Jump to ratings and reviews
Rate this book

Viking Economics: How the Scandinavians Got It Right-and How We Can, Too

Rate this book
An academic and activist takes an entertaining look at the Nordic welfare state—and shows us how we, too, can have a far more equal and just economic system

In America, many Democrats invoke Scandinavia as a promised land of equality, while most Republicans fear it as a hotbed of liberty-threatening socialism. But the left and right can usually agree on one thing: that the Nordic system is impossible to replicate here at home. The US is too big, or too individualistic, or too puritan, or too . . . something. Whatever the reason, it's impossible, and we shouldn't bother to try.

Enter George Lakey. A longtime activist and academic, Lakey has spent decades studying the economies of Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Iceland, and in Viking Economics, he reveals that Scandinavia's deep commitment to the welfare state is much more recent than we think. Not long ago, Scandinavia was a far more unequal place, with a much weaker commitment to the social welfare of its citizens. There's nothing inherently Scandinavian about greater equality . . . so why not try it here?

Viking Economics is more fun and entertaining than any economics book you've ever read. And, very possibly, more convincing! As he ranges from twentieth-century Norwegian history to the details of Swedish childcare policies, Lakey never loses his sense of humor or his expansive, generous vision of a better, more equal future. By explaining that even Scandinavia's grandest experiments in social equality are rooted in recent political struggles, Lakey explains shows how we can do it, too—conventional wisdom be damned.


From the Hardcover edition.

ebook

First published July 12, 2016

Loading interface...
Loading interface...

About the author

George Lakey

26 books36 followers
George Lakey is the director of Training for Change. He began his career as a trainer at the Martin Luther King School for Social Change, and has since gone on to lead over 1000 workshops on five continents. He has run trainings for coal miners, therapists, homeless people, prisoners, Russian lesbians and gays, Sri Lankan monks, Burmese guerrilla soldiers, striking steel workers, South African activists, and others. Trained as a sociologist, he has taught at the college and graduate level and is the author of six books. He consults regularly with a wide range of nonprofit groups.

George has given leadership to a number of social change movements. In late 1989 he led a team of Westerners in Sri Lanka who for 24 hours a day accompanied human-rights activists at risk of assassination. He has done neighborhood organizing, once successfully preventing tree-cutting and another time creating a neighborhood festival to celebrate ethnic diversity. He co-founded the Movement for a New Society, which for nearly 20 years specialized in organizational innovation. He founded and directed the Philadelphia Jobs with Peace Campaign, a coalition of labor, civil rights, poverty and peace groups. He was a designer of and staffed the Campaign to Stop the B-1 Bomber and Promote Peace Conversion, which mobilized sufficiently to gain cancellation of the B-1 in 1977 and raise the visibility of the concept of economic conversion. He was director of A Quaker Action Group when it assisted Puerto Rican nationalists in stopping the U.S. Navy from using the inhabited island of Culebra for target practice. He was also a founder of Men Against Patriarchy, which organized pioneering projects for the early men's anti-sexism movement of the mid-'70s.

George has taught peace studies at Swarthmore and Haverford Colleges, Temple University and the University of Pennsylvania. At Penn he brought the program from 11 students in one class to 105 in three sections; the administration lauded the program for the way it reached out to students of color. He also created a group dynamics lab at Penn for training men in new leadership styles under a federal grant for feminist education.

George's sixth book is on organizational development: "Grassroots and Nonprofit Leadership: A Guide for Organizations in Changing Times" (1996). He is author or co-author of five previous books: "A Manual for Direct Action" (often called the "Bible" of direct action by Southern civil-rights activists of the '60s); "In Place of War, Moving toward a New Society"; "No Turning Back: Lesbian and Gay Liberation for the '80s"; and "Powerful Peacemaking: A Strategy for a Living Revolution." His publications have been translated into Swedish, German, Danish, French, Japanese and Thai.

On the personal side, George is a Quaker, father, grandfather, and great-grandfather in an interracial family. He received the national Giraffe Award (1992) for "sticking his neck out for the common good," and the Ashley Montague Peace Award (1998) from the International Conference on Conflict Resolution.

Ratings & Reviews

What do you think?
Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars
194 (26%)
4 stars
305 (42%)
3 stars
170 (23%)
2 stars
43 (5%)
1 star
14 (1%)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 122 reviews
Profile Image for Jane Routley.
Author 9 books146 followers
July 21, 2017
A terrific book about a terrific subject - how socialist democracies work! I've lived in Denmark (7 years) and I know it works. It was a happy country and i want Australia to be happy in the same way. Free health care and free education, Yes!
(and 100 percent renewable energy)
Profile Image for R.J. Gilmour.
Author 2 books21 followers
July 29, 2016
Lakey a teacher from the U.S. married a woman from Norway and writes about the differences in political and social systems in the United States and Norway. Written in short sections the book looks at how the Scandinavian model deals with social and economic issues.

"In Norway, you have the freedom to fail without becoming a failure." 9

"The crime rate is very low, partly because societies with high equality tend to experience less crime." 9

"Borrowing a 1995 Dutch concept called "flexicurity" the Danes the changed the social contract between the state and the workforce. Instead of guaranteeing workers their existing jobs, the government would guarantee workers ongoing support and retraining so they could get new jobs." 15

"Reagan and Thatcher shared an alternative vision; instead of freeing all individuals through increasing their opportunities, it was time to free owners to make more money, and that, they claimed, would trickle down and benefit everyone." 28

"Regulations were put back into place. The lessons to the entire financial sector was unmistakable; risk your own money, not other peoples." 31 re: Iceland

"As had earlier happened in Norway and Sweden, the social Democrats allowed the three largest banks to fail rather than bailing them out....Instead of trying to pacify international investors, Iceland created controls on the movement of capital." 45

"His theory (Myrdal) encouraged an investment in the individual person as a resource for economic growth-a pillar of what came to be called the Nordic model." 68

"...for the decades of the 1980s and 1990s finding that decline in trade union membership were closely associated with widening income differences." 84

"The way that Norwegians designed their globalized economy was to create to a national mechanism for setting wages. Both labour and employers have national federations that look after the interests of their constituents." 92

"Arguably what motivates Nordics to pay high taxes for services is that the services are universal rather than targeted to a sub group of the needy." 119

"Nordic healthcare systems are also less expensive because health problems are more in common in unequal countries." 137

"They find that inequality highly correlates to the negative statistic in physical health, medical health, drug abuse, education, imprisonment, obesity, social mobility, violence, teenage pregnancy, and child well-being." 165

"In transportation policy I saw four goals in action: sustainability, efficiency, cost savings, and better health through exercise." 208
Profile Image for Kevin.
676 reviews33 followers
September 7, 2016
This is a very approachable book on Nordic policies, ranging from education to taxation and how the various Nordic countries view the social umbrella. It has very little to do with historical Viking societies and how they functioned, though the title is catchy. Most of his personal experience is with Norway, but he interviews administrators from various countries and explains how the system works. This is a nice entry-level book into how a different point of view can be beneficial and what gains can be made as a society by following these models.
179 reviews2 followers
May 16, 2017
Generally very good, as should be evident from my rating. Two complaints, though:

1. The framing device (i.e. "vikings!") gets tiresome really quick, and is just distracting.

2. Too little attention is paid to the differences in political institutions between Nordic countries and places like the US/UK. It's discussed some, obviously, but there's little discussion of, for example, the fact that American political institutions are loaded with veto points, which was always going to make it harder to pass more sweeping or radical reforms, even if the people wanted them. Or the fact that Norway has proportional representation, instead of excessive gerrymandering and first-past-the-post voting. I could go on. But these should be part of any examination of broader social/economic/political differences.
Profile Image for Daniel.
653 reviews85 followers
September 20, 2017
The author is an American who married a Norwegian woman and wrote an excellent overview of the Nordic model. Why are the Nordic countries often amongst the top of world rankings in happiness, quality of life, equality, education, and GDP per capita? The Nordic model depends on:

1. High level of employment, which together with
2. High level of taxation, provides money for
3. High level of services for everyone, including universal health care, free childcare and parental leave, subsidised transport, and social welfare in case of hardship.
4. High level of union participation allows strong bargaining power between workers and employers, allowing for high wages, fewer work hours, investment of further education, and inclusive growth.

Sounds like heaven...

Problems:
1. Immigration for asylum seekers lead to people who are vastly different in culture and language, often times with skills that are incompatible with Nordic high technology's economy. The writer wanted to emphasise the amount of efforts that had been done to integrate the immigrants. For some reason he omitted to mention Denmark's approach to asylum seekers (taking their valuables, giving them the means to go back), but only champion Sweden.
2. When welfare is very good, certain jobs will be shunned and Denmark is hitting 0 unemployment. Some people just choose not to work, breaking rule number 1. The writer did not mention this bit. So even Denmark is beginning to cut taxes to encourage working. However in the long term that will lead to cuts to the services. That may lead to loss of the socialism contract.
3. The ultimate killer is, however, demographics. That was from the Nordic country themselves: http://www.nordicwelfare.org/PageFile...
The thing is that since the birth rate is low (despite the generous parental leaves and free childcare), and people are living longer, the socialism model may not be sustainable long term. Maybe they can all use the Iceland model, where people work well into their 70s. I found it amazing that the author did not mention this at all in the whole book.

I guess the writer is trying to push for Bernie Sanders style universal healthcare, so must only mention the good points. Still I had learnt much from this book and wish Singapore will be more inclusive like Scandinavia, for more inclusive prosperity.
Profile Image for Jake M..
185 reviews6 followers
August 14, 2022
The title Viking Economics is a misnomer as it more-so resembles an overview of Nordic social democracy. George Lakey combines research and personal anecdotes to outlining how and why Scandinavia has succeeded in balancing socialism, capitalism and democracy to ensure stable, healthy and energetic societies. There is no hard economics or deep anthropological exploration, rather, Lakey explains the situation in its present day form with cursory references to the past. As a result, Viking Economics is successful as an introductory text to the Nordic model of society, but may leave experts and well-versed readers wanting. The final, prescriptive chapter about applying the Nordic model through progressive change is useful for budding activists.
August 26, 2017
Love the book!

Is the Nordic approach truly that hard to scale? Considering just two of the core variables that drive productivity, you want all citizens to be healthy and educated. This is where you should allocate your funds and reduce barriers. Also agreeable on left and right, I would hope.

As for style of the book, a bit more empirical work would have served me well.
Profile Image for Scott.
Author 14 books21 followers
May 18, 2017
This book is an excellent, highly readable introduction to the Scandinavian-style democratic socialism promoted by Bernie Sanders, why it works, and why even conservatives in the four countries covered (Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland—Finland is culturally quite different and is mentioned few times and only when citing studies that specifically included it) neither want to end their country’s socialism or particularly to leave it—he notes a guy who went to Cyprus to avoid taxes who became little more than a folk hero for Scandinavian right-wingers whom most ultimately refuse to emulate because they see the benefits of the system. It includes interviews with members of Lakey’s Norwegian wife’s family, as well as policymakers and experts in the four countries, as well as research into studies that have been done for comparable issues in more capitalistic countries.

Nordics secret to success are that they are universal services states, not welfare states. No one is employed in means testing because the services are universal, so that labor force is freed up to do more productive jobs. Lakey makes a wonderful example describing the foolishness of libertarianism. If libertarians started their own country that had no taxes, they would have no military and quickly conquered by the military of a country that did. I used this argument against a libertarian on Twitter, and he claimed I was endorsing “might makes right.” I pointed out that to recognize something as inevitable is hardly endorsing it. Nordics believe correctly that education and health care are public goods like the military, police, and fire departments from which everyone benefits, and studies show repeatedly that when workers work fewer hours and have more vacations, the hours they do work are more productive than the hours worked by those in countries like the United States, who work more hours on average. Lakey cites an OECD study that shows that Norwegian workers produce 27.8 more per hour for hours worked. A Norwegian worker works on average 1,418 hours a year vs. 1,790 hours in the United States. In the United States, productivity is higher in states with higher taxation (citing a study by Neil Brooks and Thaddeus Kwong at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, “The Social Benefits and Economic Costs of Taxation.” Policyalternatives.ca, p. 273 n 141). Nordics also have much more freedom of choice in what they do with their lives rather than being beholden to money: “What I respect is the choosing [if one has passion for what they are doing], rather than a workplace pressure that takes away employees’ freedom to create meaningful lives on their own, individual terms. This is one of the starkest contrasts I have found in exploring the Nordic model: the extraordinary lack of freedom available to individuals in the United States to place work in the perspective that makes sense to them” (135).

Contrary to American notions of Scandinavian socialism, Norwegians expect those able to work to do so. Paid work is fundamental to society. Other countries build unemployment into the model (112).

When the government raises the unemployment rate, some blame the unemployed themselves for lacking jobs. The psychological dynamic follows accordingly… overwhelmed by discouragement, especially when they are told that it must be their fault that they are “losers.”

In Norway, however, society says something very different… the economic system was built for everyone, (emphasis Lakey’s), and therefore jobs are available, and free training and support are available, and working is important for self-respect and the economic productivity of the country. In short, the government’s policy is full employment.

When I learned that the unemployment rate is actually a choice made by those who lead their economies, I looked more closely at the Norwegian unemployment rates. I’d read that Norway’s long-term average unemployment rate is considered by economists to be “full employment” because it allows for the people who are in the labor market but in transition from one job to another. The average for the period between 1997 and 2013 was 3.44 percent, according to worldfinance.com” (114).


While many attribute this to the oil boom, Norway’s unemployment actually averaged lower before the oil boom (113). “The Nordics’ biggest achievement may be in refusing to think of themselves simply as objects of mysterious ‘market forces’” (122).

Much like in the fiction of Edward Bellamy, they started small and expanded. In Equality , the United States began by nationalizing the rail system. In Norway in real life, it began by subsidizing milk and nationalizing dentistry (122-3).

Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal saved Sweden. He

had broken with the classical economists and offered breakthrough thinking that later won him the Nobel Prize in Economics. He argued that the reason classical economists were unable to imagine an economy that included well-being for workers was because they were not holistic enough. He believed that it was possible to design an egalitarian economy that would prevent poverty and be productive at the same time. His theory encouraged an investment in the individual person as a resource for economic growth—a pillar of what came to be called as the Nordic model.

Myrdal urged the new policymakers in the Swedish government to let go of the old, negative understanding of incentives for work held by classical economists—that it was a struggle for existence—and design a positive framework of incentives for economic participation.


Many lost their lives getting the Nordic model to be the law of the land. Nazi ally Vidkun Quisling made things difficult for Norway, and demonstrators had been murdered as early as 1885, while Sweden’s “Liberal-led coalition government’s choice to defend capitalism by killing workers lost the coalition most of its remaining credibility with most Swedes” (67).

While Margaret Thatcher was prepared to use the British military against her own people for engaging in a general strike, in Denmark, with 320,000 strikers is a country of 5 million, the government was persuaded to compromise, retaining stronger regulation on finance, and escaping the crashes that hit Norway and Sweden (33). “Rejecting free-market ideology, they largely returned to what works” (34).

Norway demands that banks risk their own money, not other people’s. Under President Gro Harlem Brundtland in 1991, the government seized the three biggest banks that were largely responsible for the collapse that year, regulations were restored. The government sold its shares in the banks and made a profit. Their most important decision was to eliminate shareholder equity. Morton Søberg, state secretary, notes that in order to prevent banking crises, you have to punish those directly responsible, namely, the shareholders, thus, they eliminated shareholder equity (31-32).

When hired by Iceland, health economist David Stuckler “learned that the IMF didn’t use hard data in determining the multiplier effect of government spending, relying instead on incorrect theoretical modeling. By using actual data, Stuckler’s team showed that government spending on health care and education had a high multiplier effect, and would therefore help the economy recover from the crash as well as save lives” (46). Untrue to form, the IMF, allowed Iceland to reject austerity because the government had the people at its back, and Iceland, being a democracy, has a government that, unlike in the United States, usually follows the will of the people (47). “The Icelandic government also argued that it was the banks’ idea to offer outlandish interest rates that couldn’t be made good on” (48-49). “The people as a whole do not have a responsibility for the debts incurred by private bank owners” (28). An international tribunal voted in Iceland’s favor, but not before the government acquiesced to the IMF on this one point.

Markus Jantti found that in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, children of the bottom fifth had a much better chance of a higher income than their parents than in either the UK or the United States—“the more equal a society is, the more mobility it has” (78); “[t]he track record suggests that the Nordic economic design has features that are synergistic: the more equality, the more freedom. (Markus Jantti, et al. “American Exceptionalism in a New Light: A comparison of Intergenerational Earnings Mobility in the Nordic Countries, the United Kingdom and the United States. January 2006 IZA DEP No. 1938, Discussion Paper Series, Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn, Germany. www.newyorktimes.com/interactive/2012...)

In health care, so-called “market efficiency” is actually “market wastefulness” with multiple insurance companies with multiple plans covering different things with multiple employees acting as gatekeepers (136). Lakey notes that many American doctors leave their vocation because of the paperwork burden. He refers us to David Stuckler and Sanjay Basu’s The Body Economic: Why Austerity Kills for more on the dangers of unsubsidized health care.

Innovation lags in the United States compared to Sweden and other OECD countries with lower inequality. ( Jonathan Jopkin, Vitor Lapuente, and Lovisa Moller. “Lower Levels of Inequality Are Linked with Greater Innovation in Economies.” blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/arc...)

Lakey cites (267 n. 104) Bowles and Y. Park, “Emulation, inequality, and work hours: was Thorsten Veblen right?” Economic Journal (2005) 115: F398-F412, showing that those who work the most hours gain the least, while Wilkinson and Pickett’s The Spirit Level says that countries with less equality spend more GDP on advertising. “Presumably, advertising is the carrot held in front of the donkey to keep it working.” Nordics find that Americans suffer from the inability to strike a sane work/life balance (135).

Laura Vanderkam’s “The Permanent Recession” shows that the U.S. acts in defiance of educational studies that call for small classrooms as well as divert taxpayer money into private sector testing companies (268-9). Philadelphia blaming teachers as an excuse to put educational taxes in private hands, running down quality of public service to achieve that result (269, n 117). In more equal countries, 15 year-olds tend to aspire more towards working class job that in less equal countries like Portugal and the U.S. (148-9). A 2013 poll showed 58% of Swedes opposed to charter schools, recognizing them as cash cows more than educational institutions.

UNICEF’s 2000 study of child poverty found that whether people are employed is less important a factor in poverty than what their wages were and the distribution of jobs (114). This again contrasts with a troll I encountered who insisted that work is important; whether the work pays you enough to live on is immaterial, and in my case, whether one is able to do the work safely and sustainably did not matter, either.

Lakey notes that there is a high correlation between the development and well-being of a country correlates to percentage of workers in unions. The high-union density Nordics are in the top (Iceland, 79.3&, Denmark 68.5%, Sweden 67.5%, Norway, 54.7%) with lower-union density (25.8%) UK down the list, and very-low-union-density US (11.1%), even farther down, a fact he attributes to the Orwellian labeling of common-interest groups like unions as “special interest groups” (86).

Citing a study by Neil Brooks and Thaddeus Kwong at the Candian Centre for Policy Alternatives, Lakey shows that high union density correlates with higher productivity, whereas the insecurity model used in the United States, which “creates an incentive to resist efficiency” (emphasis Lakey’s) (88).By denying businesses the right to undercut the union rate, U.S. economist James Galbraith explains, Nordic countries incentivize productivity: “They guard against lazy or incompetent managers who try to maintain profit by underpaying employees rather than doing their job of increasing efficiency” (ibid).

“Labor found that economists can design a system that virtually eliminates poverty, when hired to do so. When the working class takes power in a society, it can apply the economists’ policies and hire social scientists to evaluate the effects and stimulate course corrections.” The Nordics also “resisted the temptation to believe that poverty comes form one major cause” (111).

The Nordic countries have all but eliminated “absolute poverty,” and Lakey recommends that they take on “relative poverty” as well. The U.S., following the Nordic model, could eliminate absolute poverty and then proceed with relative poverty—“the economic marginalization that is measured internationally,” which, being more nuanced than homelessness, food, and heating, is more difficult. (See also Sean F. Readon.“The Widening Achievement Gap Between Rich and Poor” http://www.frbsf.org/community-develo..., cited by Lakey) He gives examples of these as the lack of a well-packed lunch for the school trip or the lack of a new dress for the school dances, barriers to social acceptance that “more privileged and perhaps clueless well-off people, appear to represent no barrier at all.” He notes that Norway’s Conservative Party attacked the incumbent Labor party for not abolishing relative poverty (128-9).

The USA’s 400 wealthiest families found ways to pay an average of only 17% of their income in taxes. Public confidence in economic elites is very low (W/P) (166).
Citing Timothy Potts, “Major Parties vs, the Majority” Philadelphia Inquirer, December 28, 2011, Americans are willing to pay higher taxes if they feel they get something in exchange (272 n. 138), just as the Nordics are. The problem is that in the U.S., people paqy lower taxes but do not see the direct benefits of paying them because of the wasteful ways their tax money is used. Trust levels are also highest in more equal countries (again citing Wilkinson and Pickett). Lakey also brings in Brian Miller and Mike Lapham’s The Self-Made Myth: And the Truth about How Government Helps Individuals and Businesses Succeed , which includes an introduction by Bill Gates’s father, to show how heavily subsidized by the government successful rich people actually are.

The book is a breeze to read, and as others have noted, may not get as in-depth as one may hope, but the book is really a broad survey introduction to the concepts it presents. It also includes entire chapters on how the Nordics deal with major issues such as climate change. It is therefore more of an introductory book that a deeply analytical one, but, if widely read, could be a major force in changing the way Americans think about economics and pushing for a system that works for more than just an elite few.
Profile Image for Brian.
242 reviews5 followers
December 15, 2019
Thought provoking and informative, although a bit disappointing in its policy recommendations. The book focuses on Norway, which the author admits is in a somewhat special set of circumstances given its oil wealth and small population. The Icelandic financial crisis does not get the attention that it deserves. Finland is largely ignored. The most relevant parts of the book take case studies from Denmark and Sweden.

Lakey's recommendations for the US seem naive and somewhat "pie in the sky". He does give a good explanation of how the wealth tax is implemented in Scandinavia. People pay high taxes, but the majority think they are fair and they get what they pay for. I expected a more rigorous analysis. Given his Quaker background, I was hoping that he would explore the role of military spending in the respective countries in greater depth. He also glosses over the problem of persistent institutionalized racism, acknowledging Myrdal's /American Dilemma/ but not advancing policies that address the intersection of race and class to overcome economic inequality.
Profile Image for Koji.
9 reviews
January 1, 2018
It's not meant to be an economically rigorous book, but rather a political one, filed with hollow buzzwords - it's very clearly intended to push for one particular set of policies, which would be fine, except it doesn't take others seriously. Anyone who disagrees is painted as being caricaturally evil.

Is this is your first time hearing about the Nordic Model at all, it will probably be informative, but don't expect it to paint a complete pictures on the nuances and tradeoffs of policy.
Profile Image for Linda.
72 reviews
May 14, 2017
Fantastic! There is hope if people want change. More democracy, equality, and health are not at odds with prosperity. Compelling, well researched and referenced. A must read!
798 reviews33 followers
August 18, 2021
This is a great book, strongly recommended reading for all Americans (possible exception: Not for reading aloud to your toddler. Unless maybe you read it in a really soothing voice, and say "Goodnight, Political Economic History with considerable relevance to our contemporary situation," at the end of each paragraph?).

I'm not just saying this because I happened to have the pleasure of working with the author on another book some years back, but because this book really has a lot of important news for us, news that we really need to act on. The book is about how Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland were able to turn impoverished countries ruled by tiny elites into thriving social democracies that provide substantial security and opportunity to citizens on an equal basis. And the reason my fellow Americans need to read it is that the book argues that we can do the same thing here, but only if we know how these countries managed it, and see how to apply those lessons appropriately in our own society. I wish it had a different title, as 'Viking' sounds a bit silly to me. But I may be wrong about this: Maybe the macho evocation of the Vikings is needed to strike a different note than saying Nordic or Scandinavian, with its echoes of IKEA for readers in the US.

The conclusion provides food for thought. The author notes that it was not voting that won the changes in the Nordic countries, but organized action that pressured the ruling oligarchy to concede power to the people. Given the stubborn resistance of our political system to the will of people, this is actually a hopeful conclusion. The author is not saying we don't need to vote, of course, he's only pointing out that we won't get what we need just by voting, we'll need to organize and demand what we want, and then our elected officials will have to go along. As it is now, we often find ourselves voting for someone less likely to disappoint us than the other candidate, or even if we are lucky enough to elect the perfect candidate, they are still stuck with a system designed to keep power in the hands of an economic oligarchy, and so they can't do as much good as we and they hope. To learn more about what we can do about all that, please read this book.
62 reviews
December 30, 2018
A good rundown of a bunch of ways the Nordic countries have their collective s#!t together way better than most other countries in the world. He points out that while Norway had oil wealth, it was already doing very well before the oil started flowing in the 70s/80s, while the other Nordics don't have a similar resource wealth to piggy back on. Argues that all of them a century or two ago were as poor and unequal as many other countries in Europe, but it was a set of policies aimed at enhancing and equalising wealth and welfare that led to them being what they are today. And apparently social movements were a bit part of driving these changes.
The author is very unashamedly an activist and proponent of the Nordic model and progressive causes more generally. He does go through examples of where the Nordics have made mistakes, and has a section on responding to criticisms he often encounters to copying the Nordic model in the U.S. This section is a bit odd, either he hasn't encountered or chose not to address strong criticisms. For example,
Critique: "Norway is a small country that's predominantly white. Their model wouldn't apply well to a country as large and diverse as the U.S."
Response: "Erm, that doesn't really make much sense. The U.S. do lots of other things that smaller countries do too, like have an elected national government that runs economic policy. How about we give it a go and see what happens."
Admittedly I can't think of any criticisms against the Nordic model that don't smack of vested interests trying to hold onto what they've got or irrational fears of the spectre of socialism. I am also a big fan of the Nordics from what I know of them. Would be interested in engaging with genuine critics to understand more.
Is an engaging read and a bit of inspiration on how actual real countries have got things mostly right for most of the last century.
Profile Image for Christopher.
734 reviews48 followers
November 12, 2017
Since the financial crisis in 2008, the neoliberal economic consensus has come under close scrutiny by many folks. Thomas Piketty famously showed how wealth accumulation favored those who already had wealth to build upon, especially when tax rates are low. This book takes a look at the Nordic countries and how their economic models have resulted in both economic wealth and equality.

What is so interesting about this book is just how possible it seems putting in place an economic system like this in America appears. Prior to 2008 and even Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential run in 2016, people might have laughed off any suggestions of implementing high taxes, a large safety net of Social Security & unemployment insurance, universal education, and universal healthcare. However, Mr. Lakey shows how much more resilient the Nordic model is. If the big problem of the 2011 Occupy movement was that it had no clear economic message, then this book and the Nordic model could hold they key to fixing that mistake.

However, there is one problem I had with this book. Mr. Lakey is clearly writing this book for a general audience, so, in order not to bog people down in the details, he moves at a pretty brisk pace, especially in the beginning. Strangely enough, his best chapters were some of his longest chapters and I wish he had spent a little more time explaining some more of the nuts & bolts of the Nordic model.

However, his final chapter, which is written in the form of a Q&A, about whether or not the Nordic model would be a good fit for America is not to be missed. In the end, this is a fine, if quick-paced, book about the Nordic economic model that I would highly recommend to everyone who is interested in advancing economic prosperity and equality in America.
Profile Image for Ashish Samuel.
28 reviews22 followers
April 6, 2018
If you've ever wondered how come all rankings and indicators of prosperity have a game of musical chairs going on at the top among the Scandinavian countries, this book gives you the reasons. Also, how they got there. They set a stellar example for the rest of the world in every area of public policy, from sustainability, gender parity, livability, economic prosperity, inclusiveness, social security, peace - you name it, the Scandinavians got it.

As the book shows, it wasn't always like this. They have had to make difficult choices and make compromises over the past five decades. They too have faltered at times, like the 2008 economic collapse in Iceland. But they came back strongly because of the solid community foundation they have nurtured over the decades.

George Lakey doesn't bother to hide his anti-neoliberal bias, so it's natural to doubt if his assertions are ideologically motivated or his anecdotes are cherry picked. But even if the reasons he gives for the Viking prosperity are mere imaginations, they make perfect sense. Because no other politico-economic model can explain that level of prosperity. And as those who have lived there confidently vouch, the place is as good as you can imagine. A place you can pick blindly to be born in from behind Rawls' veil of ignorance, with no hesitation.

If there's a heaven on earth, it'll be pretty cold because it's definitely gonna be in the Scandinavian peninsula!
Profile Image for Alex.
21 reviews
January 7, 2018
This book was simply phenomenal. It probably helps if you're interested in the Nordic countries, but that is certainly not required to delve into this book. I've never taken an economics course so I was bit worried about this being overly jargony or dense, but Lakey took great measure to make his work both well written and accessible by anyone. If you have any interest in equality, poverty, sustainability, diversity, collective action, universal systems of healthcare or education and all intersecting policy then please read this book. If you want to be a part of the US's #resist movement in any way then please read this book. We must build coalitions of people, from all swaths of America, around a more equitable vision of America and this book analyzes countries with great successes in just that. Let's propose policy that is already researched and tested in the real world rather falling victim to neoliberal ideology that only exacerbates inequality.
Profile Image for Joseph Gendron.
248 reviews
December 15, 2021
The Scandinavian countries are definitely at the forefront of civilized society and George Lakey lays out the reasons why in this tremendously enjoyable read. Throughout the book, the stark differences between "Nordics" and the U.S. and other countries is presented.
I was fortunate to briefly visit Denmark, Sweden and Norway in 2019 and I was impressed by what I experienced. Kudos to them and the happy people we met.
These long-lived people have a cost per capita for health care of a little more than half what it costs citizens of the U.S. The only reason for this is the greed built into our capitalist system with multiple players (insurance companies) and multiple plans all contributing to huge paper shuffling costs. The U.S. may be a rich country but it is not a smart country. Special interests control to the detriment of the citizenry. The modern day Vikings also prioritize free access to education and vocational training and it takes place over a lifetime.
Lakey tackles the question of how relevant what the Nordics are doing to life and culture in the U.S. Here his commons sense and wisdom shines as he explains the limitations of our system in achieving the quality and equality of life that the Nordics have developed. Books like these offer hope that from it will spring the inspiration and vision needed to create a higher and more equitable society here in "los estados unidos".
Profile Image for Orrezz.
306 reviews3 followers
March 31, 2022
ספר מאסט לכל מי שרוצה לדעת איך אפשר לבנות כלכלה חופשית ושיוויונית של אנשים מאושרים יותר מבלי להיכנע לפופוליזם אידיאולוגי
Profile Image for Stewart.
319 reviews16 followers
March 7, 2018
One unfortunate quality that many Americans have, while they thump their chests and chant “We’re No. 1,” is arrogance, coupled with a belief that the United States has nothing to learn from other countries.
The 2016 book “Viking Economics” by George Lakey should dispel that arrogance and unwillingness to learn. East to read and using firsthand knowledge and wide research (36 pages of notes), Lakey's book shows that economic practices in Scandinavian countries should be considered in the U.S. because they are practical and less costly.
Many topics are covered in the book, but let me write about three: health care, education, and labor unions.
Trying to get universal health care for Americans at a reasonable cost has been almost impossible the past 70 years because entrenched interests like insurance companies, with their profit-motive, drive up costs.
“The sheer efficiency of a comprehensive and universal health care system shows up in study after study,” Lakey writes. ���The United States spent over 16% of its gross domestic product for health care in 2013, according to the OECD [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development]. That’s almost twice as much as Norway and Iceland spend. Nevertheless, the Nordic countries keep their citizens healthier than the United States does.”
Lakey continues, “It turns out there’s far more bureaucracy and paperwork in the U.S. market-based health-care system, with multiple insurance companies and their multiple plans covering different things, with multiple employees acting as gatekeepers. … In health care, so-called ‘market efficiency’ is actually ‘market wastefulness’.”
Getting a college education is important for any number of reasons, but its costs – like health care – keep going up, largely because states and the federal government are reducing funding to them. More and more young people can’t afford to go to college or, if they go, are saddled with crippling debt.
“Free education can be offered on a national scale, as was done in the Nordic countries when they had far less wealth available than we do. The United States, which once offered free quality higher education in many state institutions, is currently going in the opposite direction, defunding higher education.”
Lakey points out the importance of labor unions in countries in which economic wealth and power are better shared by all citizens. Labor needs the backing of a Labor or Social Democratic party. “In the United States, we see what happens without that mechanism: the Democratic Party pays almost no attention to labor except at election time, and it fails decade after decade to enact labor’s legislative priorities even when in control of both Congress and the White House.”
It should seem obvious to practical Americans that what works, what is most efficient, and what benefits most Americans should trump the self-serving ideology of large corporations and the wealthy. But the past four decades, this neoliberal ideology (trickle-down, privatization, etc.) has persisted, notwithstanding that most of it doesn’t work and is turning the U.S. into a Third World country. Economist Jeffrey D. Sachs says that high-tax/high-spending Nordic states outperform low-tax/low-spending countries like the United Kingdom and the United States in almost every category.
So why does this neoliberal ideology and practice persist? Lakey points out something not discussed much the past 30 years: Both major U.S. political parties have veered right, the Republican Party so far as to be almost off the political spectrum, but the Democrats as well. The leadership of both parties, beholden to their wealthy donors, are out of touch with the majority of Americans. In my opinion, if the two U.S. major parties were transferred to a Scandinavian country or many other Western European countries, the Democrats would be the Conservative party and the Republicans would be a fringe right-wing party. There is no equivalent to the Labor Party/Social Democratic Party in the United States.
“‘Most of the debate in the U.S.,’ he writes, ‘is clouded by vested interest and by ideology. Yet there is now a rich empirical record to judge these issues scientifically.”
Lakey is realistic that many things need to be overcome in the United States before some of the economic practices of Scandinavia are ever discussed, much less implemented, in the U.S. We have gerrymandered legislative and congressional districts, the heavy hand of corporate money in elections, incessant propaganda funded by the wealthy and large corporations, and chronically poor voting percentages.
Politico-economic systems sustained by blind faith and propaganda eventually crumble, witness fascism in Italy and Nazism in Germany in 1945 and Soviet communism in 1991. When that will happen to neoliberalism in the U.S. is anyone's guess, but it will happen.
Profile Image for Cody.
95 reviews
December 19, 2021
It’s approachable and has good content and he makes his point and I’m all for what he’s trying to get at, but he’s all over the place and he can’t decide whether he’s going for breadth or depth at any given moment. Was excited about it, and it definitely let me down a bit.
Profile Image for Peter Moy.
44 reviews2 followers
April 8, 2019
The Performance of the Scandinavian Economies Annoys the Free Market Spruikers.

On any measure of economic performance the economies of the so called “socialist” Scandinavian countries, (Demark, Iceland, Norway & Sweden), match or outperform those of the hard capitalist countries of the Anglosphere. For example, according to the World Bank the countries rank between 8th (Norway) and 17th (Sweden) by the average income per person adjusted for purchase price parity. (This list is a little polluted with tax dodging economies such as Singapore and Ireland middle eastern oil economies which is why they don’t appear further up the list.) The USA is ranked 10th but average worker in the USA works 1790 hours per year while the average Scandinavian worker works between 1408 hours (Denmark) and 1461 hours (Iceland) according to the OECD. (USA ranks well behind the Scandinavian counties in income per hours worked!)

The difference is much more extreme on measures of equality. The Gini index is what economists use to measure inequality. An index of 0% means all the wealth of a country is perfectly evenly distributed and 100% means all the wealth is in the hands of 1 person. A Gini index of over 40% is an indication of potential for political instability of the type that blights Latin America. (Argentina 42%, Peru 44%, Brazil 51%). The Gini index of the Scandinavian countries ranges from 26% (Iceland) to 28% (Denmark) while that of the USA 41%. (If this continues to increase the USA could be headed for troubled times.) This results in Denmark, Iceland and Norway sharing first place in the UN’s International Happiness Index while USA rank 18th at the bottom of the pack of advanced economies. In addition, these economies seem to be built to last. They outperform the Anglosphere on indicators of innovation and entrepreneurship such the rate of company start-ups and patents registered by capita.

Note: Australia my home country, although part of the Anglosphere is midway between the USA and the Scandinavian countries. It ranks 19th in the GNI(PPP) per capital stage, the average worker works 1695 hrs./yr., has a Gini index of 35% and ranks 10th on happiness index.

However, despite the title, this book is not an economics text. It explores the culture and government policies which generated these remarkable economies. Most current economists base their analysis and predictions on simple equilibrium models to explain the Nordic countries. The author is quite firm in his belief that the Viking culture of equality is core to these economies. The Viking ancestors were small groups of adventurous men, not individuals, who had to depend upon each other in their longboat expeditions. At the same time their wives needed to keep running their farms so that women were a vital and equal partner in the Viking enterprise. The book explores several key points in the modern history that also contributed. For example, in Norway: After a very trouble time during the depression of the 1930s, the rich elite of the country aligned themselves with Quisling’s NAZI supported puppet regime during the 2nd World War. This did not go down well with the majority of the citizens who supported a moderate Labour party that followed Keynesian economic polices after the war. Attacks by the elites on this government did not happen because in the author’s words:

The Labor Party’s vision of nonviolent revolution resulting in a completely socialist society remained in its manifesto until 1949, reminded the owning class that another round of militant capitalist resistance to change might lead to a more radical outcome than what they were already living with.

That Norway shared a border with the communist Soviet Union also contributed to the owner class reluctance to push their luck. Since that accommodation, the benefits of all sections of society working together have become very clear to all.

Another seminal moment was the stand that the people of Iceland took against the crony capitalism that ravaged many countries in the years following the financial crisis of 2008. Here the reward from risky lending was taken by private capitalists (bankers, shareholders & depositors), but the costs were large born by society in general. Despite their undeserved reputation as being Nany-States, the Nordic countries insist that people take responsibility for their own actions. When, the IMF demanded that that Iceland’s government repay the UK and Dutch depositors in failed private Icelandic banks despite these depositors expecting unrealistically high interest payments, the people revolted and demanded a referendum:

“In March 2010, 93% of the participants voted ‘Nei’ – a refusal to repay the lenders. The stock market reacted negatively to the vote.

Iceland’s 1% pushed for a second referendum on the question, arguing fiercely that a ‘Ja’ was essential for Iceland’s credibility in the world. Once again, the citizens repudiated the debt.

The move sent shudders through the international financial world. Ordinary Icelanders were refusing to accept responsibility for the frenzied behaviour of their bankers.”

Since then Iceland’s economy has boomed with an unemployment rate down to 3.2% by June 2015.

After explaining how the Nordic countries arrived at their current circumstances, the book examines key aspects of their society. Topics covered include:

Focus on treating their citizens as an economic asset with a large investment in education, life-long learning and public health. (The countries have some of the longest average lifespans in the world.)

Focus on Family enterprises and co-operative businesses.

Support for adventurers, entrepreneurs and the equality of woman.

“Flexisecurity” , the revision of the socialist contract between the state and the worker. Instead of guaranteeing workers their existing jobs, the government guarantees workers ongoing support and retraining so they could get new jobs.

Work/Life balance which provide excellent pubic infrastructure such as parks and transport.

High taxes where everyone pays.

Active programs to eliminate poverty and crime.

There is then a section of challenges facing these countries which are the migration of other races in what to date has been a very homogenous population and the effects of climate change.

The book concludes with a Chapter in FAQ format titled “How Relevant is the Nordic Model to the United States”. Here, he expounds the view that US citizens should not depend of the elected elite to reform the US economy as these people have too much invested in the current system. They should instead embark on direct action campaigns such as that which was so successful against the bankers and their crony politicians during Iceland’s recent banking crisis.

All in all this book is a very good read and make a very convincing case that hard capitalist agenda being pushed in the Anglosphere by the 1% is not the only path to economic prosperity. The real challenge is how to transform these economies to the Nordic model.


Profile Image for Onyx.
105 reviews15 followers
August 9, 2020
Considering there were a number of used copies of this book on the shelves only a month before, when I finally decided to get it, they were suddenly all gone. Those many copies of the same used book, both hardcover and paperback, don’t usually disappear off the shelves of a bookstore that fast. So I don’t know what happened. Nevertheless, it made me want to read it even more, so I hunted it down at the library. After all that, plus based on some of what I saw and heard about it in other places, I was anticipating being able to give this book five stars when I was done. I was kind of disappointed. But it could have been worse.

It was a good book, but not quite amazing. The first part gives you some personal background and history on why the Nordic countries got to the place politically, economically, etc. where they are now. The second part shows which areas were affected by the radical shifts, and the third deals with problem areas dealt positively with, as well as questions Americans might have about the “Nordic model” ever working in the US.

This review has been posted during the Coronavirus pandemic, the BLM protests...and a couple of days after an explosion happened in Beirut, Lebanon, which left over a hundred dead, thousands homeless, and people so mad at their government that they’re taking it to the streets. But I don’t think the timing would have affected my impression of the book much. I agree with the author that depending on the ballot box to make change would have been kind of like the definition of insanity...repeatedly doing the same thing expecting different results (my words, not his)...but I disagree that nonviolent protest...or even violent protest for that matter...is a major part of the solution anymore. That was alright during past centuries when protest actually worked, but this is a different millennia. Those in power have probably figured out ways to diminish the effects of any protest to the point that they will have little impact in the ongoing future. The grassroots are not the only ones who have the capacity to learn and grow from the past. We shouldn’t underestimate the power of the other side to do the same, to the point of trying to be at least a couple of steps ahead. It’s a game of “knowing your opponent.” So no, what might have worked in Scandinavia may not translate well in the United States without something getting lost in translation.

We got computer technology now. And yes, we have digital currency, more sophisticated ways of influencing people for better or worse, we got hackers, fake news, and ways to interconnect with others much faster than before. I think protests will now be ineffective, just as ineffective as voting. We need fresh ideas. We need to brainstorm. One of the things that would probably be better now is simply hitting those in power where it hurts...the wallet. I would suggest two things: Boycott and a general strike. Vote with the purse (in other words, stop shopping except if you really have to) and walk away from work...ultimately in favor of jobs that support healthy politics, economics, and natural and social environments. I’m of the opinion that the wealthy are too big to be affected by marches for long. They can bide their time. But they can’t last long when you cut off their supply of cash. Hitting them in the pocket book might be more effective than protesting in the streets.

I think what stood out to me more is, even though “the five ideals” sound good on paper at first (equality, freedom, community, solidarity, nature), when I reflected on a previous book I read on Scandinavia as I was reading this one (“North”, by Brontë Aurell), I started thinking, “Wait...Leveling the playing field so everyone can participate in a working economy is awesome, but the resulting cultural consequences could be devastating. It could make everyone kind of all alike too. It seems to sacrifice a person’s inherent individuality, uniqueness, and personhood, and could go so far as to squelch any areas they happen to be naturals at, for the sake of the whole...for the sake of the tribe. Standing out as gifted or talented, even if it can’t be helped, could be highly discouraged and mistakenly judged as conceit. (As in, “So, you think you’re better than everyone else?” And then a beating commences. That’s what I can imagine happening in parts of the US.) I don’t think I could deal with a society where you can’t fit in because you accidentally excel at something, no matter how fair, just, and equal it might be. It seems such a society would actually encourage conformity and bland mediocrity.” But I’m not saying a culture that encourages brutal combat-like competition is that much better. That’s the other extreme...the cult of winners. What I am saying though, is the thought of the possibility of that happening to national society...if such a system should succeed in the US...actually lost the book a star. I myself wouldn’t be able to conform, even if I desperately wanted to.

I’m not a conformist. But it’s not from lack of trying.

Overall, the book’s not bad. It’s just I think these concepts probably wouldn’t work as well in the US as the author would like.


Oh I forgot, one more thing...socialism vs capitalism. (I know the author was actually addressing social democracy...or was it democratic socialism?...but still, I have to comment on this, since it’s related.) I get that there tends to be a bitter hatred of either capitalism or socialism in the US, depending on who you talk to...although I have to admit the working class shouldn’t have such a nasty allergic reaction to socialism, since it seems like it could benefit them the most. Remember the hammer and sickle? Those symbols are supposed to represent the workers...the factory workers and the farmers...the front-line workers. (But nevertheless, socialism is still considered one of those fighting words, like waving red flags in front of bulls.) However, I also find that those who would want to replace capitalism with socialism consistently keep missing something...they’re two sides of the same coin. All they’re doing is replacing one materialistic-based system with another. Bottom line, they’re both exploitive. One uses business to exploit, the other uses government to exploit, especially in state-sponsored socialism. If you want to throw in religion as a reason to support capitalism over socialism, then that’s just choosing religious exploitation. What could possibly be the difference?

Before someone says liberals are automatically socialists and communists...I would argue that there are both liberal capitalists and conservative socialists. The debate shouldn’t be over capitalism vs socialism as much as over conservatives, centrists, and liberals. Capitalism and socialism are both about materialism at their base and who should dominate you...big business or big government. (I question if being materialistic is even necessary.)

I would choose individualism over being controlled by business, government, religion, society, or anything else, because none of them can be trusted. You can only trust yourself...that is if you actually do. But maybe that’s an idea that has yet to be put on the table. (PS, I’m not a Max Stirner.)

Anyway, I’ll keep the book’s ideas in mind, but I’ll also keep looking for other economic alternatives that might work better.
96 reviews
August 7, 2018
A great deal of anecdotal evidence, and while there are some citations, the author even brags in one footnote that he doesn't cite much, since there were enough academic treatments of the subject. He does not inspire trust in his analysis when he blames, for instance, the banking crisis on greed of banks... I had chosen this book as a counter to two others on the topic from a different perspective... Usually doing so helps to keep me honest when analyzing a book with which I am in general agreement. This book was no help with that.
73 reviews21 followers
May 6, 2021
A book filled with new and interesting information about the Scandinavian Economy, that changed my mind on a number of subjects. but the book also feels one-sided, ignores the many different advantages that are unique to Scandinavia, and fails to explain in depth the complex issues of the free market and Worker's committees.
Finally that main metaphor of Viking is flat, annoying, undeveloped and Unnecessary.
Profile Image for Kelly.
56 reviews
December 17, 2017
The content of this book is exceptional in what it shares; especially as contrasted with the rogue, extractive economic system in the US. My hope is that Swedes, Danes, Icelanders, and Norwegians don’t change. Stay the course!
Profile Image for Bryce.
3 reviews
November 13, 2016
A good overview of Norway's social-economic system but not deep or comparative. Reads more like a tourist perspective.
Profile Image for Anthony Faber.
1,579 reviews4 followers
September 25, 2017
The guy explains why and how the nordic states became universal benefit states (his preferred name for what we call welfare states) and why we should think about doing the same.\
Profile Image for Richard.
Author 6 books91 followers
April 10, 2023
As British Prime Minister Harold Wilson almost said, seven years is a long time in politics.* Back in 2016, when this book was written, I shared without much question the view defended here — and derided by (especially American) conservatives — that (a) all of Scandinavia is a kind of economic and social paradise, and (b) we’d be a whole lot better off doing things their way in the US and UK. As I write (April 2023), Sweden has a far-right government intent on dismantling the “Viking” system, and famously happy Finland may be about to succumb to the same brand of angry, bitter, chauvinist myopia. Fewer people are now asking Lakey’s question, How did the Scandinavian countries get so much so right? and more are asking What went wrong?

But let’s not exaggerate. By any and every measure, the “Viking” countries are still among the most democratic in the world. (On one major international index of how democratic a country is, there are 18 countries in the top 10%. That section of the list starts with Denmark, Sweden, Norway and ends with Slovakia at #18; the US, the UK, and Canada all fail to make it into that company.) Measured by many other criteria too, the Scandinavian countries are simply the best places in the world to live: less violent, less polluted, better educated, more equal, more competently governed, healthier — and on, and on — than virtually anywhere else. And, as Lakey documents at length, many of the ideas pedaled by others to explain this annoying fact away, especially in the US and UK, are myths.

Not least of these myths is that Norway, for example, got rich on oil. Actually, it went from being a desperately poor country with vast wealth inequality and limited democracy to being one of the richest, most democratic and most egalitarian of all industrial countries before the oil was discovered — leaving us with the alarming prospect that ‘sensible socioeconomic policies’ might be the explanation.

Oh, and about that oil. Most Brit like me, especially ones who grew up in the 1970s, have a half-formed economic question lurking like a shadow at the back of their minds. “That vast North Sea oil wealth. Um… we were all set to be the next Saudi Arabia, weren’t we? We were going to be rich beyond our imaginations, weren’t we? So what happened? Where exactly did all the black gold go?” Margaret Thatcher famously liked to say that the trouble with socialism was you kept running out of other people’s money. It would be a good line, except that the best example in all British history of a political ideology squandering other people’s money was her allegedly ‘conservative’ policies deftly transferred our collective oil wealth wholesale, through tax cuts, to the already-rich. Theft of the commons, pure and simple; the eighteenth-century Enclosure movement, still going strong. And the Norwegians? They didn’t have Margaret Thatcher; as a direct result of that oversight, they now have radically less wealth inequality than the UK, radically less poverty, far better opportunities for the next generation, far better social mobility (supposedly the glory of the Anglo-American ‘free market’ systems), and… a trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund.

There’s much more of interest here. How Iceland succumbed to neoliberal snake oil and was nearly destroyed by it in 2008 - but recovered so much better than so many other countries. Why Finnish and Swedish education is so good. Why the “socialist” and “welfare state” sloganeering gets these economies so conveniently wrong. Why high taxes keep on and on failing to do what economists keep on and on telling them they must do, which is reduce productivity. Why even conservative Norwegian politicians thought (correctly: I lay my cards on the table) that liberal darling Barack Obama was “right wing.” Why, once again, from a “Viking” perspective, countries like the US and the UK are simply not remotely as democratic as they endlessly congratulate themselves on being.

The Scandinavian countries are under constant pressure, from their “allies” and from international corporations, to give up everything they have achieved, especially their egalitarian, IMF-unfriendly social vision. Lakey documents that too. It’s pretty clear that if you're a tub-thumping neoliberal fundamentalist — essentially the entire political mainstream, in the US — there’s nothing more terrifying than the threat of a good example.

(* “A week is a long time in politics.” His most famous line, allegedly said during the sterling crisis of 1964; but there seems to be some doubt as to whether he really ever said it.)
8 reviews2 followers
August 24, 2017
Lakey threads a needle here between lacking rigor (he has plenty) and beating the reader over the head with technicalities (not by a long shot). There are no surprises here: invest heavily in human capital, promote equality and full employment, demand value and transparency in government. What Lakey provides is a well-researched, broad-strokes support structure for Nordic economic priorities that have so successfully transformed Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Iceland over the past 70 years, give or take.

Lakey's primary focus is Norway because of his personal familiarity--he married a Norwegian woman and has spent various periods of time living and working there. He branches out to include each of the other countries in specific examples and comparisons, but Norway is mostly the focus. He provides very helpful historical depth not necessarily from the Viking era (though there is some of that) from the first half of the 20th Century. Norway was part of Sweden until the 19-teens and the story of its independence and internal class struggle is helpful context for subsequent developments. Workers political movements and co-ops have been integral to Norwegian society for more than a century, and attitudes of national solidarity, mutual trust, and the common good are cultural bases for their modern economy. These were important parts of an active but not necessarily militant resistance to Nazi occupation during World War II.

A sometimes spoken, sometimes unspoken foil for Lakey is, of course, the United States and the global, neoliberal economy of the late 20th Century. The final three chapters on diversity, climate, and applicability of the United States, respectively, are all argued against various strands of "conventional wisdom" arguments in American politics. (Actually, that can be said of the entire book in some sense, but those chapters even more so). Again, the ideas here are not new, but Lakey has done progressives a favor with organization, research, and anecdotes that illustrate alternatives to prevailing political ideas.

The racial diversity chapter I found to be particularly inspired. In light of recent political events in the US, however, race (and class) stand out as significant points of contention for promoting and adopting Nordic economic concepts. Lakey is absolutely correct that racial and cultural diversity could (should) be turned to an advantage, but that flies in the face of centuries of history on the North American continent. He is also correct that diversity should not have anything to do with many potential changes. What does diversity have to do with wanting better education or health outcomes or infrastructure?

Another foil I identified that Lakey left unspoken is the Nordic willingness to follow best practices, new evidence, and demand transparency. Americans have shown in spectacular fashion that new evidence that undermines a valued vested interest or political position will be ruthlessly savaged rather than pursued to develop fresh, forward-thinking policy. Best practices that conflict with traditions are freely ignored, and transparency is dispensable.

In short, Lakey has provided a very well argued and researched resource for people interested in making change in US economic priorities. The Nordic priorities make sense in every way. Making sense does not often lead to large scale economic change in the US, and certainly not quickly.

Displaying 1 - 30 of 122 reviews

Can't find what you're looking for?

Get help and learn more about the design.