Sweden is not Socialist. Only right-wingers and socialists/communists looking for a positive model to point to (because North Korea isn't quite a gold star standard to look up to) think Sweden is. Real Swedes bristle at this comparison and will be glad to point out why it is wrong.
NDP acting like Liberals ?
- Thread starter train
- Start date
Same as botswana's 
Classic blackrock
Actually Sweden is a constitutional monarchy with a centre right party in power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate_Party
Classic blackrock
Actually Sweden is a constitutional monarchy with a centre right party in power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate_Party
Only looking skin deep again. Nice Wiki search.Same as botswana's
Classic blackrock
Actually Sweden is a constitutional monarchy with a centre right party in power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate_Party
You should have read a little further down.
"The Swedish Social Democratic Party has played a leading political role since 1917, after Reformistshad confirmed their strength and the revolutionaries left the party. After 1932, cabinets have been dominated by the Social Democrats. Only five general elections (1976, 1979, 1991, 2006 and 2010) have given the centre-right bloc enough seats in Parliament to form a government."
At the national level you're correct, but what make the difference is that great deal of the social programs are handled at the lower county/municipal levels. 70% of the healthcare services are funded at the local level. So where the countries 'national' government is correctly be called a Constitutional Monarchy. The country is run very much with socialist styled programs at the lower levels, county and municipal. It's much the same in Finland where municipal taxes can account for 20% the personal annual tax burden and the social programs are run locally as well, housing, childcare, work training.
The centre right doesn't have a majority in government, just more than any other as a block. It's a minority government, nice try. Even the 2002 was that big a statement against socialism in the long term just the first election after the Swedish collapse in the late 90's. No mystery. The Socialist parties haven't had that bad a result since the late 20's, not a bad stretch. So the electorate chose to toss the bums out, not unusual. The SD alliances have been in power for 65 of the last 78 years. In a country with PR elections and 8 relevant political parties, swings are more the rule than the exception, but in not so in Sweden, 65 of 78 years. Not what I would call a political movement in trouble over the long term.
The decentralized point shows that the national government situation at any given point in time isn't necessarily the whole story of the way a country is run. The country doesn't, as a whole expect to have an every-man-for-himself life style. The social support net works because it's wide AND deep.
Give up
Shit, the US has a welfare program, and walk in clinics, but I wouldn't dare call them socialists.
FAST
You will NEVER get blackrock discuss what makes a country socialist.
Shit, the US has a welfare program, and walk in clinics, but I wouldn't dare call them socialists.
FAST
Since you`ve never told us what you think makes a country socialist, even though you challenged me to and then got the answer, then went silent, how can we think you know what does.
I guess you missed this post, a direct answer to your question.
Your Challenge in post #39
My reponse of what is socialism compared to Commuinism in post # 41
That the US have one makes them one step higher than most 3rd world counties i that area, not socialist. The welfare programs is just one factor. How about comparing the other programs listed?
So what do you think makes a country a socialist country? So far we haven`t even got your opinion nor a reference that would back you up; just your opinion.
Around the bush
So your saying, it takes "X" amount of "programs" to make a country socialist, how do you determine what "X" is.
You just said 2 isn`t enough, maybe 3 or 5 or 10, what.
I, on the other hand have repeatedly stated, there are NO socialist countrys, as socialism does NOT exist.
FAST
In all of the above, you STILL have not defined what makes a country socialist.
So your saying, it takes "X" amount of "programs" to make a country socialist, how do you determine what "X" is.
You just said 2 isn`t enough, maybe 3 or 5 or 10, what.
I, on the other hand have repeatedly stated, there are NO socialist countrys, as socialism does NOT exist.
FAST
I'm convinced you can't read and understand english as the answer was in the post title 'my response'. It does take a little intelligence to take comparison between socialism and communism and see the definition of a socialist state in plain english. In that post I thought you probably wouldn't accept/comprehend the answer and I was right.
In my words
" Democratic socialism attempts to create through the establishment of a legal and social system based on equality, fairness, and social justice using legislation and programs like old age pension, medicare, unemployment insurance and subsidized housing, referred to incorrectly, by some, as a welfare state, emphasizing redistribution of wealth and social equality, but doesn't do so at expense of the elimination of market capitalism.
Communism takes it further by having the state taking control of everything, leaving nothing in the control or possession of the population. The state owns it all and controls it all."
What part of this answer doesn't explain what a socialist state is and then take it further and describes the difference of a communist state. Communism is a more extreme/complete version of socialism. Everything is own by the government which is not necessarily the case in the socialist state. If you can't understand that then you're being just plain ignorant.
or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Socialism
As a social structure and set of social relations, socialism is democratic or participatory management based on adhocracy or democratic forms of organization in the workplace and in the economy. This is based on equality of opportunity or equal power-relations.
As a political movement, socialism is associated with various socialist, communist, social democratic and labor parties, as well as trade unions and various other forms of social movements with the ultimate aim of establishing a socialist economic system.
As a specific worldview, socialism is usually based on a materialist conception of social and economic development, and the position that human behavior is in large part influenced by the social environment. This often implies a specific methodology for examining social and economic phenomena.
No opinion
You have yet to express in YOUR words what you believe socialism is, or what makes a country socialist.
I have clearly expressed my opinion.
And once AGAIN, you have FAILED to respond to my last post, and NO, copy/pasting in not a response from you, but some one else’s opinion.
FAST
Talk about NOT being able to read, all you are doing is copying and pasting from the net.
You have yet to express in YOUR words what you believe socialism is, or what makes a country socialist.
I have clearly expressed my opinion.
And once AGAIN, you have FAILED to respond to my last post, and NO, copy/pasting in not a response from you, but some one else’s opinion.
FAST
The first, as stated, are my words, the second, as stated, is from someone elses. You won't accept what I write and you won't accept what others write and don't offer any definition from anywhere, just your 'opinion'. You're an idiot troll pure and simple. Nuff said.
Sore looser
That includes the US, because it is, by your muddied definition, socialist.
Therefore, as I have stated to you many times, the term is meaningless, in describing the politics of a country.
I’ll try to explain it to you in simpler terms, just because a country has one or more programs to assist the poor, have sliding scale tax brackets, provide schooling, policing, etc, DOES NOT MAKE IT SOCIALIST.
Just a responsible government, that’s all, nothing more complicated than that.
If we listen to socialists, socialism (their term, not mine) is good, so more is better, and as YOU say, “communism takes if further“, so communism is better.
And to repeat for you, the term socialism was originally coined during the French revolution, when attempts were made to overthrow capitalism, which did in fact happen in Russia.
Again,……….today, the term is outdated/meaningless, unless of course, when referring to communism.
But in some countries, as the OP mentioned, an insult.
…….. And still with the insults, must hurt when your loosing.
FAST
So, if I’m going to accept your “opinion”, which is nothing more than regurgitated phraseology from internet searches, then every fricken country in the world is in one form or another a socialist country.
That includes the US, because it is, by your muddied definition, socialist.
Therefore, as I have stated to you many times, the term is meaningless, in describing the politics of a country.
I’ll try to explain it to you in simpler terms, just because a country has one or more programs to assist the poor, have sliding scale tax brackets, provide schooling, policing, etc, DOES NOT MAKE IT SOCIALIST.
Just a responsible government, that’s all, nothing more complicated than that.
If we listen to socialists, socialism (their term, not mine) is good, so more is better, and as YOU say, “communism takes if further“, so communism is better.
And to repeat for you, the term socialism was originally coined during the French revolution, when attempts were made to overthrow capitalism, which did in fact happen in Russia.
Again,……….today, the term is outdated/meaningless, unless of course, when referring to communism.
But in some countries, as the OP mentioned, an insult.
…….. And still with the insults, must hurt when your loosing.
FAST
That's funny - Rae was NDP, Mulcair was Liberal - wow talk about a change in political stripes! It back to the same problem we had with Iggy and that Jack guy. Do you left wingers really know what the hell your talking about? :frusty:
The gullible voting pubic (stirred up by the leftist media) gets caught in the cross fire of the socialist agenda. The conservatives are the only genuine party remaining in this country
Unfortunately the Libs moved to far to the center IMHO....so that has caused them trouble. But really I would like to see one of the parties take on electoral reform. I am sick and tired of parties claiming they have some sort of mandate when 60% of the country voted against them. It really strips the govt of legitimacy and creates more friction for that govt's agenda.
There are crossovers all the time, no big deal. Some time ago Steven Lewis and his wife were at dinner with Rae, I believe when he was premier, and after dinner his wife told Lewis that Rae wasn't a full fledged NDP'er. Steven Lewis said later, history showed that she was 100% correct.
Better than an Ndp'er
Rae was far too bright for the pinko party.
FAST
Saying "Rae wasn't a full fledged NDP'er", was actually a compliment.
Rae was far too bright for the pinko party.
FAST
