3 ms·

> I don't mean hardcore enforced-total-equality Socialism, I mean nice Socialism like the kind Bernie Sanders has been raving about. It's taboo to point this o

> I don't mean hardcore enforced-total-equality Socialism, I mean nice Socialism like the kind Bernie Sanders has been raving about. It's taboo to point this out, especially on HN, but I'm feeling bold today: You can't discuss the socialist policies of Western European countries without addressing their wealth. And you can't discuss the current wealth of Western European countries without acknowledging the process by which they acquired that wealth. The "nice socialism that Sanders has been raving about" is the kind that is practiced in countries with a long history of colonization and slavery[0]. During this timeframe, they "earned" a massive amount of money by extracting resources from people that they literally enslaved. This started before the 17th century and continued into the 20th century. Those people who were colonized and enslaved (and their countries) are still feeling the effects of that today, and they would not be so quick to describe that kind of socialism as "nice". [0] Denmark and Sweden are the two that Sanders has called out specifically by name.

marshray 11y ago
Many countries in Western Europe have been destroyed and rebuilt multiple times since the 19th century when slavery was practiced.
- chimeracoder 11y ago
  > Many countries in Western Europe have been destroyed and rebuilt multiple times This doesn't change the fact that the current economic status of Denmark and Sweden today is directly linked to their status as colonial powers and slaveholders from the 17th-20th century. > since the 19th century when slavery was practiced. This entire subthread began with the claim that being "low-class" in the US is tantamount to slavery. If that's the case, there should be no problem with accepting colonialism, as it was practiced by Sweden into the late 19th century and Demark into the early 20th century, as a form of slavery, since it resembles slavery far more closely than being a member of the working poor in the US.
  - marshray 11y ago
    So perhaps you can explain why, whatever this wealth was providing Denmark's 'economic status' the Nazi's didn't plunder it when they occupied it during WWII? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark_in_World_War_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark_in_World_War_II AFAICT, Denmark (and Germany, Japan, China, Singapore, South Korea, and everybody else) have whatever 'economic status' they have due to a lot more to what happened during the post WWII years than to colonial times.
    - ptaipale 11y ago
      Yes, and attributing Sweden's wealth to slave trade is disingenuous. Attributing it to WWII years and selling ball bearings to Nazis is more relevant - but then, who in their position wouldn't have done that? I.e. stay out of the nasty war and trade, if it helps to keep peace on borders.
  - amag 11y ago
    Late 19th century, early 20th, Sweden was one of the poorest countries in Europe. The wealth of Sweden was accumulated post-WWII when the rest of Europe stood in ruins and needed to be rebuilt, not by being a colonial force to be reckoned with (it never was).
    - chimeracoder 11y ago
      > Late 19th century, early 20th, Sweden was one of the poorest countries in Europe. not by being a colonial force to be reckoned with (it never was) I mean, yes, if you compare Sweden only to the really lucrative colonizers, it'll look "poor" by comparison. But all you're really saying is that Sweden was less effective as a colonial power than its neighbors who were even "better" at it (England, France, etc.). That doesn't change the original point. If you look beyond simply Europe at where Sweden was with respect to the rest of the world, especially the regions that were colonized and enslaved, it's clear where they stood, and clear how much they benefited by being the ones who colonized, as opposed to the ones who were colonized. The point is, you can't just look at "nice European socialism" in a vacuum and ignore the reasons why that philosophy has succeeded in Western Europe and why that exact same philosophy has been an empirical disaster in countries that were previously colonies of Western European powers and are still impoverished enough that they cannot export the working class down the economic chain any further (the way Western European powers - and the US as well - have).
- efaref 11y ago
  I'm sorry to inform you that slavery is alive and well in Western Europe: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/16/lithuanian-guilty-forced-labour-southampton-zydrunas-zdanevicius http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/16/lithuanian-guil...
  - marshray 11y ago
    No, you just linked to an article proving that it's illegal and prosecuted when it occurs.

marshray 11y ago

Many countries in Western Europe have been destroyed and rebuilt multiple times since the 19th century when slavery was practiced.

chimeracoder 11y ago
> Many countries in Western Europe have been destroyed and rebuilt multiple times This doesn't change the fact that the current economic status of Denmark and Sweden today is directly linked to their status as colonial powers and slaveholders from the 17th-20th century. > since the 19th century when slavery was practiced. This entire subthread began with the claim that being "low-class" in the US is tantamount to slavery. If that's the case, there should be no problem with accepting colonialism, as it was practiced by Sweden into the late 19th century and Demark into the early 20th century, as a form of slavery, since it resembles slavery far more closely than being a member of the working poor in the US.
- marshray 11y ago
  So perhaps you can explain why, whatever this wealth was providing Denmark's 'economic status' the Nazi's didn't plunder it when they occupied it during WWII? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark_in_World_War_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark_in_World_War_II AFAICT, Denmark (and Germany, Japan, China, Singapore, South Korea, and everybody else) have whatever 'economic status' they have due to a lot more to what happened during the post WWII years than to colonial times.
  - ptaipale 11y ago
    Yes, and attributing Sweden's wealth to slave trade is disingenuous. Attributing it to WWII years and selling ball bearings to Nazis is more relevant - but then, who in their position wouldn't have done that? I.e. stay out of the nasty war and trade, if it helps to keep peace on borders.
- amag 11y ago
  Late 19th century, early 20th, Sweden was one of the poorest countries in Europe. The wealth of Sweden was accumulated post-WWII when the rest of Europe stood in ruins and needed to be rebuilt, not by being a colonial force to be reckoned with (it never was).
  - chimeracoder 11y ago
    > Late 19th century, early 20th, Sweden was one of the poorest countries in Europe. not by being a colonial force to be reckoned with (it never was) I mean, yes, if you compare Sweden only to the really lucrative colonizers, it'll look "poor" by comparison. But all you're really saying is that Sweden was less effective as a colonial power than its neighbors who were even "better" at it (England, France, etc.). That doesn't change the original point. If you look beyond simply Europe at where Sweden was with respect to the rest of the world, especially the regions that were colonized and enslaved, it's clear where they stood, and clear how much they benefited by being the ones who colonized, as opposed to the ones who were colonized. The point is, you can't just look at "nice European socialism" in a vacuum and ignore the reasons why that philosophy has succeeded in Western Europe and why that exact same philosophy has been an empirical disaster in countries that were previously colonies of Western European powers and are still impoverished enough that they cannot export the working class down the economic chain any further (the way Western European powers - and the US as well - have).
efaref 11y ago
I'm sorry to inform you that slavery is alive and well in Western Europe: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/16/lithuanian-guilty-forced-labour-southampton-zydrunas-zdanevicius http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/16/lithuanian-guil...
- marshray 11y ago
  No, you just linked to an article proving that it's illegal and prosecuted when it occurs.