this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
666 points (99.0% liked)

Memes

48656 readers
2028 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 21 points 22 hours ago (8 children)

Meanwhile, socialist Norway's wealth fund could maintain everyone's standard of living for 400 years if they stopped working right now.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 minutes ago

Norway isn't socialist. And by "everyone" you mean just Norwegians, even though Norway's wealth was built on the backs of people in the global South.

Not to mention that Norway's public wealth is being claimed by the capitalist class, just like in every western country

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 hours ago

Norway funds its safety nets off of super-exploitation of the Global South, ie Imperialism. It is firmly Capitalist and in no way Socialist, private property is the primary driving aspect of Norway's economy, the higher standard of living comes from acting as a Landlord in country form.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

norway isnt socialist. they just excel at exporting capitalism's issues to the third world.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 20 hours ago

of course not, you can bet that "wealth fund" is invested in institutions that leech of the global south.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I upvoted for the first sentence, don't know enough about Norway to have a critical opinion on the second one. It does sound like imperialism though. When they don't any more resources to exploit nationaly, capitalists must go elsewhere

[–] [email protected] 11 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

for the second part: i'm not well versed in norway's specifics but northern europe in general uses brazil as a resource colony, i know norway engages in oil extrativism here, in some delicate areas of the amazon rainforest that really shouldnt be disturbed right now.

i'm willing to bet good money they do it to many many other regions too.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 18 hours ago (5 children)

In a democratic state, things like universal healthcare are also called "socialized medicine" because it is an example of the people owning the means of production in that particular industry.

That's why most countries are what we call "mixed economies", that mix elements of capitalism and socialism.

Norway mixes in a higher ratio of socialism to capitalism than most countries. But they don't export any more of capitalism's issues to the third world than other countries. It's something to emulate, not discredit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Social programs are not Socialism. Every economy is a mix of private and public property, that doesn't make it mixed Capitalism and Socialism. Capitalism and Socialism are descriptors for economies at large, as you cannot remove entities from the context they are in. A worker cooperative is not a "socialist" part of a Capitalist economy, because it exists in the broader Capitalist machine and must use its tools.

What determines if a system is Capitalist or Socialist is if private property or public property is the primary aspect of a society, and which class has control. In Norway, Private Property is dominant, so Social Programs are used to support that.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 49 minutes ago (1 children)

But in another comment you referred to the USSR as "the world's first socialist state", yet it existed in the broader global capitalist machine. You have contradicted yourself. Which is it? Can socialism exist in a world with capitalism, or not?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 38 minutes ago

Socialism can, Communism cannot. Socialism is a gradual process towards Communism. A worker cooperative does not endanger the Capitalist system nor move agaInst it, but Socialist countries and economies working towards Communism do.

Communism, however, must be global.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

No. "Socialized medicine" is not "people owning the means of production"

[–] [email protected] -2 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

It is in a democratic state. Who else do you think owns it?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Pretty sure no one with universal healthcare calls it "socialized medicine". That's just a buzzword Americans use to scare each other.

It's not a means of producing anything other than health. Health is seen as a human right and it makes sense even in most western capitalist countries for it to be extended to everyone.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

I'm Canadian. It's what the founder of our healthcare system, Tommy Douglas, called it.

And yeah, it's the people owning the means of producing health. Socialist healthcare.

Americans scare people with these references to brutal authoritarian dictatorships that call themselves "socialist" but the real cause of all these problems is that they weren't democratic, not that they socialized industries.

Anyways, maybe it's just my autism making me literal as fuck, but I think you guys need to clear that up. This is what the people owning the means of production looks like. It's always going to be adjacent to capitalism, whether it's a socialist industry in a capitalist country, or a socialist country in a capitalist world.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

It is not Socialist. Social programs are not Socialism. Every economy is a mix of private and public property, that doesn’t make it mixed Capitalism and Socialism. Capitalism and Socialism are descriptors for economies at large, as you cannot remove entities from the context they are in. A worker cooperative is not a “socialist” part of a Capitalist economy, because it exists in the broader Capitalist machine and must use its tools.

What determines if a system is Capitalist or Socialist is if private property or public property is the primary aspect of a society, and which class has control. In Canada, Private Property is dominant, so Social Programs are used to support that.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 48 minutes ago (1 children)

By this absolutist logic, a socialist country is not a "socialist" part of a capitalist world, because it exists in the broader capitalist machine and must use its tools.

What is the point then? If you don't want to call anything "socialism" until the very last human on earth is socialist, fine, I will focus more on improving people's lives than haggling over definitions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 39 minutes ago

This isn't true, though. Socialism is a transitional status towards the goal of Communism, states that are pushing forwards on that goal, or "on the Socialist road," play a progressive role, while Capitalist countries take a regressive role. Socialist countries indeed exist in the context of a world economy dominated by Capitalism, but are moving against that.

I call many countries Socialist, like the PRC, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, former USSR, etc.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Interesting, thanks for the Canadian history lesson Perhaps that's where the Americans got their weird terminology from.

you guys need to clear that up

Who needs to do what? I'm not sure what I said that somehow gave you the impression I was an American.

My society pays for universal free healthcare, like everywhere in the civilized world.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

How is democracy related to ownership?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 52 minutes ago (1 children)

A democracy is a state in which the government is owned and controlled by the people.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 minutes ago

So not Norway, or any Western capitalist pseudo democracy.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

and in a demoratic world norway wouldnt be doing tax-free extrativism in my country (and others'), so that you can pay for your socialized medicine in a capitalist economy, where the money to finance it has to come from the poor. in this case we are your poor.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 14 hours ago

Socialized medicine is always cheaper than capitalist medicine. It's inherently more cost effective for people to pool their money together. It isn't paid for by some rich miner buying mining rights in some other country.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

That’s why most countries are what we call “mixed economies”, that mix elements of capitalism and socialism.

No. They are capitalist.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

By that logic, socialism cannot exist until the entire planet is socialist.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Close. Communism cannot exist until the entire planet is Socialist, but Socialism can be determined at a country level.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 46 minutes ago (1 children)

This seems needlessly arbitrary and reductive. Socialism exists all around us, it isn't defined by a country's borders.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 41 minutes ago

I don't know what this means, Socialism is not a gas.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not sure how that link is supposed to refute anything? It says basically what the comment above says without using the phrase "mixed economies".

If you meant the power structure and public/private balance is heavily capitalist for Nordic countries then you'd probably want to post something else supporting that statement.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Hey, I'm the author of that post! I don't see how my post says the same thing at all, it very much talks about which aspect, private or public, has power in society is what determines the nature of its economy.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 16 hours ago

"We should emulate the imperialist welfare state not discredit it!" 我不喜欢你鬼。 《 。…… 。》

[–] [email protected] 11 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Whenever people say this they neglect to point out that all the money came from selling oil.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 17 hours ago

They forget to point out that only dumbfuck yanks would consider Norway to be socialist, so the comment, in a meme community, is misleading from the get-go.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Hmmm, interesting. But what if we gave it all to one guy?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 21 hours ago

Its so fucking dumb, you wouldn’t believe it! If he isn’t retarded and have an Elon Musk moment then he would and this is making me genuinely sick contribute to society, theoretically making a net plus to society

[–] [email protected] 5 points 14 hours ago

Norway is not socialist in the least

[–] [email protected] 7 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

thats not something to boast about, it tells how deeply embedded the nordic socdems are in financial parasitism aka imperialism.

living off interests is parasitism

[–] [email protected] 4 points 18 hours ago

Norway is a capitalist country. It us an OECD hanger-on to the US-led imperialist world order.