Everyone involved needs to read more theory. My basic rule of thumb is that if you can't explain a concept in a way a small child can understand, you don't understand that concept. The other factor is that people have to be emotionally ready to engage with concepts. A huge problem with Internet Communists is that we tend to make dogmatic statements which don't actually educate. Do not state that the Nordic model is fascist, instead explain the things that make it fascist and let them come to the conclusion that it's fascist.

I say the Nordic model is fascist

In this case: don't tell, show. People without a theoretical or historical framework are not going to be receptive to that sort of description (even if correct).

It's more difficult to break down why it isn't really part of the socialist movement, but it is more effective propaganda to use it as a teaching moment, including examples of how thhey have reverted to neoliberalism (and racism) after the fall of the USSR.

I also offer some grace and suggest that:

if we could snap our fingers and have Nordic model everywhere tomorrow, then most socialists wouldn't have a major issue with that. The living conditions are largely very good!

The problem is that it is still built on exploitation of the global south, so by that model there must always be an exploitable group of people or land to sustain it. It also preserves the economic relations of capitalism at the core of their economy. This will always lead to capitalists gathering power for themselves and hollowing out the state/social institutions for their own profit. You already see this happening in Sweden in the last decade.....

Yep, the definition of fascist to someone without the needed context is basically "where everyone listens to that one guy in a military uniform". Which is why you can end up with someone legitimately believing stalin was fascist.

When talking about the Nordic model or really any kind of socdem, I think it's always good to break down what they think is good about the model, and then provide examples of the harm it can or has done. At the end you can split the good and bad, pretty much universally the benefits align with the ideas borrowed from socialism, and the harm from where it's deviated away from socialism.

Teaching anything requires patience. You wouldn't become antagonistic to a person you are teaching because they challenge your knowledge or want to make their ideas and experience fit within the lesson. Sure it's frustrating, but that's education for ya.

reading theory by simply using enticing vocab words

I actually think that's one of the biggest hurdles to introducing new people to socialism that people engage with after reading a bunch of theory. Using language that the unaware have no context for not only distracts from the points you are trying to make, but it makes everything seem either as a way to elevate yourself, or worse like a cult that has developed its own speech patterns. Speak simply, keep it broad and understandable, give real world examples. You might pull some ADHD/autism with language from theory, but they were prob going to end up here on their own eventually anyways.

I don’t think it really matters at this point.

Engaging in debates or seeking to “correct” people isn’t going to achieve anything.

Just get them to join an org or a union. Politics will follow action.

It’s not very difficult to get people to realize that the Democrats or whatever “mainstream left” party are actually neoliberal, and it’s not difficult to get them to realize neoliberalism is the problem.

If they can see that there is a system and that politics are part of that system, that the system perpetuates itself, then the rest falls into place.

It's me, I got baited by vocab

Universal law: system has to be rational. No rational system or justice can be based on power abuse.

Based on my travels/experiences this feels intuitively true to me.