K
Kaninchen
Guest
While American definitions are, I’m sure, terribly useful in understanding the US as Americans understand the US, European definitions tend to work best for understanding Europe.The pejorative you introduced then dismissed will be ignored.
The “European” definition you gave for socialism is actually the definition for communism.
Socialism is where the government collects the assets from people and redistributes it evenly. Essentially, taking little from the poor and giving them much while taking much from the wealthy and giving them little. It is a very intrusive form of government in that it is typified by significant regulation and large number of restrictive laws. Community ownership may or amy not be part of it. However the Nordic countries do have some state-owned business, such as mines, oil companies, etc.
Communism is, classically, the final stage of socialism - the difference being that ownership would be no longer vested in the State (which would wither away) - ‘workers control’ in other words (so not common ownership . . .).
The ‘Scandinavian model’ is a variation of the European ‘social democratic’ tradition which really has two themes - social insurance systems (including social medicine) and greater or lesser levels of State ownership of (mainly) public utilities.
Your characterization of the way in which it works is, of course, that of an American Conservative. One could use similarly loaded terms to describe how America works (I’ve lived in the US, I’m not exactly naive about it) - as I did in joking about an American Conservative appreciation of ‘socialist’ only to conjure one up.