We think of the Scandinavian countries as being rich and egalitarian.  But less than a hundred years ago, all Northern Europe  had a few rich families and a horde of poor people–many of whom emigrated to the opportunity of the U.S.  Norway and Sweden both had a history of horrendous poverty. When the 1 percent was in charge, hundreds of thousands of people emigrated to avoid starvation. Under the leadership of the working class, however, both countries built robust and successful economies that nearly eliminated poverty, expanded free university education, abolished slums, provided excellent health care available to all as a matter of right and created a system of full employment. Unlike the Norwegians, the Swedes didn’t find oil, but that didn’t stop them from building what the latest CIA World Factbook calls “an enviable standard of living.”

Neither country is a utopia, as readers of the crime novels by Stieg Larsson, Kurt Wallender and Jo Nesbro will know. Critical left-wing authors such as these try to push Sweden and Norway to continue on the path toward more fully just societies. However, when I first encountered Norway and learned some of its language and culture, the achievements I found amazed me. I remember, for example, bicycling for hours through a small industrial city, looking in vain for substandard housing. Sometimes resisting the evidence of my eyes, I made up stories that “accounted for” the differences I saw: “small country,” “homogeneous,” “a value consensus.” I finally gave up imposing my frameworks on these countries and learned the real reason: their own histories.

Then I began to learn that the Swedes and Norwegians paid a price for their standards of living through nonviolent struggle. There was a time when Scandinavian workers didn’t expect that the electoral arena could deliver the change they believed in. They realized that, with the 1 percent in charge, electoral “democracy” was stacked against them, so nonviolent direct action was needed to exert the power for change.

In both countries, the troops were called out to defend the 1 percent; people died. Award-winning Swedish filmmaker Bo Widerberg told the Swedish story vividly in Ådalen 31, which depicts the strikers killed in 1931 and the sparking of a nationwide general strike. (You can read more about this case in an entry by Max Rennebohm in the Global Nonviolent Action Database.)

The Norwegians had a harder time organizing a cohesive people’s movement because Norway’s small population—about three million—was spread out over a territory the size of Britain. People were divided by mountains and fjords, and they spoke regional dialects in isolated valleys. In the nineteenth century, Norway was ruled by Denmark and then by Sweden; in the context of Europe Norwegians were the “country rubes,” of little consequence. Not until 1905 did Norway finally become independent.

When workers formed unions in the early 1900s, they generally turned to Marxism, organizing for revolution as well as immediate gains. They were overjoyed by the overthrow of the czar in Russia, and the Norwegian Labor Party joined the Communist International organized by Lenin. Labor didn’t stay long, however. One way in which most Norwegians parted ways with Leninist strategy was on the role of violence: Norwegians wanted to win their revolution through collective nonviolent struggle, along with establishing co-ops and using the electoral arena.

In the 1920s strikes increased in intensity. The town of Hammerfest formed a commune in 1921, led by workers councils; the army intervened to crush it. The workers’ response verged toward a national general strike. The employers, backed by the state, beat back that strike, but workers erupted again in the ironworkers’ strike of 1923–24.

The Norwegian 1 percent decided not to rely simply on the army; in 1926 they formed a social movement called the Patriotic League, recruiting mainly from the middle class. By the 1930s, the League included as many as 100,000 people for armed protection of strike breakers—this in a country of only 3 million!

The Labor Party, in the meantime, opened its membership to anyone, whether or not in a unionized workplace. Middle-class Marxists and some reformers joined the party. Many rural farm workers joined the Labor Party, as well as some small landholders. Labor leadership understood that in a protracted struggle, constant outreach and organizing was needed to a nonviolent campaign. In the midst of the growing polarization, Norway’s workers launched another wave of strikes and boycotts in 1928.

The Depression hit bottom in 1931. More people were jobless there than in any other Nordic country. Unlike in the U.S., the Norwegian union movement kept the people thrown out of work as members, even though they couldn’t pay dues. This decision paid off in mass mobilizations. When the employers’ federation locked employees out of the factories to try to force a reduction of wages, the workers fought back with massive demonstrations.

Many people then found that their mortgages were in jeopardy. (Sound familiar?) The Depression continued, and farmers were unable to keep up payment on their debts. As turbulence hit the rural sector, crowds gathered nonviolently to prevent the eviction of families from their farms. The Agrarian Party, which included larger farmers and had previously been allied with the Conservative Party, began to distance itself from the 1 percent; some could see that the ability of the few to rule the many was in doubt.

By 1935, Norway was on the brink. The Conservative-led government was losing legitimacy daily; the 1 percent became increasingly desperate as militancy grew among workers and farmers. A complete overthrow might be just a couple years away, radical workers thought. However, the misery of the poor became more urgent daily, and the Labor Party felt increasing pressure from its members to alleviate their suffering, which it could do only if it took charge of the government in a compromise agreement with the other side.

This it did. In a compromise that allowed owners to retain the right to own and manage their firms, Labor in 1935 took the reins of government in coalition with the Agrarian Party. They expanded the economy and started public works projects to head toward a policy of full employment that became the keystone of Norwegian economic policy. Labor’s success and the continued militancy of workers enabled steady inroads against the privileges of the 1 percent, to the point that majority ownership of all large firms was taken by the public interest. (There is an entry on this case as well at the Global Nonviolent Action Database.)

The 1 percent thereby lost its historic power to dominate the economy and society. Not until three decades later could the Conservatives return to a governing coalition, having by then accepted the new rules of the game, including a high degree of public ownership of the means of production, extremely progressive taxation, strong business regulation for the public good and the virtual abolition of poverty. When Conservatives eventually tried a fling with neoliberal policies, the economy generated a bubble and headed for disaster. (Sound familiar?)

Labor stepped in, seized the three largest banks, fired the top management, left the stockholders without a dime and refused to bail out any of the smaller banks. The well-purged Norwegian financial sector was not one of those countries that lurched into crisis in 2008; carefully regulated and much of it publicly owned, the sector was solid.

Although Norwegians may not tell you about this the first time you meet them, the fact remains that their society’s high level of freedom and broadly-shared prosperity began when workers and farmers, along with middle class allies, waged a nonviolent struggle that empowered the people to govern for the common good.

Racism is increasingly a justification given for all sorts of crimes, including a mass murder this week.   And those attacked have to prove they weren’t racist.    That’s the way it is in America today.  No one points out this murderer’s paranoid delusion that he is justified in killing those who are firing him as a proven thief.  Because it is a cultural delusion. Hallucinations of shamans and witch doctors are revered in many cultures.  It’s a cultural delusion–so it’s not labelled as madness.  In our modern American culture, many share a delusion that their problems are caused by oppression by anglo-saxons.  Taking the madness further, some anglo-saxons even self-destructively believe this.

Once again, I’m glad I’m headed for Eastern Europe where this cultural schizophrenia has not taken hold.  It will be so good to escape the belief that white racism is the cause of all black people’s crimes and problems.  It’s sad when you have to go to the former Soviet Union to escape group-think.  It’s even sadder that so many well-meaning people in the US truly believe this destructive idea.

However, “racism as the cause of all our problems” is just one manifestation of a deeper problem infecting America: blame others for your problems.  An oil spill in the gulf and our dear leader takes no responsibility for cleaning it up.  Instead he blames the problem on the people who used to be in charge.  Reminds me of Robert Mugabe and other dictators blaming the problems they cause on the colonization which ended 50 years ago.

Blaming someone else for your problems is a delusion spread throughout the culture. The Republicans seem to be blaming Obama for everything.  He does nothing right and they do nothing wrong.  We don’t learn lessons from our mistakes, instead we just try to blame others.  Of course, its pretty hard to admit mistakes of the Bush Administration when it will only stoke the tendency of Democrats to BIOB (Blame it on Bush).

This cultural delusion’s inevitable result is a plauge of trial lawyers convincing Americans to sue at every opportunity.  If someone else is the cause of your problems, then they should pay for it.  It’s a logical extension of our cultural delusion.  The rest of the world takes for granted we are lawsuit happy in the US.  But our delusion keeps us from doing anything about it.  When the head of BP says, “This is America — come on. We’re going to have lots of illegitimate claims. We all know that,” we attack him instead of seeing the truth of his statement and changing our ways.

Blaming others for our problems and demanding compensation from them is destroying all which is productive in our country.  Any productive, profitable company is sure to face lawsuits.  Every company must divert huge resources from their productive activities to dealing with frivolous lawsuits.

The most pernicious manifestation of this destructive cultural delusion is the demonization of anglo-saxons as racist.  It will destroy our society if it is not stopped. When our culture accepts the delusion that white racism is the cause of all black problems, is it any wonder that the delusion manifests itself in murder?  How many riots and murders will it take before we wake up and call this delusion what it is?

When the Ten Commandments were written, racism was not in the top ten.  In fact, throughout human history, most people have liked their own ethnic group more than others.  Until the last 60 years or so, that was not a problem.  It was like death and taxes–just a fact of life.  Anyone who didn’t like their own group the best was kind of weird.  Even if you were in a different ethnic group, you couldn’t really trust anyone who didn’t like their own group best.  It was just the natural way of things.

Now this thing called “racism” seems to have trumped all other sins.  In fact, it seems to be the only real sin left, for some people.  But it only applies to a few people.  Many define racism such that no one except Anglos can be racists.  In fact, racism is just a tool to get Anglos in line.  Nowadays, whenever an Anglo does something you don’t like, you can get him to backpedal real quick by just yelling racism.  Even if he doesn’t do anything, you can just make something up and he’ll still have to spend all his time defending himself and you win.

Yelling “Racism” is such a powerful tactic.  I’m surprised there isn’t a manual published advising people on how to use it for personal advancement.

Righteous anger is the best part, though.  This self-righteous, true-believer look comes over the face of people when they accuse others of racism.  You can make your anger into something positive when you are say you are fighting racism.  Almost as strong as the righteous anger of those fighting anti-Semitism.  Except yellling racism gives you an excuse for crime.

See a pick-up flying a Confederate flag?  You will get off if you shoot the driver.   Not satisfied with the outcome of a court case?  Burn cars and buildings and your community will be rewarded with urban renewal grants.

Yelling “Racism” has become so insidious a trend in America, it reminds me of the 50s.  Then you could accuse someone of being a communist and immediately they were on the defensive.  If they denied it, well of course they would deny it.  That didn’t mean they weren’t really communist underneath.  And maybe they didn’t even realize they were.  Maybe they were unconscious communists.  The anti-communists won that battle.  Noone wants to be a communist today.  Now they are doing the same thing with “socialism.”  And some would like to do the same with “progressive.”

I can’t wait until someone starts to use the term “institutional socialism.”  Institutional racism says: if the preferred ethnically group isn’t in control, its because of racism.  I guess institutional socialism will mean: if a rich businessman isn’t in control, its because of socialism.

To insure I offend the true-believers on both sides: calling someone socialist is the same qualitatively as calling someone a racist.  It’s name-calling.  It’s putting your enemies on the defensive.  It’s the far right’s version of  Alinsky organizing methods.

Yelling racism is far more effective than yelling socialism, though.  A socialist can repent and become a capitalist.  No Anglo can ever repent enough to not be an Anglo.

I’m not sure why people don’t see “yelling racism” as the insidious cancer it is.  Maybe when the first black incumbent President is defeated fairly and riots break out in the streets . . .  Maybe then people will start to root out this cancer.

Maybe then they will realize how it is destroying America.  How implementation of affirmative action programs tracks very closely with the decline of American manufacturing and American education.

Until we counter those who yell racism, our country will continue to decline.  We have dozens of examples of the decline of countries due to the cultural delusion that white people are the cause of black people’s problems.  Haiti is the worst example.

The second country (after the US) to throw off its colonial masters was Haiti.  At that point Haiti was the richest country in the Western Hemisphere.  In an anti-white rampage, the Haitians raped and killed all the French and most of the mulattos who were half-French.  Haiti has now been independent for over 200 years and they are the poorest country in the hemisphere.  But their modern apologists still blame racism.

We haven’t reached that point yet, but doesn’t it look like we are headed that way?