Sweden's state-owned enterprises were sold purely because of politics. No one reversed course. It's just the right wing got majority and sold what they could when they had the chance including a large amount of public housing, schools and healthcare facilities.
No, it wasn’t some accident of Swedish politics. The same thing happened all over the world at the same time. It happened in India, it happened in China. It happened in Germany. The movement toward state owned enterprises in the 1960s and 1970s was reversed in myriad countries with myriad political systems because it didn’t work.
I didn't say anything about the rest of the world. You made a statement about Sweden, even highlighting that it was "every single country" which, unless you want to qualify that statement, simply wasn't accurate. State-owned enterprises in Sweden weren't sold off because they didn't provide service or even didn't make profits but because of shifting politics in Sweden and the EU. Politicians who never wanted state-owned enterprises came into power and the EU made many ventures outright illegal as unlawful state aid. The same politicians who privatized everything else and ended conscription so Sweden had no choice but to join Nato. You can of course argue that "it didn't work because it wasn't wanted" but then the same thing goes for anything else that was changed like government owned nuclear power plants. Which these days of course also requires approval from the EU.
> Politicians who never wanted state-owned enterprises came into power
And pray tell, how did that happen? How do people come into power in Sweden? I thought that it has a system where people propose what they will do, and the population votes on whose ideas and proposals they like the most, doesn't it?
What happened in other countries is relevant because it shows that it wasn’t just something you can explain away as specific to Swedish politics and who got elected when.
> Biggest example is the idea that it's dominated by a culture of white tech bros, when in fact it's dominated by highly educated and hard-working Indian and Chinese immigrants.
Those are two related but also completely different things. Just because immigrants work at these companies doesn't mean they have a large impact on the overall culture, especially not the outward facing culture, and they certainly aren't dominating it. If anything those groups are underrepresented in culturally influential positions.
I don't understand how you can say this when many of the largest tech companies have first immigrant CEOs. Of the top 10 tech companies globally, 4 (Meta, Apple, Tesla and Amazon) have CEOs of European descent.
Is the position of CEO not "culturally influential"?
We would need to look at the ethnicity statistics across C-level executives. Rishi Sunak is the British PM but I can say "UK politics and government is still dominated by Whites" and the British Parliament would agree with me [1]
yes, that's exactly what I meant. I was demonstrating that just because the top guy is a member of the minority group does not mean that organization is "influenced" by minority group.
Edit: I finally read the context again. Yes the top guy is a member of a minority group, and of course he will have some cultural influence. But people will disagree whether the minority group is _at the right level of influence_.
Conversely, if you say that "UK politics and government is dominated by Whites" without mentioning that the Prime Minister is of Indian origin you are making an equally misleading omission.
I didn't say it didn't exist. Considering how many Chinese and Chinese Americans work in the tech industry how many famous entrepreneurs, venture capitalist or programmers of such descent do you know of that the average hackers news reader or even the average person will know of? I bet that for most people it's few.
The argument was that investigating "tech bro" culture is frivolous because the tech industry is made up of immigrants and that is simply not true. It's still very much a prevailing culture. Heck, this entire discussions stems from "what is Elon Musk going to do (next)?" after replacing the CEO of Indian descent.
I wouldn't say the same thing about hardware. But that also isn't nearly as influential and also not a hot topic either.
A company stamp isn't a security device any more than a signature. It's an abstraction similar to a "power of attorney" type thing. They are going away but has been used in Japan and China, including Hong Kong, as well.
Multiple women were sentenced during #metoo. Presumably one took five years because they first tried to prosecute her for her book, which didn't succeed.
I do not deny that some who oppose lax immigration policies are racist, but just because some people who have certain concerns are racist does not mean that everyone who shares those concerns is also racist, or that those concerns are invalid.
Some people have in fact been trying to have discussions about immigration policies, but for quite a while proponents of lax immigration policies have dismissed any pushback against such policies as racist/xenophobic fear mongering.
The statistic is unfortunately being hijacked for that purpose. It is especially common for foreign news outlets to focus on this and it gives the impression that Sweden is not a safe place for women. The opposite is true however, Sweden is one of the safest places and on earth for women.
