In 1960, Eisenhower, speaking at a Republican Party function, had this to say about socialism and suicide rates:
"This country has a tremendous record for socialistic operation, following a socialistic philosophy, and the record shows that their rate of suicide has gone up almost unbelievably and I think they were almost the lowest nation in the world for that. Now, they have more than twice our rate. Drunkenness has gone up. Lack of ambition is discernible on all sides. Therefore, with that kind of example, let's always remember Lincoln's admonition. Let's do in the federal Government only those things that people themselves cannot do at all, or cannot so well do in their individual capacities[1]."
Naturally, the Nordic countries took offense at this remark. This statement launched an enduring myth, quite false, about the effects of socialism. It also helped contribute to misunderstanding over what socialism is that persists to this day, as the recent presidential election in the US clearly showed.
Sweden will be the focus of this article for various reasons: it is the “prime” example of socialism brought up in discussions on the topic, it took particular offense to Eisenhower’s comment, and the blogger has a special affinity for the country. Sweden is by any measure not a socialist country. However, it has, since the early 1900s, been grappling with the issues of the welfare state. How and when did Sweden build this state, and what can it tell the world today?
First, to eliminate some basic misconceptions. Socialism is essentially the state-owned or collective control over the means of production and the creation of an egalitarian society. This differs from communism in that communism envisions a state-less, class-less society. Many countries today are partly socialist—even the US if one considers employee owned stocks as partial ownership over the means of production[2]—commonly nationalizing, or giving the state control over, industries important to the economic well-being of the country. For all the claims about socialist Sweden, it does not have a history of nationalizing industries (except for a period in the 1970s under a conservative party’s leadership) comparable to other countries that are decidedly more socialist. However, Sweden, as of 2007, is the world’s third most income-equal society in the world, and its policies are aimed at creating an egalitarian society. Sweden, then, is perhaps a prime example of the welfare state—a state that works to protect and care for its people.
How did Sweden become a welfare state? This process was begun in 1889 with the birth of the Social Democratic Party (modeled on the Danish party, itself a model of the German). In 1920 the SDP became the party in power for a brief time, and from 1932 until 1976 the party would enjoy almost uninterrupted control of government[3]. With a political alliance with the Farmer’s party, the SDP was able to create and carry out an agenda an ambitious agenda of social reform and societal reconstruction.
Social reform touched on nearly every aspect of life—health, education, labor, religion, opportunity—and the effects are nothing less than dramatic. While the earliest reforms were passed in the 1920s, it was not until after World War II that the reforms in society were affected.
Health insurance was nationalized, and with it came several advances. Infant mortality rates dropped to the lowest in the world, lifespan was greatest. Sweden provided not only more beds than the Soviet Union and the US per ten-thousand people, but the care was excellent[4].
Education, even into the 1970s, preserved the social hierarchy. There was a system for the elites and a separate system for the lower classes. Sweden looked abroad to increase enrollment (equalizing opportunity) and improving education. The results, again, are impressive. Practically every child attended an elementary school by 1970, and college enrollment increased from 5% to 30% in twenty years. School was made affordable—Swedish college students for example do not pay tuition, receive generous grants, loans, and a monthly stipend[5].
Labor experienced its reform earlier than health or education. The labor unions were organized into an umbrella organization, the Landsorganisation or LO in 1898. In 1902 the businesses banded together under the Swedish Employers Federation or SAF. By 1938 they agreed to the Saltsjöbaden Agreement, which systemized talks between the two parties and set up an arbitration court. It was based off the September Compromise in Denmark (from 1899). However, it has not worked as well as the Danish counterpart, but it has largely accomplished its goals. After WWII, the Swedish government moved to give the workers more control over the companies in the form of stocks and employees were represented on boards of directors in the late 1970s.
As of today, the Swedish Lutheran Church is no longer controlled by the state, the first time it has been free from state control since Gustav Vasa converted the state to Lutheranism and took control of the church in the 1520s. In the 1950s, greater religious freedom was introduced, finally approaching the level of religious freedom in the US. Women were allowed to become priests in the state church, and pastors outside of the church were legally allowed to marry couples.
This is an incredibly brief and incomplete look at the welfare state, but the aim is summed up excellently by Scott: “The goal professed was unfettered opportunity for the individual, the method was oversight by the government to provide that opportunity and to prevent interference”[6].
All this is not to say that the system works perfectly and is without problems. A common joke is that Swedes complain about the weather and taxes, and the tax rate is spectacularly high (just under 50% of GDP). There is also the loss of freedom of action. While society is egalitarian and doors are open for anyone qualified, there is the paradox of inability to act. The welfare state also faces challenges to its viability in today’s world, but its resilience and adaptability clearly show that it will survive in some form for a long while. These are but some of the negatives that must be weighed against the positives of one of the most successful welfare states in Europe and the world.
Sweden provides the world with an excellent example of how the government can be responsive to the needs of its people and perform certain tasks better than the fabled private sector. While the world, and certainly the US, cannot adopt the Swedish program in its entirety (largely due to cultural differences, and Swedish culture prior to the welfare state certainly helped its acceptance and creation), the world should certainly examine how Sweden has created a successful welfare state and why it works as well as it does.
[1] http://homepage.mac.com/jrc/contrib/sweden_suicide.html
[2] Scott, Franklin D. Sweden: The Nation’s History. Southern Illinois University Press, 1988. p 524
[3] Scott, 540
[4] Scott, 526
[5] Scott, 535-37
[6] Scott, 526
