Summarize Your National Political Views

[Sergius]

We have often discussed extra-national and extra-European issues, such as relations between Europe and the US, immigration, and so forth. Now I think we could talk about what different political systems that we believe in for our respective nations, economic systems and so on.

[wilpuri]

I am more or less satisfied with the welfare state model. It works well as long as the borders remain closed from free riders and dead weight. Free-market capitalism doesn't look like it would be going away any time soon, so I think that a socialist-light (or corporatist-light system) such as the Nordic model, which is integrated into the global market economy isn't bad at all from a nationalist perspective.

As for politics, I'd prefer to move away from the heavily centralist structure and grant local autonomy and increase local democracy to a higher degree. Switzerland is a good example of what I'd like to see done. Other than that, I'd of course want to get rid of the whole "Finland for everyone attitude" and I would like the state to remain Finnish. We don't need to give up our identity in public institutions, schools, etc - public life should remain distinctly Finnish.

So as you can see, nothing too radical.

[Marulus]

First of all, I am strongly opposed to the liberal democracy. It is a terribly flawed system which necessarily degenerates into plutocracy.

However, I am in favour of democracy (without that "liberal"). In the democratic system, as I conceive it, there would be no political parties. Political parties are entirely useless and harmful organizations, they are in fact legalized mafia. People should choose solely candidates at elections, not parties and lists. However, not anyone could become candidate for elections: there should exist a kind of assembly of elders, composed of the most prominent and respectful learned people of the country (say, 50 in number), to decide whether a candidate is suited to take part in the political life or not.

Economy would be based on distributism: there should be many small businesses and the state should make as easier as possible for people to acquire property. For example: the state should give up all taxes on land, so in order to build a house one should pay only the material (of course, rules for how to build a house should remain in vigour). It is much heathier for a family and for the nation as whole to live in a house than in the skyscraper. The best vaccine against monstruous ideas like Communism is people having their own property! Of course, those who have no ability to support themselves, should be granted minimum help, in order not to starve. Basic humanity and Christian justice requires not to let anyone die of hunger...The social state should be retained to a certain extent.

The economic life of the country would pursue the ideal of self-sufficiency, the principle of free trade should be discarded. Of course, I don't mean a wholesale isolation because it would be neither possible nor desirable in today's world. I mean every country should produce as many products as possible for its own sustenance and consume only domestic products. The importation would be limited only to those things that can in no way be produced in that country. Products of real life would take preference over the abstract value of money (as we have today).

Family values would be encouraged. The today's individualism should be condemned as an evil and anti-human ideology. The role models would not be, as it is today, "happy, smiling singles in their thirties", having fun and living for today, pursuing hedonistic and individualistic, basically destructive, life-style, behaving childishly and immaturely. Having children and being responsible family man/woman would be promoted. Of course, I don't say every family should have 10 children, like Africans do, but 3 or 4 (which is much better than the actual 0-1). Abortion would be banned and severly punished if done illegally. This would be part of the national policy because it is very important: European nations must be rejuvenated if they don't want to perish.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by wilpuri

I am more or less satisfied with the welfare state model. It works well as long as the borders remain closed from free riders and dead weight. Free-market capitalism doesn't look like it would be going away any time soon, so I think that a socialist-light (or corporatist-light system) such as the Nordic model, which is integrated into the global market economy isn't bad at all from a nationalist perspective.

Nordic model?

"In the writings of Philippe Schmitter, Gerhard Lehmbruch, and their followers, "neo-corporatism" refers to social arrangements dominated by tri-partite bargaining between unions, the private sector (capital), and government. Such bargaining is oriented toward (a) dividing the productivity gains created in the economy "fairly" among the social partners and (b) gaining wage restraint in recessionary or inflationary periods."

It sounds suspiciously similar to the Vertical Union in Spain under Franco's regime.

As for politics, I'd prefer to move away from the heavily centralist structure and grant local autonomy and increase local democracy to a higher degree.

This too sounds similar to the Spanish Traditionalist Foral System.

[wilpuri]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Nordic model?

Yes, the Nordic welfare state.

It sounds suspiciously similar to the Vertical Union in Spain under Franco's regime.

How is the similarity suspicious?

This too sounds similar to the Spanish Traditionalist Foral System.

Yes, or the Swiss canton system. Is there a point to these paralells you are drawing or are you just making conversation?

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by wilpuri

How is the similarity suspicious?

Suspicious in that, apparently, it is now called Nordic. But surely there must be modifications which support the name change.

Yes, or the Swiss canton system. Is there a point to these paralells you are drawing or are you just making conversation?

Oh, no! Just wondering..

[wilpuri]

After reading the wikilink you provided on the vertical union, I can see the theoretical similarities - in practice it seems to have been rather different.

The Nordic Model was first developed in Sweden by the Social Democrats, in the form of Folkhemmet, the people's home, although the term itself is derived from the right rather than the left. This was before Swedish Social Democracy became the ethnomasochistic ideology it is today.

[Menydh]

I see..

It is difficult to comment because that link to the definition of Folkhemmet is too short to allow anyone to judge with a fair degree of certainty. I couldn't find more information on the internet.

However, judging from what I read there, I would say that the degree of intended state control and interventionism over individual freedom and enterprise is frightening. I'm surprised..