I have a business idea for a dictator: Take over Sweden. Kick out all the vagrants. Put the native children in engineering programmes, lower the tax burden, simplify the regulations, wait 30 years, and reap the rewards.
Yes, it may be a bit funny, vulgar and laughable. But is it a good idea to run a country into the ground, destroy its infrastructure, tear up its roots and culture, and heavily overtax its citizens?
Sweden could easily be like Switzerland or any other rich and successful country, and a leader in research and industry. With the right policies. We know it. Everyone knows it.
So why is the country mismanaged?
Yes, that is the question. There will be no profit in the future. It’s already ruined now. Moreover, the post-modern liberalism that dictates this kind of policy is also half-dead. It has no popular support, and even academic and political support is rapidly waning. It is not a winning model.
The leadership in Brussels is behaving like tyrants; it’s been a long time since they introduced anything that favoured their subjects. It’s all about regulating, restricting and patronising. And that is the very definition of tyranny. The fact that they are (sometimes) elected is no excuse, a tyrant is a tyrant.
That a democratic country’s leaders do not represent their people is relatively new, as the well-being and success of the people often coincides with that of the leadership. A rich country creates a rich elite. Everyone wins. Run a country into the ground and its politicians themselves are soon done for. And nobody wins.
There is really no benefit in undermining a country. It’s not a win even for your worst enemies, because wealth and scientific progress have a way of crossing national borders. A poor and backward Sweden contributes to a poorer and more backward world.
