chinese characteristic is different than the Nordic countries.

[@duhni4551]

Because Nordics are not communist nor even socialist countries. Nordic model ranks higher in free market economy meter than USA, it is more open and gives more freedoms to make it simple and Nordic Model is going to increase those 2 factors quite a bit. If you wonder the well fare system, it has no political motivations, it is born out of national motivations. I understand it is hard to understand in countries that are not as homogeneous as Nordics are.

[@patrickholt2270]

The people in Russia were democratising workplaces and land between February and October 1917, in a movement of local land seizures and oustings of bourgeois factory owners. Nationalisation and administrative control by Bolshevik party civil servants was only imposed later, during the civil war, as a stop-gap to deal with the economic crisis of the civil war which saw workers flood out of the cities back to the villages to try to grow the food they couldn't buy in the cities, creating a vicious cycle whereby factories couldn't produce enough to meet peasant demand and peasants stopped bringing food to market to sell to buy manufactured goods which weren't available. The dialectical materialists of the RSDWP in both wings believed in having a planned economy, as part of the pre-existing utopian socialism of the Emancipation of Labour group before they appropriated Marx's name to their tendency, and had assumed a power seizure whereby they would nationalise both land and businesses using the state, rather than assuming what did happen, which was the revolutionary people spontaneously socialising both on a democratic, proto-co-operative basis, which was more like what Marx had predicted and hoped for. The fact that there was a contradiction between democratised workplaces and central planning became apparent at that point, when the workplaces were appropriated from the workforces by party officials. The stop-gap became permanent, leaving a perment deficit of legitmacy for the Soviet planned economy with workers who remained alienated within the workplace, which eventually resulted in a lack of popular resistance to the oligarch-creating rushed privatisation of the system rammed through under Boris Yeltsin.

[@alexleibovici4834]

I have some questions regarding the timeline for some events. > between February and October 1917... oustings of bourgeois factory owners Do you have a reference for this? > Nationalisation and administrative control by Bolshevik party civil servants was only imposed later, during the civil war Can you please present a more detailed timeline, as you see it? We agree that the start of the revolution is 7 Nov. 1917 (25 Oct. old style). But when did nationalizations start; you only say "later, during the civil war". WHEN during the Civil War (it ended in Nov. 1922)?

[@Battlecry17]

Wolff doesn't seem to understand that definitions matter and words have meaning. Destroying the meaning of worlds leads to obfuscation and makes meaningful discussion on theory, policy, systems and politics difficult. The "Nordic mode" is a form of capitalism as it features the defining characteristics of capitalism, which Wolff himself doesn't deny. Socialism, however defined, has its own unique defining characteristics that make it distinct from capitalism. Namely, some form of social ownership of the means of production and social appropriation of the surplus product. The Nordic model never approached any form of socialism; at most, there was a proposal in Sweden during the 1970s to switch to what can arguably be called a type of market socialism, but this was aborted and Sweden, along with the rest of the world, embarked on a policy of neoliberal reform to its economic system and welfare system. Even continuing to describe it as "social democracy" in the post-war definition is stretching it. Wolff used to provide better insights and analyses to these kind of questions. I remember seeing a presentation he gave in 2016 where he made a hard distinction between capitalism and socialism, and rightfully critiqued the Nordic model as a form of capitalism that, despite generous welfare provisions, was unsustainable and gradually being rolled back. I feel he has become much more politicized since leaving academia to appease the progressive crowd in America rather than provide much real, insightful analyses on these questions.

[@bjrnhjortshjandersen1286]

It is not the color of the cat that matters....but the fact that it catches mice. Any system that eliminates poverty and gives people good opportunities in life and hope for a safe future is a benefit. It is not about the "purity of definition" it is about having the possibility to live a good life and use your abilities for improving your situation and follow some dreams. In that way China may be a better society for the poor than the USA.

[@mranderson4739]

Comment

[@keithmoschetto3566]

They tried socialism in Cuba and Venezuela. It didn't work out very well.

[@sharpienate]

They tried capitalism in the US. It didn't work out very well. I guess we better do nothing, say nothing, and think nothing because your thoughtful insight is so groundbreaking.

[@itzenormous]

Well, first off, what is "Nordic Socialism?" The last time I looked (a few days ago) Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland, were all Capitalist countries. You might be able to get away with claiming that these countries are Social Democratic, but even that is a stretch.

[@AymanB]

Indeed. They used to be strongly social democratic, but have been deeply affected with austerity and centrism (in their own relative way of course). I mean just look at the UK, the original social democractic country... Devastated by Thatcherism and been drifting to the pits since.

[@rustylidrazzah5170]

Great question! Is it capitalism lite, or a step toward a more socialist model?

[@duhni4551]

Nordics are not socialist, that is a fact number one. Fact number 2 would be that according all the meters, Nordic Model is more free market economy than USA uses, at least according the meter. So it is actually step towards more open markets with more freedoms. What people in USA struggles to understand about Nordics are these 2 things: 1. Nordics are not socialist countries at all. 2. Well fare system in Nordics doesn't have political motivations but national motivations.

[@rustylidrazzah5170]

@@duhni4551 so you view the system as capitalism with a social safety net? Is that a fair assessment of your opinion?

[@duhni4551]

@@rustylidrazzah5170 That is pretty much it. The social safety net is not result from political motivations though but from national ones and that is the key point. It is benefit of being quite homogeneous country, we care about each others.

[@rustylidrazzah5170]

@@duhni4551 I find the definitions of political labels a moving target. No modern advanced society operates a ism by its purest definition. China has markets, but calls itself communist. The USA is considered capitalist, but has several large social programs. I personally don’t care what any of them are labeled. The end results of their systems are what I judge them by. The labels do allow us to critically analyze and compare them however.

[@duhni4551]

@@rustylidrazzah5170 Well, in that case it is safe to say the way you put it. Capitalism with social safety net.

[@manuelmanolini6756]

The welfare state (mainly relating to universal health, free education and regulated housing) is not incompatible with worker coops. Thus, social democracy is a progressive step.

[@sojournern]

By far the most important subject you can talk about is what China and the Soviet Union did WRONG. This is where the objection to socialism comes in.

[@midknight1968]

Modern socialism is kind and fair, you can't be making trillions stealing from others, have your ideas, implement them with ethics and enjoy wealth

[@alloomis1635]

the scandis are about as good as it gets, for homer sap. "so far from paradise, so close to hell," to paraphrase el presidente diaz. they are varieties of elective aristocracy, with a monarch still. no pretense to democracy there. their saving grace has been small populations and cultural homogeneity, which has made strong unions possible, and minimal factionalism. even so, the right rules, from time to time, and the swedes were perfectly prepared to throw assange to the cia wolves, so he jumped from frying pan to fire. norway are happiest: they found oil off-shore, and declared the income public good. profits went into a sovereign fund which will subsidize for many years.

[@helengarrett6378]

The Nordic style of socialism sounds better than the right wing conservative capitalism we have here. Would I rather have an even more socialist system here? You bet! But we are stuck in a capitalist hell that is devolving into something resembling economic feudalism. We have the wealthy and privileged that nobody denies own almost everything and the overwhelming mass of citizens that struggle to survive, much less thrive. Our largest new industry is poverty in the United States. More of the middle class are living less well and more working class families cannot become upwardly mobile. Instead, workers salaries are static even through inflationary times and workers are falling into stressed and indebted poverty while the already poorest are third world destitute. Our city streets are in the midst of an unhousing boom. As a people we have choices. We just have to make up our minds if we prefer a cooperative ethic and economy or If we want to ontinue to claw at each other in intense unceasing competition which is actually throttled by the wealthy who don't share their obscene and excessive wealth and power in any meaningful way. They just accumulate a growing share of everything that has value and put their nammes on public buildings or charities to make themselves feel warm and benevolent. In fact, they are still accumulating and hoarding stocks, cash, art, vehicles, boats of varying sizes and even fleets of airplanes and jets. Their homes and estates sprawl across the globe and private islands sit waiting, fully stocked, for the next visit by the pampered elitist or his powerful cronies. We don't have to live this way. Other countries have chosen not to watch their fellow citizens fall into dire straits. There are many paths to follow toward a more equitable future, but before we can improve the lives of the many we simply must take wealth and power from the tiny slice of of our population that keeps their economic knee on our neck and ignores our cries for help.

[@seanpol9863]

A major exposé by ProPublica has revealed how U.S. billionaires pay little in income tax compared to their massive wealth, or sometimes even nothing. Private tax records of some of the country's top billionaires also show that between 2014 and 2018 the wealthiest 25 Americans saw their collective wealth jump by more than $400 billion, but they paid just over $13 billion in federal income taxes - amounting to a tax rate of just 3.4%. "Typical wage earners like you or me, we pay taxes every time we get a paycheck," says Jeff Ernsthausen, a senior data reporter at ProPublica. "But for the ultra-wealthy, it's a completely different story." kzbin.info/www/bejne/oIi1nZ59mMhnj9k

[@1homelander179]

Yes and no.

[@howardkeller1137]

What would happen to the Sahara desert after Socialism takes over Sahara Desert? It is hard to know, but sand will disappear in about first two weeks.

[@selwynr]

Yes, but if anything can mean anything then everything means nothing. We should not be afraid of definitions. They are useful. Sure, they are not writ in stone, but if concerns me when Wolff throws open the doors and effectively says "if you consider yourself a socialist, then ipso facto you are one". Well, by that token the Nazis were (National) socialists too. Sorry, but socialism actually is defined by some pretty strict characteristics (bloody good ones, which Wolff is brilliant at elucidating) and if a society does not implement them they have no right to the term. I'm not sure why Wolff does this, but I suspect he's attempting to negate the caricature of socialism as a system of totalitarian governmental repression and control (and other rightwing lies). But perhaps the answer is in the qualifying "Nordic". I would prefer he wrote Nordic "socialism" to indicate that it isn't the real deal. Because it isn't.

[@lloydmoore982]

What ever works,but definitely present day capitalism just keep working for how crony you are,and how much advantage you are willing deal out,all my life i always heard hard work shall be rewarded, but today quite the opposite.

[@bjrnhjortshjandersen1286]

Hard work...maybe rewarded...but you still must do some thinking by yourself and understand the rules of the game.

[@veronicajensen7690]

there is NOBODY in Nordic countries that call our system Socialism, we call the political parties on the far left socialist, you can come across people from Nordic countries who wrongly call our system Socialdemocracy , because Social democrats have been quite dominating especially in the past and more so in Sweden , these people are themselves Socialdemocrats I believe , if you however google (in the Nordic countries) you will find that our system is called social liberal

[@Bjorn2055]

Benchmark: Prosperity Index Freedom in the World Index OECD Better Life Social Progress Index World Happiness Report 🇺🇲 Vs 🇩🇰🇫🇮🇮🇸🇳🇴🇸🇪

[@jgalt308]

You heard it here straight from the horse's mouth..." you can define anything you want, any way you want." But this only applies to "socialism"...for "capitalism" his definition is very "specific" and doesn't include "the private ownership of the means of production"...nor does it consider the role of "government" or the monetary policy and the effects of "fiat". ( as money and government ) What is particularly ironic is that for Wolff, "the lesson of history is: we have learned nothing from history." This level of "willful ignorance" is truly astounding, and lacks a basic understanding of the totality of human history...and human nature, whose priorities are determined by the "laws of nature" and NOT to be confused with "Natural Law" which is a "human construct" and essentially a "denial" of the very thing it purports to define and explain. The very idea of "human rights" as both "unalienable" and "inherent" have never been true nor "self-evident", nor are they consistent with the laws of nature...and the single universal right that does exist and is possessed by all living things, is not a passive one...so its exercise is "optional" and that it will be attempted successfully carries no guarantee and the laws of nature couldn't care less. This is THE foundational aspect of "objective reality" and if it is omitted, then whatever claims made in any reference to "rights" is "subjective nonsense"...which has no logically reasoned foundation and therefore, no possibility of resulting success. ( and history has demonstrated this failure time and time again. ) If one can accept the harsh reality of the "laws of nature" and the biological imperatives imposed by them...then all the "mysteries" of "human behavior" and "interaction" are now easily accessible and one need not wonder why "dominant hierarchies" evolved, and produced governments, when the agricultural revolution made them possible by removing the limits of population, that the nomadic hunter/gatherer tribes were restricted to by available resources and the need to compete for them. At the very least, the understanding that "governments" are the determining factor in all aspects of the "social populations" they control...should be readily acknowledged and yet for the most part, it is not in any "objective sense" as illustrated by Wolff...even though it is "subliminally" present and observable in all human interaction. An examination of this phenomenon can be found in Desmond Morris, the Human Zoo, and the ten rules of dominance...which can be found with a simple "search"...since posting links on youtube is now verboten and subject to deletion.

[@torkelmoland8212]

I think you forgot the workers union is verry strong in skandinavia. Thei play i werry importante role,evry yare,to raise the workers pay. (Escuse my englis) Both in Norway we been having almost 8 yares of ei verry bad rigth goverment. Both it is almost 100% surten thath wee have a change this fall,hvith the election this fall. It is abauth time,both anyway thei are noth nearly thath bad compare the democrats in the US.

[@Owl350]

The USA needs to do away with the military-industrial complex at all cost. And the many contractors involved with it.

[@TheBigGSN5]

Socialism is workers own the means of production. If you don’t have that, you don’t have socialism. That being said, you could theoretically have worker ownership in a fascist state. The people can vote to be rapacious, genocidal maniacs. The US, for one, technically does it all the time.

[@aleksanderbrygmann279]

Is the collective ownership through the state of education and healthcare, produced and distributed universally basend on need rather than profit capitalism? No it is a very important step towards socialism by way of reform not revolution. So we are in the evolution between the two economic systems. Which is why the separate definition of social democracy is more accurate than just calling the system capitalism

[@bjrnhjortshjandersen1286]

As a variation, the Nordic Countries also have ownership models like cooperatives and associations which can work in the same way as a capitalist corporation, but where the rule is one man one vote no matter how big a share of the company this person owns. These are typically farmers or worker's cooperatives. However, as long as life is safe and comfortable the majority of people prefer to be wage earners or employed by someone and not have to bother about the running of a company with all the complexities and worries this entails. A classical communist system where workers are the collective owners of the means of production is something most people care little about as long as the society seems to have an acceptable degree of fairness and quality of life.

[@duhni4551]

There are no such thing as Nordic Socialism =D

[@gottagowork]

Social in "The Nordic Model" refers to the social welfare state in a Social Democracy (right leaning). Not the social in "social ownership" socialist economy that refers to Democratic Socialism (left leaning). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

[@duhni4551]

@@gottagowork Nordics are not social democracies either, in case you didn't know this.

[@gottagowork]

​@@duhni4551 "Nordics are not social democracies either, in case you didn't know this." I'm Norwegian, and we're very much about social democracy (social welfare structure and interventionism but still free market capitalism - somewhat mixed economy), and not at all about democratic socialism (no social collective ideologies). All Nordic countries are.

[@duhni4551]

@@gottagowork Nope, we are not, at least here in Finland. We sure have well fare but we don't have government interventionism nor is the well fare system from social democracy, newer has been. There has been short period when Finland was social democracy, it was after we got independent and thought we join Prussian Empire. Back then we adopted German constitution which was social democratic one. It was soon removed for many reasons.

[@gottagowork]

​@@duhni4551 Finland is interventionalists. www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/2019/39/matecconf_mse2019_07012.pdf "the degree of state intervention in the OECD countries," "The maximum level appears in: Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland (2016), Norway, Sweden." "nor is the well fare system from social democracy" What is a social democratic state? espousing state regulation (rather than state ownership of the means of production) and extensive social welfare programs (from Encyclopædia Britannica). (ædia? wtf?). Finland and other Nordics seems to fit this well. Key word being extensive. US has far less developed social programs.

[@patricialongo5746]

Capitalism with handouts. It's a humane way to preserve the failure we live under, capitalism.

[@MrCBTman]

Or socialism with markets.

[@patricialongo5746]

@@MrCBTman socialism never arrived in Sweden-. Ownership by the rich always was too important.

[@bjrnhjortshjandersen1286]

Well, handouts can be useful and all systems have weaknesses as it is always difficult to find the best way to share.

[@edwardyang8254]

I'll give one example of real world highly developed and successful socialist company: Huawei. Make no mistake, Huawei is owned by the employees. Everyone who works at Huawei knows this, and that's hundreds of thousands of people. A Japanese film director made a documentary, where he entered Huawei's record room, a huge library of records of all the shares owned by every employee ever. After working a few years, people get paid from their share dividend more than their salary. After a decade or so, they could retire. This my friend is why the US is so harsh on Huawei. It fundamentally challenges the capitalist system that the West pretend to be the only viable solution.

[@bjrnhjortshjandersen1286]

The way China works and the ability of the Ruling Class to work for the best of the nation is a strong force. Can China control corruption and continue to adjust the direction and improve the ability and the quality of life it may be heading towards a model very similar to the Scandinavia model. The historical lessons and traditions in China are different from Scandinavia and the fear of unrest and destructive rebellion is a very potent factor, however, the ability to adjust the society for the benefit of the people is real. Political opportunism balanced with genuine idealism seems not very different from what is found in the west.

[@christiansantiago9234]

The Nordic model is always a capitalist system with a huge welfare state. They have never been socialists since workers don't own the means of production. The socliast argument has been previously debunked by fellow leftist Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman, in which he wrote a whole article discussing this in NY Times. Take the case of Sweden, they even privatized their pension system.

[@shzarmai]

Th Nordic Countries are Social Democracies lol not truly socialist Countries

[@radhakrishna1845]

Professor Richard Wolff, Democracy.. Capitalism.. Socialism.. Communism... All have their own.. Dynamics... Individuals are part of society... So called individual freedom.. Freedom of speech.. Must be in harmony with the.. Good of all... (Vladimir Putin...)...

[@sampohonkala4195]

Being a Finn I would say the Nordic model is not a kind of socialism nor social democracy and it is not even leading to any kind of socialism. We should understand that in WW2 the Finns were literally ready to die rather than accept socialism - even most of the communists and social democrats knew the society had developed beyond the point where socialism could have been seen as progress. And at some point the wealthy business owners just realized that their work force is smarter, healthier and makes more profit than before, and even accept reasonably low wages, as life is rather secure and many basic needs are free. Of course the tension between employers and empolyees will always be there, but both know that the deal we now have is rather close to win - win. About taxes we should understand that the Nordics do not tax corporations very highly and there are few really rich. The Nordics tax everyone rather heavily, especially the upper middle class. But so far people are generally just getting wealthier, so nobody cares. There are political parties who try to promote tax cuts, but when asked which free services they would then cut to keep the budget in balance, they cannot really say. Everything should be the same, just more efficient.

[@jilescrouch3211]

Is this vid promoting socialism or decrying the evils of socialism..someone help me out.

[@yovcho1789]

If socialism means everything, it means nothing.

[@cosmicmusicreynolds3266]

It means hope for many

[@ladooshka]

AOC is turning out to be not a new gen socialist politician but more and more self serving corporate democrat.

[@teardrop-in-a-fishbowl]

Not only AOC, all of them lost the path towards changes, this what they promissed to do when in office. People should send them a clear message.

[@PoliticalEconomy101]

AOC got implants with taxpayer dollars. they were paid from the defense department budget. They bring a whole new meaning to national treasures.

[@JohnT.4321]

@@teardrop-in-a-fishbowl Well, that is what happens when you run as a Democrat. You eventually fall in line with the Party. You cannot change the Party from within considering they are a corporate backed Party like the Republicans. For A better critique of AOC here is a video from Socialism for All: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nYKrm3yXbquMoK8

[@JohnT.4321]

And here is a second video from Socialism for All: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJbTdYF9nrierJY

[@TheBigGSN5]

@@JohnT.4321 That guy you linked is nuts. He and his ilk understand nothing of politics and wallow in elitism. Total wokescolds. They’re loony tankies that think executing CEOs would create communism overnight.

[@kpatelv607]

I'm sorry but calling capitalism socialism is lying.

[@thomasjamison2050]

Jeff Bezos says it's not quite practical to have a centrally managed economy, and he is proving it.

[@son-of-the-republic3723]

Nazi stands for National Socialism I want to hear wolf explain how what he proposes is different. Because I can’t see how it is. I think his listeners deserve to hear this. It’s important

[@itzenormous]

You might ought to interest yourself in political theory and its history. Perhaps, if you invest the time and effort, and actually read, then you would be in a much better position, and you wouldn't be asking such ridiculous questions. It's important.

[@daveparker1537]

The nazis themselves said national socialism has nothing to do with marxist thinking.

[@atashikokoni]

The word 'privatization' was coined to describe what the Nazis were doing to their economy. Whatever they called themselves, their economics were neoliberal.

[@selwynr]

@@itzenormous It's not a ridiculous question. If a word can have any meaning, then we have to accept whatever anyone calls themselves (so a capitalist can call themselves a socialist and you would have to agree, if you follow what Wolff is saying). I'm an eco-socialist and socialism MEANS something very particular - workers owning the means of production and democratically running them. And Wolff usually gives that as his definition of socialism, or its key characteristic. So why then this definitional ambiguity and flexibility? It's counter-productive.

[@m.rebman7221]

Son of the republic? That’s even more ridiculous than “J Galt.” Why not “A. Rand” and be done with it? I just love these aliases… almost more fun than the replies! 😎

[@silversurfergw]

nórdic socialism =lots of wealth, tiny homogenous population and inconsequent global impact.

[@kobemop]

its the policies they enact, not the population

[@tiblex1585]

I want transhumanist socialism

[@alexanderordinary2110]

This guy is saying to democratize stuff? lololol. Somebody needs to tell this guy that the richest country in the world now, China, is the farthest thing from democracy...

[@katy9860]

Monolithic culture and secure borders are key.

[@1danwynn]

We Europeans see this argument being used against the Nordic Model a lot, particularly in the USA. But it's not really accurate. For an interesting discussion see this article: www.jacobinmag.com/2015/08/national-review-williamson-bernie-sanders-sweden/

[@katy9860]

@@1danwynn So could/should the Nordic countries absorb a few million unskilled Central Americans?

[@PoliticalEconomy101]

Yes, a monolithic socialist society and identity. Abolish Idpol, diversity, multiculturalism and class. We can have secure borders but OPEN immigration.

[@1danwynn]

@@katy9860 No. They're too small. But they take a disproportionately high number of refugees. The question of central American immigration to the US is an extreme example. There's more subtly here. The point I'm making is that immigration, ethnic diversity and multiculturalism are not incompatible with social democracy, as the right often claims. Which is good news! 🙂

[@kobemop]

its the policies they enact, it has nothing to "monolithic culture." if that was the case why is lithuania falling apart (an ethnic homogenous country with high outwards of out migrations)? of course you're a moronic racist.

[@son-of-the-republic3723]

Nazi stands for National Socialism I want to hear wolf explain how what he proposes is different. Because I can’t see how it is. I think his listeners deserve to hear this. It’s important

[@interestedperson7073]

The Nazi party added socialism to the name to convince the German working people that they were on the side of labor. Once in power they began a process of Privatization of public works, in fact they came up with the idea.

[@WackadoodleMalarkey]

m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/gaCYaGaFptRpd68 That ought to get you in at least rock n roll tune buddy.