pull down to refresh
I'd go as far as to argue that the size of government is actually secondary the morality and culture of the people.
that's not to say that government structure doesn't matter at all. even the most ethical people wouldn't succeed at full blown socialism because of the calculation problem. But on the margins of government programs that get actively debated, I'd suspect that the culture of the people matters more than the specific design of the program .
If men were angels, etc.
size of government is actually secondary the morality and culture of the people
This. And honestly even just a common morality even if the morality is not perfect is better than what we have now in the US for example. Becoming more and more convinced that the left/right system arguements we have are nearly pointless when we have fewer shared morals and world view.
One of the biggest lies is that only religious people are religious. Everyone has a world view and a world view is just another word for religion. It is impossible to divorce relgiion from government. We think we have a separation but really we just created new religions and are in denial about it.
What we see in politics might just be competing religions. Obviously some systems work better than others but one of the biggest problems that almost always gets shunned as off-limits is cultural commonality. We worship diversity today and it's killing us.
100% the right read. Agreed
I remember watching the documentary on Swedish Socialism which I think was Jonah's. The TLDR was this.
Sweden went full socialist in the 70s. IE real socialism, not capitalism with a large welfare state which is what they are now. It didn't go well. Shocker. So they reformed and began to prosper again.
The other takeaway was that their welfare state worked better when there was a stronger tight culture and work ethic. IE, less free loaders. Over time freeloaders increased. Adversarial relationships between unions and management is getting worse. As their society becomes more diverse there is more of a sense of entitlement to benefits and more resentment from those working towards those who are taking.
It all makes sense to me. Full socialism is madness. More economic freedom leads to more abundance but with a weaker culture and more diversity it is harder for any system to work.
Because Sweden is small some social programs can work better when there is a more unified cultural ethic. These systems over time lead to entitlement and resentment. Add in foreign cultures with different moral values and norms and it starts to show cracks.
The lesson for me is that programs to help people if they are done in a small local first way by groups that have shared values are far more likely to show success. The bigger and more diverse the more likely you see abuse by the faciltators, the reciever's and the providers.
The Democratic Socialist point to Sweden as an example of socialism but it isn't a positive one. It actually seems to not only NOT be socialism but it is an example of how when tried in a great place where you'd think it would work it failed.