Why anyone would associate Sweden with socialism is beyond my understanding. Even Canada has a larger proportion of public ownership than Sweden. But then for many Americans I guess Canada is socialist! In terms of an economic system East Germany was much closer to socialism than Sweden ever was. Simply having civil rights associated with most advanced capitalist democracies or an extensive welfare system does not entail that a country is socialist.
Nowadays, most capitalist commentators point to a ‘new Swedish model’ of privatisation, deregulation and other market orientated "reforms". They also point to the way Sweden supposedly managed its banking crisis in the beginning of the 1990s. In short, the present Swedish model reads as a capitalist success story to show that neo-liberalism ‘works’.
Likewise, what is sometimes called the ‘mixed economy’ in Sweden was never a mix of public and privately owned companies. In fact, Sweden’s state sector was smaller than in many other countries and the role this state sector played was to provide cheap energy, infrastructure, and research and development (R&D) to the big monopolies that dominate the economy, while the welfare system and social democratic governments would guarantee the necessary political and social stability for capitalist expansion.
The concentration and centralisation of capital probably went further in Sweden than in most other advanced capitalist countries. "It's a family business that dominates its country's business sector with some of Europe’s biggest in its stable...", wrote the Financial Times (July 12, 2004) in an article about the Wallenberg family and its empire. According to he same article: "No other family dominates the business sector of a developed country in the way that the Wallenberg hold sway in Sweden." And "Wallenberg dominance of corporate Sweden has been helped by successive social democratic governments." At one stage, the Wallenberg family controlled almost 40 percent of the shares traded on the Stockholm (Sweden) stock exchange.
Even Peter Stein, an extreme neo-liberal Swedish economist, admits that "Although nationalisation was a point of principle in the social democrat’s programme it was never implemented. Until 1970 government controlled manufacturing accounted for 5 percent of the total. State ownership and management where they existed were guided by professional ethics and not hampered by political considerations". (Peter Stein: Sweden: From capitalist Success to Welfare - State Sclerosis, September 10, 1991).
Nationalisation was never "a principle". Social democracy ruled the country for almost 40 years concurrently - from the 1930s to 1976 - and during this time hardly nationalised any industry. And the few state-owned companies that do exist are mirror images of privately owned companies, and that is how social democracy and the trade union leaders want things to stay.
The trade union representatives on the boards of companies act as the defenders of shareholders, not the workers. Being in the boardroom has been a doorway to an extra income for the trade union leaders, and without any democratic control from below, or alternative to capitalism, the trade union representatives have almost always sided with the bosses. Recent examples illustrates this. Olle Ludvigsson, from the Metalworkers’ union, who has been the employees’ representative on the board of Volvo since 1998, even voted for a big increase in dividends in 2009 at the same time as the company sacked thousands of workers. The LO chairperson Wanja Lundby-Wedin voted yes to a generous retirement package for the head of the "pensions company" AMF. The very same AMF lowered its pension payouts to existing pensioners as a result of huge losses in its equity holdings. When this became public knowledge in Spring of 2009, a poll showed that 90 percent wanted
Lundby-Wedin to step down as LO chief. Sitting on several company boards gave her an extra half million krona each year.
Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html
--- On Fri, 2/5/10, Bhaskar Sunkara <bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Bhaskar Sunkara <bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] 36% of Americans have a positive image of socialism
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Friday, February 5, 2010, 9:27 AM
> Agreed. It's certainly better
> that more and more people are associating
> socialism with Sweden rather than East Germany. The
> line between
> quasi-social democratic politics of the left-wing of
> mainstream liberals and
> democratic socialism is simply that that latter advocates
> structural change.
> This shows there is an audience for such a politics, if
> only the left got
> its act together and decided to start building an
> opposition movement.
> Without a party with the working class is everything and
> with one it is
> everything. I'm all for the strategy Fletcher lays
> out at the end of this
> speech (minute 18ish):
> http://theactivist.org/blog/its-time-for-the-left-to-get-serious
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Lenin's Tomb
> <leninstombblog at googlemail.com>wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > So when 95% of Americans say they like
> small biz they don't really mean
> > > it, but when 36% say they like socialism they
> really do?
> > >
> > > Doug
> > >
> >
> > No, you've missed my point. I don't take either
> finding at face value.
> > Most of those who say they like socialism don't mean
> what you or I do by
> > the
> > term. But that's not the point. The fact
> that liberals - even in the
> > capitalist media, I note - have been provoked into
> defending socialism by a
> > right-wing hysteria campaign over healthcare has meant
> that as a political
> > term it is more acceptable. That's a propaganda
> opportunity for the Left.
> > As someone once said somewhere at some time - if they
> give you a handle,
> > turn it.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Richard Seymour
> > Writer and blogger
> > Email: leninstombblog at googlemail.com
> > Website: http://www.leninology.blogspot.com
> > Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/leninology
> > Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Seymour_(writer)
> > Book:
> >
> > http://www.versobooks.com/books/nopqrs/s-titles/seymour_r_the_liberal_defense_of_murder.shtml
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>