If Capitalism is a “failed experiment” where are all the successful Socialist countries?

According to our new Prime Minister Capitalism is a “failed experiment” but not one of our MSM organisations challenged her on that outrageous statement. Who exactly has it failed? The poor? The majority of the population or the minority? How did it fail them? If capitalism failed them can anyone point out to me a country where Socialism did a better job?

Communism is socialism on steroids so it should be even better than capitalism yet there are only 5 Communist countries left in the world today. If it was such a great model surely there should be more communist countries not less?

Russia became a communist state in the year 1917, and dozens of countries followed. In fact, at one point during the Cold War, the world was split roughly 50/50 in ideology: half of it was capitalist, and half was communist. By 2016, only five countries remained under communist rule: China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam and North Korea.


Of those remaining countries the only one that is doing well economically is China. Their labour costs are low so their profit margins are high. They don’t need to worry about respecting patent laws so they can rip off the intellectual property of others and undercut them by making their inventions cheaper. Communist repression of the worker that ensures that they are all equally poor is clearly an advantage in the business of exporting stuff. I wonder if our PM would consider China to be a successful experiment?

But wait you say, Ardern was talking about Socialism, not Communism.

East Germany is a great example of a failed experiment in Socialism. They spied on their people, banned jeans and you could easily wait 15 whole years before you would be given the opportunity to buy a car amongst other things. When the wall came down the people of the former socialist country embraced the wonders of capitalism with enthusiasm and now have better living standards as a result.

One thing East Germany country was big on was recycling which Ardern would no doubt be pleased about but like many things under a Socialist government is was only successful while it was state funded.

Jacinda may also have approved of a “feminist” policy the state introduced to get women to work.

[…] Seeing the patriarchy as a result of capitalism, they introduced quotas for working women in industry, as well as introducing comprehensive laws to protect working mothers, and to supply childcare.

I am sure the opportunity to brainwash the children who were no longer under the care or influence of their mothers had nothing to do with the states motivation?to put them into state care facilities. It was all about feminism and smashing the patriarchy.


I don’t know why Jacinda thinks that socialism?will succeed when history shows that it always fails. Socialist countries that have done well for a while like Denmark and Sweden did so because they started from a position of wealth thanks to the capitalism. Eventually, though they always run out of other people’s money and their determination to put everyone on welfare eventually ruins even the most wealthy country.

At first glance, it seems that the Nordic countries of Europe have become everything the Left admires: prosperous, yet equal and with good social outcomes. And the left loves to attribute it all to socialism.?But a?closer look shows that what the left admires about Nordic societies is not due to socialism, and that the true lesson from Nordic countries is the importance of free markets and a vibrant work ethic.

Here are five myths about Nordic countries and socialism:

Myth #1 ??Countries Like Denmark Show That Socialism Works

The success of Nordic countries is based on the fact that historically they have relied on free-markets and protection of private property. The only exception is a short period in Sweden (see myth #2) wherein socialist policies crippled growth and job creation. Nordic nations do have high taxes and generous welfare, but in many other regards they have unusually free markets.[…]

Myth #2 ? Nordic Countries Became Rich by Relying on Socialism

This couldn?t be more wrong. Sweden is the only Nordic country that actually experimented with socialism, during the 1970s and 1980s. It is difficult to see how these policies could be viewed as anything else but a massive failure.

Sweden?s economic development can be divided up in four eras. A free-market era lasted between 1870 (when capitalism was introduced) and 1936 (where the social democrats came to power). During this time the economic policies of the country were characterized by minimal government involvement, and the Swedish economy grew more rapidly than any other Western European country. Between 1936 and 1970 Social Democrats made their way into Swedish politics, but even leftist governments were careful not to disturb the free-market. Sweden?s growth rate fell to an average of Western European economies for this period.

Then came an era between 1970 and 1991 when social democrats actually tried to introduce a form of planned economy in the country. Sweden?s growth rate fell to the second lowest among?western European countries. The center-right government that was elected in 1991, and consequent governments on both the right and left, have moved the country towards free-markets again. As a result, Sweden has experienced the second highest growth rate in western Europe during its new free-market era, between 1991 and 2014.

Once you gain more knowledge about the actual economic histories of Sweden and other Nordic countries, it turns out that their experience is not a case for socialism, but rather strongly points to the benefit of economic freedom.[…]

Myth #3 ? Nordic-Style Welfare Leads to Admirable Social Outcomes

Today, Nordic countries stand out as having high-tax models. Denmark,?for example, has the highest tax rate among?developed nations. But in 1960 the tax rate in the country was merely 25 per cent of GDP, lower than 27 per cent in the U.S. at the time. In Sweden the rate was 29 percent, only slightly higher than the US. What might come as a surprise to American admirers of Nordic countries is that the admirable social outcomes of Nordic countries were in place already at this time.

The good outcomes existed well before the creation of the welfare state ? which makes sense since they are linked to the healthy diets and lifestyles of Nordic people.[…]

[…] Iceland ? the Nordic country which historically has had the smallest welfare state ? is the one with the highest life span and lowest child mortality. Denmark ? the Nordic country with the largest public sector ? lags behind its neighbors.[…]

Myth #4 ??Nordic Welfare Leads to Income Equality

[…] What leads to income equality in Nordic countries? The answer seems to be a Lutheran culture with strong emphasis on work and individual responsibility, combined with homogenous populations and the wealth-creation of capitalism. The countries, which already had prosperity, equality and strong norms about individual responsibility, then chose to move towards generous welfare.

With time however, Nordic people adapted their work ethic to large welfare states. It has become more acceptable to rely on government support, even if one is healthy enough to seek employment. Massive welfare dependency has grown, not least among?those with an immigrant origin ? I myself grew up in a family supported by welfare. So although Nordic welfare states certainly do help the less fortunate through government benefits and services, this does not only combat poverty but also unintentionally creates social poverty.

Myth #5 ? Americans Would be Better off With Nordic-Style Welfare

The thing to hold in mind is that the success of Nordic societies obviously has much to do with their unusually strong ethical norms, and not just their welfare policies. So what happens if the same culture is combined with another political system? We can find the answer by looking at Nordic-Americans.

Historically, it was mainly the impoverished people in the Nordic countries who sailed across the Atlantic to found new lives. Despite this, Nordic-Americans have managed to be much more affluent than their cousins who stayed behind. Today Danish Americans have a fully 55 percent higher living standard than Danes. Swedish Americans have a 53 percent higher standard than Swedes. The gap is even greater, 59 percent, between Finnish Americans and Finns. Even though Norwegian Americans lack the oil wealth of Norway, they have a 3 percent higher living standard than their cousins overseas.[…]