Truly attending to the world’s problems would mean abandoning the parochial, nation-centered vision of social democracy for something like a true internationalism.
For a person like myself raised in Ohio, I like how you have written this without having to use the word “class” and also point out that “capitalism” is still the underlying driver behind all the touted Nordic socialist ‘success’ stories. Analysis should first be directed at establishing consensus on goals of reform before you decide what policies could bring those goals into being. If your goal is just to destroy capitalism you’ll never get an American following because most Americans believe it is the same thing as ‘democracy’. This is encouraged and maintained because there is absolutely no understanding that something like Norways “world’s largest sovereign wealth fund” in every ‘modern’ nation state that finances their grasp of externalized resources.
What are the strategic policy conclusions that you draw from this critique? It sounds like you want Norway to close its borders to immigration from lower wage regions, stop importing goods that are made more cheaply abroad, and sell off all its foreign investments. Is that right? And if so, how do you see this advancing the socialist movement?
-Pay decent wages/salaries to all labor immigrants.
-Support labor rights overseas and discourage unsustainable (incl. labor practices) commodity production.
-Definancialize sovereign wealth and work toward social investments (infrastructure, climate change mitigation, R&D funds, climate reparations, and more).
For a person like myself raised in Ohio, I like how you have written this without having to use the word “class” and also point out that “capitalism” is still the underlying driver behind all the touted Nordic socialist ‘success’ stories. Analysis should first be directed at establishing consensus on goals of reform before you decide what policies could bring those goals into being. If your goal is just to destroy capitalism you’ll never get an American following because most Americans believe it is the same thing as ‘democracy’. This is encouraged and maintained because there is absolutely no understanding that something like Norways “world’s largest sovereign wealth fund” in every ‘modern’ nation state that finances their grasp of externalized resources.
What are the strategic policy conclusions that you draw from this critique? It sounds like you want Norway to close its borders to immigration from lower wage regions, stop importing goods that are made more cheaply abroad, and sell off all its foreign investments. Is that right? And if so, how do you see this advancing the socialist movement?
-Pay decent wages/salaries to all labor immigrants.
-Support labor rights overseas and discourage unsustainable (incl. labor practices) commodity production.
-Definancialize sovereign wealth and work toward social investments (infrastructure, climate change mitigation, R&D funds, climate reparations, and more).