3 ms·

I was hoping there would be a novel reason to stop comparing Nordic countries to the rest of the world. Sadly the main points the article makes are: (1) they ar

I was hoping there would be a novel reason to stop comparing Nordic countries to the rest of the world. Sadly the main points the article makes are: (1) they are welfare states and that would never be welcome anywhere else and (2) they have small populations. So... (1) maybe a welfare state isn't that bad? and (2) that's akin to not believing in small-scale trials/pilots because they're small.

strange_quark 9y ago
Also that they're incredibly homogenous and that they may be just as racist and unequal as the rest of us, but nobody notices because everybody in their country is the same race.
- vacri 9y ago
  Sweden has its share of problems. It's not a fantasy state where everything is hunky-dory. The south of Sweden is a European hotspot for anti-semitic violence, for example. It also currently has a spate of hand-grenade attacks by organised crime, the only area of its kind in the West[1]. As for 'incredibly homogenous', they have a larger foreign-born population (15%) than the US (14%) or the UK (12%). While that number doesn't tell the full story, sure, it does show that Sweden isn't some hermit-state. And it's neighbour Norway has the highest immigration rate of any western democracy that isn't a city-state. Trying to find reasons to exclude Sweden as a comparator is basically condoning bad behaviour. It's not a perfect fantasy state; they're just doing really well in the quality-of-life stakes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grenade_attacks_in_Sweden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grenade_attacks_in_Swe...
AndrewKemendo 9y ago
I think #2 is the most valid and compelling reason for a host of reasons. The other thing that is in the article that shouldn't be dismissed the homogeneity of the population. That goes a long way toward making #1 possible as it's easier to empathize across a smaller population.
- corybrown 9y ago
  Plenty of US states have small populations, no? Also lots of states are comparatively homogeneous (Sweden has 19% of population as recent immigrants).
  - AndrewKemendo 9y ago
    Sure, so those comparisons are actually more apt! You rarely if ever see them made however. Georgia, Michigan, NC and NJ are the closest in size but that's about where it ends. Michigan probably has the closest demographic homogeneity. However the existence of the federal government as well as natural resources as a economic base throws a wrench into any further comparisons.
    - corybrown 9y ago
      > natural resources as a economic base True for Norway, but not any other country in the neighborhood (fine, Scotland I guess)
- foxbarrington 9y ago
  Homogeneity isn't one of the main points though. The article barely touches on it -- mentioned in one sentence, almost as an afterthought. Also, as some other commenters point out, their homogeneity isn't on a different scale from places that aren't topping the charts.

strange_quark 9y ago

Also that they're incredibly homogenous and that they may be just as racist and unequal as the rest of us, but nobody notices because everybody in their country is the same race.

vacri 9y ago
Sweden has its share of problems. It's not a fantasy state where everything is hunky-dory. The south of Sweden is a European hotspot for anti-semitic violence, for example. It also currently has a spate of hand-grenade attacks by organised crime, the only area of its kind in the West[1]. As for 'incredibly homogenous', they have a larger foreign-born population (15%) than the US (14%) or the UK (12%). While that number doesn't tell the full story, sure, it does show that Sweden isn't some hermit-state. And it's neighbour Norway has the highest immigration rate of any western democracy that isn't a city-state. Trying to find reasons to exclude Sweden as a comparator is basically condoning bad behaviour. It's not a perfect fantasy state; they're just doing really well in the quality-of-life stakes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grenade_attacks_in_Sweden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grenade_attacks_in_Swe...

AndrewKemendo 9y ago

I think #2 is the most valid and compelling reason for a host of reasons. The other thing that is in the article that shouldn't be dismissed the homogeneity of the population. That goes a long way toward making #1 possible as it's easier to empathize across a smaller population.

corybrown 9y ago
Plenty of US states have small populations, no? Also lots of states are comparatively homogeneous (Sweden has 19% of population as recent immigrants).
- AndrewKemendo 9y ago
  Sure, so those comparisons are actually more apt! You rarely if ever see them made however. Georgia, Michigan, NC and NJ are the closest in size but that's about where it ends. Michigan probably has the closest demographic homogeneity. However the existence of the federal government as well as natural resources as a economic base throws a wrench into any further comparisons.
  - corybrown 9y ago
    > natural resources as a economic base True for Norway, but not any other country in the neighborhood (fine, Scotland I guess)
foxbarrington 9y ago
Homogeneity isn't one of the main points though. The article barely touches on it -- mentioned in one sentence, almost as an afterthought. Also, as some other commenters point out, their homogeneity isn't on a different scale from places that aren't topping the charts.