Identifying Socialist Institutions and Socialist Countries

Properties1
tagsnordic-model, norway, social-wealth-fund, ownership, bruenig

3 min read

Identifying Socialist Institutions and Socialist Countries

Author: Matt Bruenig | Date: 2018-08-07 | URL: https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2018/08/07/identifying-socialist-institutions-and-socialist-countries/ Status: fetched (WebFetch; arguments and short quotes captured)

Summary

The missing left counter-case on are-the-nordic-countries-socialist. Every other source in the corpus, across lean, says no. Bruenig says yes — and crucially, he argues it on the critics’ own definition, ownership of capital, rather than by redefining socialism as a welfare state.

Key Claims

  • Definition: socialist institutions are “institutions that facilitate the collective, democratic ownership of capital.” Three kinds in the Nordics: the general government sector, portfolios of state-owned enterprises, and social wealth funds holding capital assets.
  • The load-bearing datum: the Norwegian state owns roughly 76% of the country’s non-home wealth (2016), likely above 80% by 2017.
  • Norway’s sovereign wealth fund held 8,488 billion kroner by 2017 and owns an average of ~1.4% of every globally listed company.
  • On the Swedish Meidner plan: the wage-earner funds accumulated about 7% of Swedish company stock over eight years before being dismantled — evidence the mechanism worked as designed.
  • Against Brad DeLong’s threshold (socialism requires ~75% of GDP under state control), Norway reaches roughly 60% — so Bruenig argues for a spectrum rather than a binary, on which Norway sits furthest along.
  • Conclusion: Norway is the most socialist country in the developed world, and the model is a proven blueprint to extend, not a ceiling.

Direct Quotes

“Institutions that facilitate the collective, democratic ownership of capital”

“Norway is clearly the most socialist country in the developed world”

“Norwegian state does own 76 percent of the country’s non-home wealth”

“The Nordic countries have effective socialist institutions”

“They should extend them further still”

Notes

This is the argument the wiki’s Nordic debate page was missing, and it is a genuinely different argument from the usual left move. The standard exchange in the corpus runs: right says “the Nordics are market economies, therefore not socialist,” left says “but they have big welfare states.” Bruenig instead concedes the ownership definition and disputes the facts — arguing collective ownership of capital is exactly what Norway has, via the state’s asset holdings rather than via nationalized firms.

The obvious counter, not addressed here: state asset ownership funded by petroleum rents and invested in global equity markets is not the same as social control of production, and Norway’s firms still operate on market prices — which leaves the economic-calculation-problem untouched. Flag when using this in the debate page.

Date caveat: 2018 figures, pre-dating the current cycle by eight years. Norway’s fund has grown substantially since; the percentages should be refreshed before publication.

Concepts: nordic-model, socialism, social-democracy, economic-calculation-problem | Debates: are-the-nordic-countries-socialist, does-socialism-work-economically, is-democratic-socialism-different-from-socialism