Congratulations to Sweden
September 18, 2006On finally voting out the Social Democrats in the national election. I’ve been following the election through Johan Norberg’s blog and it has been quite interesting.
Although there are many similarities between Denmark and Sweden there are also differences. For me it is in particularly interesting how both sides of the Øresund, the sound dividing Denmark and Sweden have taken different approaches to liberalizing their economies.
In particular it is interesting for me that at least one of the winning parties has had a platform of flat tax and the alliance as a whole has been promising lower taxes. Good for them. The Danish Center-right coalition is scared to promise lower taxes before the next election, which is just plain stupid. They are in many ways the embodiment of Ayn Rand’s famous quote:
In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.
And yes when she said this she meant capitalism=good and statism=evil. So it is more than valid for what is happening in Denmark. Compromising so much over the last 50 years the Danish pro Capitalism parties have gone over to the side of evil without even noticing it.
This is very true for Sweden as well of course, it is just interesting and refreshing to see that there are parts of the “pro capitalism” alliance that still want to push Capitalism and not Statism.
Comments:
Well Pelle...
As you probably had read in the news, not everything is going straight forward with the new Swedish government.In fact, it's probably been the worst start of any Swedish government at all, if you see it in a PR point of view.
I'll look at in in anohter perspective. Like in Denmark (or the US), there is typically a normal period of time that any political party can hold power. And let's face it. The Social Democratic Party (in Sweden), has been there too long, like Poul Nyrup Rasmussen (a Danish primeminister for nearly ten years in the 90's). I think it's only natural and healthy that a country can switch power to one political party to another, and still remain a stabile country.
But don't forget, that what you trade in for, isn't necessarily going to be better.
I think it's healthy to any democratic society that there is both right/left wing parties. But take a notion that most Danish government has been through the basis of what lies between right/left wing parties - center!
Why? Maybe because its what most people want - or maybe that is what has proven to be the most succesfull governments?
People in general want's stability. The big question is ofcouse who can provide it? Is capitalism the only ressource or do we need a controllable form of capitalism?
When you boil it down, it's the basic question and the most fundamental difference between yours and my political philosophy.
You will always find people within the democratic system who endorse the purest form of Capitalism (and ofcourse people in the other end of the political spectre). But ask you self this question. Why do these kind of people not succed?
If the purest form of Capitalism is so good, why isn't it supported. Im sure that the new swedish government is over their problems at the moment, they will loose their hardcore pro Capitalism approach to a more realistic political tone, which is often called realpolitik (in danish).
You saw the very same thing with the current Danish Primeminister, Anders Fogh, who had some (in my views) radical capitalistic view on things when he was younger, but lost many of his ideals when he actually became the Primeminister.
Why is that? is it because he sold his sole to the devil, did he face realpolitik, or did he actually just aknolledge that pure Capitalism isn't the tool to rid of us all existing political and social problems?
I believe we should have some control on Capitalism, not overcontrol, but some control. It's not necessarily Statism, but a mere tool to control something with should be controlled
Thomas
Posted by: Thomas Robert Madsen at October 19, 2006 05:53 PM
