What do you think?
Rate this book
The Nordic Theory of Everything
A Finnish journalist, now a naturalized American citizen, asks Americans to draw on elements of the Nordic way of life to nurture a fairer, happier, more secure, and less stressful society for themselves and their children.
Moving to America in 2008, Finnish journalist Anu Partanen quickly went from confident, successful professional to wary, self-doubting mess. She found that navigating the basics of everyday life—from buying a cell phone and filing taxes to education and childcare—was much more complicated and stressful than anything she encountered in her homeland. At first, she attributed her crippling anxiety to the difficulty of adapting to a freewheeling new culture. But as she got to know Americans better, she discovered they shared her deep apprehension. To understand why life is so different in the U.S. and Finland, Partanen began to look closely at both.
In The Nordic Theory of Everything, Partanen compares and contrasts life in the United States with life in the Nordic region, focusing on four key relationships—parents and children, men and women, employees and employers, and government and citizens. She debunks criticism that Nordic countries are socialist “nanny states,” revealing instead that it is we Americans who are far more enmeshed in unhealthy dependencies than we realize. As Partanen explains step by step, the Nordic approach allows citizens to enjoy more individual freedom and independence than we do.
Partanen wants to open Americans’ eyes to how much better things can be—to show her beloved new country what it can learn from her homeland to reinvigorate and fulfill the promise of the American dream—to provide the opportunity to live a healthy, safe, economically secure, upwardly mobile life for everyone. Offering insights, advice, and solutions, The Nordic Theory of Everything makes a convincing argument that we can rebuild our society, rekindle our optimism, and restore true freedom to our relationships and lives.
Moving to America in 2008, Finnish journalist Anu Partanen quickly went from confident, successful professional to wary, self-doubting mess. She found that navigating the basics of everyday life—from buying a cell phone and filing taxes to education and childcare—was much more complicated and stressful than anything she encountered in her homeland. At first, she attributed her crippling anxiety to the difficulty of adapting to a freewheeling new culture. But as she got to know Americans better, she discovered they shared her deep apprehension. To understand why life is so different in the U.S. and Finland, Partanen began to look closely at both.
In The Nordic Theory of Everything, Partanen compares and contrasts life in the United States with life in the Nordic region, focusing on four key relationships—parents and children, men and women, employees and employers, and government and citizens. She debunks criticism that Nordic countries are socialist “nanny states,” revealing instead that it is we Americans who are far more enmeshed in unhealthy dependencies than we realize. As Partanen explains step by step, the Nordic approach allows citizens to enjoy more individual freedom and independence than we do.
Partanen wants to open Americans’ eyes to how much better things can be—to show her beloved new country what it can learn from her homeland to reinvigorate and fulfill the promise of the American dream—to provide the opportunity to live a healthy, safe, economically secure, upwardly mobile life for everyone. Offering insights, advice, and solutions, The Nordic Theory of Everything makes a convincing argument that we can rebuild our society, rekindle our optimism, and restore true freedom to our relationships and lives.
448 pages, Paperback
First published June 28, 2016
2235 people are currently reading
19815 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,289 reviews
February 28, 2016
Utterly charming and incredibly informative -- though a side effect of reading it will be an incredible desire to move to a Nordic country, because America is stupid.
May 1, 2018
Anu Partanen does not convince me of anything new about America and Nordic countries. This book was a tiresome, shallow, didactic experience of a Finnish woman lecturing about America's problems, after less than a decade of living in this country. Partanen's perspective is privileged, unrelatable, and unsympathetic to most Americans who actually live here for a significant time, and under conditions that are actually oppressive and debilitating. (If your worst concession is that you'll have to move back to Finland to raise your children, you are not relatable on the subject of your book.) Reading this book was like a thin person pointing out to an overweight person that she is fat and ought to diet and exercise. Thanks! Didn't know! Problem solved!
I wanted this book to show me some interesting, balanced examples of how citizens living in Nordic countries both thrive and struggle in their style of government. Instead, Partanen merely brushes off any negative aspects about Nordic states, if she mentions them at all, and heavily criticizes those of America's, without investigating the very complex reasons of why this country has the problems it has. Her denial of a homogeneous culture in Scandinavia is laughable, and if she thinks that doesn't have any impact on the style of government and its ability to be flexible and adaptable, she's delusional. One or two anecdotes from your elitist friends do not prove your points. Merely mentioning the massive problems in Scandinavian countries without further investigation does not equate to fair-mindedness. One measly line mentioning the race issues in America is pathetically under-representing how powerless the most disenfranchised people in this system are, how merciless they are to the machinations of government and obstacles of society. Not once in this book will you find even a suggestion of how to implement such changes into the American system beyond, "You should do x like Finland!".
It won't be too soon if I never read the words "Nordic theory of love" again. The theme of individual self-sufficiency and independence is wonderful, but that is essentially parenting advice. I don't even disagree with this; I enthusiastically support this value. I just feel it is an inappropriate criticism that does not foster any substantive discussion on government's role in your life. She might have understood this if she had actually spoken to someone who wasn't an academic or in her Manhattan/Finland social circles. This simply is not a comprehensive and meaningful examination of how the most disaffected in our society feel about the government, and how the people in charge are the ones who benefit most. Of course we want free and equal education for all. Of course we want to mitigate health care costs for all and dismantle the repugnant health insurance/drug company industry. Of course we want to have long vacations and maternity leave and life-affirming, well-paying jobs. But Finland's demographic and its role on an international scale are so dramatically different from America's, that it is impossible and foolish to equate the two. She managed to cobble a dozen or so contributions that the Nordic countries have made to the world - shall we count America's? Taxes, health care, health insurance, education - these are complex issues that operate so far above the average American citizen's ability to change them, despite everyone's dissatisfaction with them. It's pretty rude to point out the obvious without even offering a solution. These issues deserve more due diligence.
Ultimately, this could be an illuminating book for a reader who knows absolutely nothing about the Nordic states. But do not let this author fool you into thinking that there are easy answers or easy problems in America, nor are there zero problems in Finland. There are a few interesting and positive things to take away from the book, particularly the perspective on marriage and the autonomy of children at home and in school. I also appreciate it for introducing me to the Law of Jante. But this book does not do thorough justice to the serious issues that it attempts to address, and thus undermines Partanen's endeavor to compare Finland/Nordic countries to America. It is a reductive powerpoint presentation for a social studies class.
I wanted this book to show me some interesting, balanced examples of how citizens living in Nordic countries both thrive and struggle in their style of government. Instead, Partanen merely brushes off any negative aspects about Nordic states, if she mentions them at all, and heavily criticizes those of America's, without investigating the very complex reasons of why this country has the problems it has. Her denial of a homogeneous culture in Scandinavia is laughable, and if she thinks that doesn't have any impact on the style of government and its ability to be flexible and adaptable, she's delusional. One or two anecdotes from your elitist friends do not prove your points. Merely mentioning the massive problems in Scandinavian countries without further investigation does not equate to fair-mindedness. One measly line mentioning the race issues in America is pathetically under-representing how powerless the most disenfranchised people in this system are, how merciless they are to the machinations of government and obstacles of society. Not once in this book will you find even a suggestion of how to implement such changes into the American system beyond, "You should do x like Finland!".
It won't be too soon if I never read the words "Nordic theory of love" again. The theme of individual self-sufficiency and independence is wonderful, but that is essentially parenting advice. I don't even disagree with this; I enthusiastically support this value. I just feel it is an inappropriate criticism that does not foster any substantive discussion on government's role in your life. She might have understood this if she had actually spoken to someone who wasn't an academic or in her Manhattan/Finland social circles. This simply is not a comprehensive and meaningful examination of how the most disaffected in our society feel about the government, and how the people in charge are the ones who benefit most. Of course we want free and equal education for all. Of course we want to mitigate health care costs for all and dismantle the repugnant health insurance/drug company industry. Of course we want to have long vacations and maternity leave and life-affirming, well-paying jobs. But Finland's demographic and its role on an international scale are so dramatically different from America's, that it is impossible and foolish to equate the two. She managed to cobble a dozen or so contributions that the Nordic countries have made to the world - shall we count America's? Taxes, health care, health insurance, education - these are complex issues that operate so far above the average American citizen's ability to change them, despite everyone's dissatisfaction with them. It's pretty rude to point out the obvious without even offering a solution. These issues deserve more due diligence.
Ultimately, this could be an illuminating book for a reader who knows absolutely nothing about the Nordic states. But do not let this author fool you into thinking that there are easy answers or easy problems in America, nor are there zero problems in Finland. There are a few interesting and positive things to take away from the book, particularly the perspective on marriage and the autonomy of children at home and in school. I also appreciate it for introducing me to the Law of Jante. But this book does not do thorough justice to the serious issues that it attempts to address, and thus undermines Partanen's endeavor to compare Finland/Nordic countries to America. It is a reductive powerpoint presentation for a social studies class.
July 10, 2016
Americans, please don't read this book. If more Americans would read it, they will probably invade the Nordic countries.
December 28, 2016
The beginning of this book impressed me, because the author makes a fresh argument about how the lack of a social safety net in the US actually makes us less free, not just by constraining our opportunities based on our family background, but also by forcing our social relationships to bear the weight of responsibilities like health care and education. Why should your health care depend on a spouse or your education on your human, fallible parents, and why do we equate that with freedom? What the Nordic countries provide isn't exactly a "safety net" to protect you from falling, but a substrate of services that are for everyone and make everyone equally free to pursue their careers and family life.
Unfortunately, beyond the first chapter, this book is repetitive, thin, and evasive. Thin, because it contains a longish magazine article's worth of observations in over 300 pages, and the surplus doesn't help the argument. Evasive because Partanen completely fails to account for racism as a factor in the American way of life. This is simply a stunning omission. She brushes aside our history of slavery, segregation, and racism in just a few clauses sprinkled through the book and does not examine this dynamic as a cause of everything else she observes about the US. While I can understand why a recent immigrant might feel daunted in tackling these topics, by overlooking them, Partanen seems simply obtuse. It's not that we Americans don't see the benefits of the system she describes; there is simply a critical mass of us who take a stronger interest in making sure that other people, less deserving people, you know the kind of people they mean, don't enjoy those benefits. In addition, the author comes off as rather smug. Things in Finland are so much better, why don't Americans see that? Well, lady, why don't you unravel our centuries of poisonous racism for us, and then we'll talk.
Recommended perhaps for parents, because a large portion of the book is devoted to the topics of parental leaves, childbirth, and education. Even so, this book remains a striking example of white feminism at its least observant. I suppose eight years in Brooklyn will do that to you.
Unfortunately, beyond the first chapter, this book is repetitive, thin, and evasive. Thin, because it contains a longish magazine article's worth of observations in over 300 pages, and the surplus doesn't help the argument. Evasive because Partanen completely fails to account for racism as a factor in the American way of life. This is simply a stunning omission. She brushes aside our history of slavery, segregation, and racism in just a few clauses sprinkled through the book and does not examine this dynamic as a cause of everything else she observes about the US. While I can understand why a recent immigrant might feel daunted in tackling these topics, by overlooking them, Partanen seems simply obtuse. It's not that we Americans don't see the benefits of the system she describes; there is simply a critical mass of us who take a stronger interest in making sure that other people, less deserving people, you know the kind of people they mean, don't enjoy those benefits. In addition, the author comes off as rather smug. Things in Finland are so much better, why don't Americans see that? Well, lady, why don't you unravel our centuries of poisonous racism for us, and then we'll talk.
Recommended perhaps for parents, because a large portion of the book is devoted to the topics of parental leaves, childbirth, and education. Even so, this book remains a striking example of white feminism at its least observant. I suppose eight years in Brooklyn will do that to you.
July 26, 2016
I picked up this book at the library because the title was intriguing and I liked the look of the cover. After reading the dust jacket I thought it would be a lot of socialist drivel but decided to read it anyway.
The author was born, raised and worked in Finland. She moved to the United States in 2008 and married an American. She became a US citizen in 2013 and still lives here.
I ended up being extremely impressed with this book overall. The main premise is the comparison between the governments of both countries, mainly focusing on how Finland's way of doing things would benefit the United States. i.e. Education, the tax system, healthcare, etc.
Finland is a "socialist" country, but not in the way that we Americans think. Finland doesn't have loads of people on the welfare dole like we do here. They don't create welfare queens. It's actually in your best interest if you work in Finland and contribute to society. The taxes you pay into the system are given back to you (not others) through:
Very low cost healthcare
Very low cost prescription medication (they don't allow drug companies to charge ridiculous prices)
Free K-12 education (children start school later, have shorter school days, have lots of outdoor time and are top in the world in their scores)
Free college
Free graduate school
Very low cost daycare
Very low cost elder care
Generous time off (years) for you and your spouse or partner if you have children
Generous yearly vacation (4-5 weeks, which you're encouraged to take)
Normal work hours
Generous sick leave
Unemployment coverage
I love how in Finland everyone is treated as an individual. You don't pay taxes according to your marriage status, you pay it individually. (By the way when you pay your taxes it's a 1-page, simple tax form for most people.) Your healthcare isn't tied to your employment, so if you lose your job you don't lose your health insurance. They also have a very generous unemployment package if you get fired or laid off so that you have time to find a new job and won't have to worry about making ends meet. It doesn't matter what your parents make, college is free and financial aid isn't dependent on your parent's financial status. Everything is driven toward helping the individual, and as a side effect making and keeping families strong. She calls this the "Nordic Theory of Love".
She also busts the myth that most Finns pay half or more of their income in taxes. For her it was about 30%, which includes federal and municipal taxes (approximately $18,000.00 out of the $67,000.00 that she made her last year working there). When you factor in what she got back in benefits, it's actually a very good deal.
Also, they are a Capitalist country. Ever heard of Supercell, Nokia, Ikea, H&M or Angry Birds? All Scandinavian creations. The way their system is set up makes it easy for entrepreneurs to open new businesses.
The main point I got from the book is "Smart government, not big government". I think the United States could learn a lot from the way Finland and the Scandinavian countries do things in general. Finland has gone through their own growing pains, as she readily admits, and made a lot of reforms starting in the 1970's.
The author loves the American spirit and generosity. I think she gave a very balanced view of both nations.
The author was born, raised and worked in Finland. She moved to the United States in 2008 and married an American. She became a US citizen in 2013 and still lives here.
I ended up being extremely impressed with this book overall. The main premise is the comparison between the governments of both countries, mainly focusing on how Finland's way of doing things would benefit the United States. i.e. Education, the tax system, healthcare, etc.
Finland is a "socialist" country, but not in the way that we Americans think. Finland doesn't have loads of people on the welfare dole like we do here. They don't create welfare queens. It's actually in your best interest if you work in Finland and contribute to society. The taxes you pay into the system are given back to you (not others) through:
Very low cost healthcare
Very low cost prescription medication (they don't allow drug companies to charge ridiculous prices)
Free K-12 education (children start school later, have shorter school days, have lots of outdoor time and are top in the world in their scores)
Free college
Free graduate school
Very low cost daycare
Very low cost elder care
Generous time off (years) for you and your spouse or partner if you have children
Generous yearly vacation (4-5 weeks, which you're encouraged to take)
Normal work hours
Generous sick leave
Unemployment coverage
I love how in Finland everyone is treated as an individual. You don't pay taxes according to your marriage status, you pay it individually. (By the way when you pay your taxes it's a 1-page, simple tax form for most people.) Your healthcare isn't tied to your employment, so if you lose your job you don't lose your health insurance. They also have a very generous unemployment package if you get fired or laid off so that you have time to find a new job and won't have to worry about making ends meet. It doesn't matter what your parents make, college is free and financial aid isn't dependent on your parent's financial status. Everything is driven toward helping the individual, and as a side effect making and keeping families strong. She calls this the "Nordic Theory of Love".
She also busts the myth that most Finns pay half or more of their income in taxes. For her it was about 30%, which includes federal and municipal taxes (approximately $18,000.00 out of the $67,000.00 that she made her last year working there). When you factor in what she got back in benefits, it's actually a very good deal.
Also, they are a Capitalist country. Ever heard of Supercell, Nokia, Ikea, H&M or Angry Birds? All Scandinavian creations. The way their system is set up makes it easy for entrepreneurs to open new businesses.
The main point I got from the book is "Smart government, not big government". I think the United States could learn a lot from the way Finland and the Scandinavian countries do things in general. Finland has gone through their own growing pains, as she readily admits, and made a lot of reforms starting in the 1970's.
The author loves the American spirit and generosity. I think she gave a very balanced view of both nations.
February 7, 2017
In short:
Partanen claims things are great in the Nordic states and terrible in the US and uses apples-to-oranges comparisons and cherry-picked data combined with personal anecdotal claims to support this argument. Even more surprisingly, she does not seem to understand, or potentially even be aware, of the social history of the United States and how 1) that social history differs from the Nordic states and 2) the extent to which social history determines, or at least constrains, the present and future. The level of obtuseness to this fact was astounding.
In more painful detail:
Many of her arguments are focus on comparing apples to oranges and pretending like it is apples to apples.
For instance, she goes in exhausting detail about how Finland and other Nordic states out-perform the US on the PISA exam. She claims this is due to better funding and methods used by the Nordic states. However, the most recent round of the PISA tracked 3 US states as unique entities in addition to the US. Sure enough, states like MA and CT actually out-performed the US on average, and the Nordic regions as well, while the third state, FL, dropped much lower. Places that are well-off economically and have lower levels of racial tension, like MA and CT, actually do as well and better than the Nordic region.
She also goes in detail about health insurance. The US health care system is a mess - that is undisputed. But again, she compares outcomes in the US on average to the Finish average, without acknowledging that it isn't a fair comparison. Finland has a life-expectancy-at-birth of 80.6 years. The US is 78.7. However, if we look at a state similar to Finland (low racial tensions, homogeneous population) like MN (81.1), Vermont (80.5), Wisconsin (79.9) or Iowa (79.7). Other states, particularly in the South, drag the average down.
Also Danish TV is the best TV because The Killing was a show from DR1 (the Danish variant of BBC). They also produce such high quality shows as "Denmark's Got Talent", "X Factor (Denmark)", "Dansk Melodi Grand Prix" and "Eurovision Song Content." There are 9 shows listed on Wikipedia as "Entertainment" on DR1's English page - 2 don't have English Wikipedia articles (suggesting that they aren't viewed much outside of the country) and only 4 of the remaining 7 appear to have ever been broadcast outside of Denmark. Danish TV is really taking the world by storm!
Beyond these flawed comparisons, she doesn't seem to understand why things are different.
She constantly asks "why doesn't America just do what they Nordic states did?" She never truly acknowledges that the Nordic countries might be no better, the observed differences are driven by racial, economic and cultural differences between the Nordic states and the US. She does, at one point, say that the Nordic region is less diverse than the US but dismisses the possibility that this is important in the next sentence. The low rates of foreigners and and racial homogeneous population centered in urban areas (a 1/3rd of people in Sweden live in the top ten largest cities compared to about 7% in the US) make it a very different place. It is entirely possible that a drop-in replacement in the US would likely not result in improvement or even meaningful change.
She certainly never addresses the fact that racially-defined slavery existed in the US until the 1860s. While slavery was legal in Denmark until 1792 (or 1848 in the Danish colonies), it was banned in Sweden and Finland 1335 and in Norway in 1274. There was no African-based slave trade until the 1400s. This might matter just a little...
She doesn't discuss the history of welfare in the US. It started out as a "Mother's Pension" for widows and orphans but gradually increased in scope. Eventually, the fact that poverty is biased by race with a larger percent of minorities under the poverty line occurred to people and there was an effort to extend the coverage. This inspired a racially-motivated backlash against the programs. Vox has a wonderful history of welfare in the US (http://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988...). This lead to a larger backlash and stigma against welfare. The Nordic states don't have these racial tensions, racial history or racist behaviors in their past (certainly not the same degree as the US, especially the American South). The people of the US didn't sit down and say "Hmmm, we could do what Finland does or we could do nothing. Nothing seems like the better idea. Let's do that!"
Even in less racial cases, she doesn't mention why things are the way they are. For example, she doesn't discuss why the American system works the way it works. For example, why do we have employer sponsored health insurance? Because during WWII, wages were restricted and employers started offering health insurance as a shortcut around these limits to attract better labor. It wasn't intended as a "system." People who got it, were happy but it wasn't really needed as healthcare cost wasn't out-of-control at the time. Gradually, it did get out of control but most people who voted also had jobs and so they didn't really see an urgent need for a change. Even today, most people would prefer the "devil that they know" to the one they don't when it comes to healthcare reform. Other states, such as the UK or the Nordic countries, never developed this hodgepodge system and so when the need for a health care system presented itself, they made a complete, unified drop-in system like the National Health Service. It is almost certain that if the US were to design its system from nothing, they'd do the same. But due to reasons of history and voter fear, it doesn't happen.
The lack-of-ability to understand why America is the way it is was amazing. Sure, there is no technically good reason that we don't open up a single payer health system tomorrow like most other countries or pass a law providing paid paternal leave funded by Social Security - but neither of these are possible due to the historical process that got us to where we are. Policy is "path dependent." We've taken all the turns at that got us to this restaurant and while we know the one across town is better and there is "no good reason" for us to not drive across town to get there, getting the whole group to agree to spend the time, effort and money to drive across town (especially some of whom might be every much okay with the current choice and might be uncertain about the restaurant on the other side of town) is nigh impossible. Same is true of a health care system. Or child care system. Or school system. Or welfare system.
In all, it was an exhausting book. Overly long (like this review), relatively uninformed in its subject matter and astonishingly non-observant.
Partanen claims things are great in the Nordic states and terrible in the US and uses apples-to-oranges comparisons and cherry-picked data combined with personal anecdotal claims to support this argument. Even more surprisingly, she does not seem to understand, or potentially even be aware, of the social history of the United States and how 1) that social history differs from the Nordic states and 2) the extent to which social history determines, or at least constrains, the present and future. The level of obtuseness to this fact was astounding.
In more painful detail:
Many of her arguments are focus on comparing apples to oranges and pretending like it is apples to apples.
For instance, she goes in exhausting detail about how Finland and other Nordic states out-perform the US on the PISA exam. She claims this is due to better funding and methods used by the Nordic states. However, the most recent round of the PISA tracked 3 US states as unique entities in addition to the US. Sure enough, states like MA and CT actually out-performed the US on average, and the Nordic regions as well, while the third state, FL, dropped much lower. Places that are well-off economically and have lower levels of racial tension, like MA and CT, actually do as well and better than the Nordic region.
She also goes in detail about health insurance. The US health care system is a mess - that is undisputed. But again, she compares outcomes in the US on average to the Finish average, without acknowledging that it isn't a fair comparison. Finland has a life-expectancy-at-birth of 80.6 years. The US is 78.7. However, if we look at a state similar to Finland (low racial tensions, homogeneous population) like MN (81.1), Vermont (80.5), Wisconsin (79.9) or Iowa (79.7). Other states, particularly in the South, drag the average down.
Also Danish TV is the best TV because The Killing was a show from DR1 (the Danish variant of BBC). They also produce such high quality shows as "Denmark's Got Talent", "X Factor (Denmark)", "Dansk Melodi Grand Prix" and "Eurovision Song Content." There are 9 shows listed on Wikipedia as "Entertainment" on DR1's English page - 2 don't have English Wikipedia articles (suggesting that they aren't viewed much outside of the country) and only 4 of the remaining 7 appear to have ever been broadcast outside of Denmark. Danish TV is really taking the world by storm!
Beyond these flawed comparisons, she doesn't seem to understand why things are different.
She constantly asks "why doesn't America just do what they Nordic states did?" She never truly acknowledges that the Nordic countries might be no better, the observed differences are driven by racial, economic and cultural differences between the Nordic states and the US. She does, at one point, say that the Nordic region is less diverse than the US but dismisses the possibility that this is important in the next sentence. The low rates of foreigners and and racial homogeneous population centered in urban areas (a 1/3rd of people in Sweden live in the top ten largest cities compared to about 7% in the US) make it a very different place. It is entirely possible that a drop-in replacement in the US would likely not result in improvement or even meaningful change.
She certainly never addresses the fact that racially-defined slavery existed in the US until the 1860s. While slavery was legal in Denmark until 1792 (or 1848 in the Danish colonies), it was banned in Sweden and Finland 1335 and in Norway in 1274. There was no African-based slave trade until the 1400s. This might matter just a little...
She doesn't discuss the history of welfare in the US. It started out as a "Mother's Pension" for widows and orphans but gradually increased in scope. Eventually, the fact that poverty is biased by race with a larger percent of minorities under the poverty line occurred to people and there was an effort to extend the coverage. This inspired a racially-motivated backlash against the programs. Vox has a wonderful history of welfare in the US (http://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988...). This lead to a larger backlash and stigma against welfare. The Nordic states don't have these racial tensions, racial history or racist behaviors in their past (certainly not the same degree as the US, especially the American South). The people of the US didn't sit down and say "Hmmm, we could do what Finland does or we could do nothing. Nothing seems like the better idea. Let's do that!"
Even in less racial cases, she doesn't mention why things are the way they are. For example, she doesn't discuss why the American system works the way it works. For example, why do we have employer sponsored health insurance? Because during WWII, wages were restricted and employers started offering health insurance as a shortcut around these limits to attract better labor. It wasn't intended as a "system." People who got it, were happy but it wasn't really needed as healthcare cost wasn't out-of-control at the time. Gradually, it did get out of control but most people who voted also had jobs and so they didn't really see an urgent need for a change. Even today, most people would prefer the "devil that they know" to the one they don't when it comes to healthcare reform. Other states, such as the UK or the Nordic countries, never developed this hodgepodge system and so when the need for a health care system presented itself, they made a complete, unified drop-in system like the National Health Service. It is almost certain that if the US were to design its system from nothing, they'd do the same. But due to reasons of history and voter fear, it doesn't happen.
The lack-of-ability to understand why America is the way it is was amazing. Sure, there is no technically good reason that we don't open up a single payer health system tomorrow like most other countries or pass a law providing paid paternal leave funded by Social Security - but neither of these are possible due to the historical process that got us to where we are. Policy is "path dependent." We've taken all the turns at that got us to this restaurant and while we know the one across town is better and there is "no good reason" for us to not drive across town to get there, getting the whole group to agree to spend the time, effort and money to drive across town (especially some of whom might be every much okay with the current choice and might be uncertain about the restaurant on the other side of town) is nigh impossible. Same is true of a health care system. Or child care system. Or school system. Or welfare system.
In all, it was an exhausting book. Overly long (like this review), relatively uninformed in its subject matter and astonishingly non-observant.
October 5, 2016
I believe that as a Canadian, I was the perfect audience for this book. Since I am not Finnish (or from any other Nordic country) I am not bored by the topic. Since I am not American, I am not insulted?
Canada has a lot of Nordic leanings (or at least we are much closer than the States in many things), which means it would be even easier to make some of the changes. Especially with school and parental leave and vacations and sick days!
Mostly I wish every country in the whole world had the Baby Boxes. How wonderful are they.
Canada has a lot of Nordic leanings (or at least we are much closer than the States in many things), which means it would be even easier to make some of the changes. Especially with school and parental leave and vacations and sick days!
Mostly I wish every country in the whole world had the Baby Boxes. How wonderful are they.
June 6, 2019
Horrifying.
I kept having to put it down, because it was too depressing.
A Finnish journalist, now an American citizen, breaks down the way the Finnish system of healthcare, school, and taxation works to show how absolutely SCREWED America is unless we make drastic (but perfectly logical) changes. She talks about the Nordic theory of love: by freeing up families from the burdens of working extra hours to afford healthcare or better schools or elder care, you free them up to love their families without strings attached, to take care of themselves mentally and physically, and have the time and the solid foundation to achieve their dreams.
It made me want to cry.
I kept having to put it down, because it was too depressing.
A Finnish journalist, now an American citizen, breaks down the way the Finnish system of healthcare, school, and taxation works to show how absolutely SCREWED America is unless we make drastic (but perfectly logical) changes. She talks about the Nordic theory of love: by freeing up families from the burdens of working extra hours to afford healthcare or better schools or elder care, you free them up to love their families without strings attached, to take care of themselves mentally and physically, and have the time and the solid foundation to achieve their dreams.
It made me want to cry.
August 1, 2016
I'm sympathetic - even envious - of Nordic culture (gone to Iceland twice, Norway once ... and would move to Iceland if my wife would - but it's not in the cards). The reasons I rate this book - am still reading it - 3 stars vs 4|5 are: A) too verbose B) doesn't delve deeper into key underlying differences between the Nordics and U.S. : culture & tradition. On page 77, for instance, "An American friend ... fumed to me about a female colleague of his who was asking to work part-time from home after having children. 'She chose to have children' he said angrily. 'Now she wants everyone else to accommodate her choices. It's not our problem.' .... However, I still thought of children's well-being as everyone's benefit..." Which, although it speaks to cultural differences (I'm perhaps the American exception who agrees with her and not her colleague), doesn't dig into the WHY of such differing viewpoints. There are countless examples in her book of attitudinal differences, but no discussion yet (I haven't gotten to the end, so I could be proved wrong) of how American cultural attitudes could be changed, or conversely, how Nordic policies implemented here could potentially go wrong. E.G., what works in a small, ethnically homogeneous population, might not work in a large, diverse population like the U.S. Issues of trust (e.g. are too many Americans would-be freeloaders? ), education (the U.S. as a whole, is a lot less educated than any of the Nordic countries), and of traditions. Some aspects of culture take generations to change. A strong point she makes is that we Americans are living behind the times: fighting cultural battles among ourselves that much of the more modern world (the Nordics) have left behind. But, unmentioned, is that we have been fighting foreign wars almost continuously for the past 100 years, unlike the Nordics (granted, Finland fought the Russians multiple times; and Norway & Denmark were occupied during WWII). Such constant foreign turmoil takes a toll.
Perhaps my review here was too verbose also.
Perhaps my review here was too verbose also.
April 11, 2017
The Nordic Theory of Everything is a must-read for people everywhere, but particularly for residents of the United States. Anu Partanen is a Finnish writer and journalist who fell in love with an American writer at a conference, and eventually moved to New York. She relates her experience in moving from a society that takes care of everything, including education, health care, maternity and child care, maternity and paternity leave, old age care, unemployment and more, to an America in which many middle-class people can no longer aspire to upward mobility for themselves and their children, and live in dread of medical catastrophe. She became depressed and fretful when she realized that all of her safety nets had been removed and the wire raised! She turned the experience into an interesting and well-written account of the differences between the Nordic countries and the United States, which she already admired and has come to love.
Ms. Partanen explains the frequently mentioned "Nordic Theory of Love," which I will risk paraphrasing as the principle that everyone in a society should have equal opportunities, and that obligations to others should not prevent anyone from fulfilling their plans and dreams. For example, caring properly for children or elderly parents requires a considerable commitment of time for both sexes, which can derail careers and cause people to lose their jobs. She effectively refutes the unfair and ignorant claims of conservatives and libertarians who claim that the Nordic countries are socialist nightmares that suck every penny from hard working people. In fact, she shows very convincingly that if all Nordic income and consumption taxes are counted and compared to the sum of American taxes, hidden taxes, child care costs, senior care costs, and educational costs the United States loses on all counts—cost, quality, and risk.
She completes the picture by suggesting, with a wink, that Americans need to ask not what you can do for your country, but what your country can do for you. She makes a very convincing case that sharing a little Nordic love can bring back the fast-disappearing American dream, allow Americans to rethink success, step off the crazy carousel of success, and live happier, better lives. That does not require America to sacrifice its business and academic leadership, as she shows by comparing the performance of Nordic companies and startups.
I loved this book, although at times the comparisons necessarily became a little repetitive. Ms. Partanen builds a very logical, coherent case, and is uncannily good at anticipating every objection and providing reasonable counter evidence. I hope that more Americans read it and get as excited as I am. But don't move to the Nordic countries. Stay here and learn from their success to help change our dysfunctional systems.
Ms. Partanen explains the frequently mentioned "Nordic Theory of Love," which I will risk paraphrasing as the principle that everyone in a society should have equal opportunities, and that obligations to others should not prevent anyone from fulfilling their plans and dreams. For example, caring properly for children or elderly parents requires a considerable commitment of time for both sexes, which can derail careers and cause people to lose their jobs. She effectively refutes the unfair and ignorant claims of conservatives and libertarians who claim that the Nordic countries are socialist nightmares that suck every penny from hard working people. In fact, she shows very convincingly that if all Nordic income and consumption taxes are counted and compared to the sum of American taxes, hidden taxes, child care costs, senior care costs, and educational costs the United States loses on all counts—cost, quality, and risk.
She completes the picture by suggesting, with a wink, that Americans need to ask not what you can do for your country, but what your country can do for you. She makes a very convincing case that sharing a little Nordic love can bring back the fast-disappearing American dream, allow Americans to rethink success, step off the crazy carousel of success, and live happier, better lives. That does not require America to sacrifice its business and academic leadership, as she shows by comparing the performance of Nordic companies and startups.
I loved this book, although at times the comparisons necessarily became a little repetitive. Ms. Partanen builds a very logical, coherent case, and is uncannily good at anticipating every objection and providing reasonable counter evidence. I hope that more Americans read it and get as excited as I am. But don't move to the Nordic countries. Stay here and learn from their success to help change our dysfunctional systems.
February 25, 2017
Do not be fooled - this is not one of the currently-trendy books about 'hygge' and all the ways that Scandinavians excel at coziness and contentment. Rather, this is a treatise on how Scandinavian social policies create a better life for all because they are ultimately based on what the author calls the Nordic Theory of Love. Essentially, as the author says, "Henrik Berggren—put together their observations on individualism and formulated something they called “the Swedish theory of love.” The core idea is that authentic love and friendship are possible only between individuals who are independent and equal.” And that, my friends, is the root of all of the systems of support that Nordic countries have state-mandated, supported, and eventually institutionalized. The author argues that the "lack of a social safety net in the US actually makes us less free, not just by constraining our opportunities based on our family background, but also by forcing our social relationships to bear the weight of responsibilities like health care and education.", as another Goodreader states. The author succinctly reminds us of the benefits when "Nordic societies provide their citizens - all their citizens and especially the middle class- with maximum autonomy from old-fashioned, traditional ties of dependence (my note - think elder care, child care, spousal support and more), which among other things ends up saving people a lot of money and heartache along with securing personal freedom", which allows " all those human relationships to be unencumbered by ulterior motives and needs, and thus be entirely free, completely authentic, and driven purely by love". Add to that the core belief that those wacky Scandinavians have about that what is best for the least of us, benefitting ALL of us, and BOOM - you have amazing state-supported and universally available healthcare, childcare, elder care, education (through college), and so much more. And lest you think that all of this is socialist drivel supported by huge taxes - the author VERY carefully lays out some facts, ya'll, that show that "Average Nordic tax rates are lower than in the United States, although corporations and very wealthy individuals pay more." and remind us " Far from being a socialist nanny state, Finland promotes liberty and family values: it frees individuals and families to enjoy closer, fairer, and less stressful lives.". Count me in! Maybe this book really is about 'hygge' at it's very core....
May 28, 2021
The things you do for love...
Somu žurnāliste iemīlas amerikāņu rakstniekā, un izdomā, ka ir loģiskāk, ja viņu kopdzīve turpināsies ASV. Tur viņa piedzīvo n-tos kultūršokus, un tā kā modernā pasaule ir sajukusi prātā ar fanošanu par Somiju, viņa izdomā salīdzināt šis abas valstis no socioekonomiskā skatupunkta.
Šis nav romāns, bet gan reāls stāsts, pilns ar faktiem, skaitļiem no aptuveni 2016.gada, un it kā mēģina skaidrot lielās atškirības starp ziemeļnieku sabiedrību un sapņu valsti ASV.
Pilnīgi lieka grāmata, it kā kāds normāls (tiešām normāls, ne slavu un super karjeru alkstošais) cilvēks aiz brīva prāta gribētu pārcelties uz dzīvi ASV. Protams, es nesteidzos ar pārcelšanos uz Somiju... tāpēc piekrītu, ka katram savi iemesli.
Autores galvenie argumenti balstās Ziemeļnieku mīlestības teorijā - citējot Stingu, if you love somebody, set them free. Dot cilvēkiem pēc iespējas lielāku brīvību pašiem darboties, pieļaut kļūdas, gūt panākumus, utt, galvenokārt tas attiecināms uz bērnu - vecāku attiecībām, nekādas auklēšanās līdz 30 gadu vecumam un studiju kredītu apmaksas, vecāki savu jau ir izdarījuši bērnībā, izmantojot valsts nodrošinātos bērna kopšanas atvaļinājumus. Tas stiprina nāciju, audzina neatkarīgus, par sevi parūpēties spējīgus pilsoņus.
Liekam pretī ASV, kur sabiedrība iekuļas apburtajā lokā - vecāki ir spiesti plānot savu bērnu potenicāli veiksmīgās dzīves jau līdz ar ieņemšanu, un vada tās nepaguruši līdz koledžas beigām, līdz lomas mainās, un bērniem ir jāuzņemas rūpes par vecākiem. Bez ģimenes tev var nebūt nodokļu atvieglojumu, veselības apdrošināšanas, pietiekamu ienākumu. Pieliekam klāt vēl šausmu stāstus par veselības aprūpi, kas maksā simtus tūkstošus un ir neparedzamāka par Eirovīzijas rezultātiem. Nevienlīdzīgā izglītības pieejamība, neeksistējošais atbalsts jaunajiem vecākiem (10 nedēļas vecs bebis jādod silītē, lai mamma var saglabāt darbu). Kā to var saukt par iespēju un sapņu zemi? Pirms 70 gadiem varbūt. Uz to arī autore pastāv, ka ASV izglītības, veselības, sociālās apdrošināšanas un nodokļu principi neder "modernajam 21.gs". To viņa pagūst pieminēts katrā trešajā rindkopā.
Skaidrs, ka ideālā valsts pārvalde pastāv tikai uz papīra, un pat labākajiem no piemēriem ir iespējas uzlabojumiem (Somijā uz valsts apmaksātu kataraktas operāciju jāgaida daži mēneši! Ārprāc!), bet autores centieni izglābt ASV ir tik nožēlojami - amīši kritizē ziemeļvalstis kā ņuņņu sabiedrību, kur valsts par visiem parūpējas, kas viņi paši par sevi nevar parūpēties? "Man ir svarīgi pašam izvēlēties dakteri, valsts (kā Somija) ierobežo manu brīvību," kopkorī mauc redneki, un nabaga somiete domā, tiešām, vai valsts pieņem lēmumus manā vietā? Tas nav labi!
Man visa šī grāmata škita kā spēle pie vieniem vārtiem, tikai autore otrā pusē mēģina kaut kādu karsējmeiteņu kombināciju. Pati vainīga, ka apprecēja amerikāni, es biju gudrāka!
Somu žurnāliste iemīlas amerikāņu rakstniekā, un izdomā, ka ir loģiskāk, ja viņu kopdzīve turpināsies ASV. Tur viņa piedzīvo n-tos kultūršokus, un tā kā modernā pasaule ir sajukusi prātā ar fanošanu par Somiju, viņa izdomā salīdzināt šis abas valstis no socioekonomiskā skatupunkta.
Šis nav romāns, bet gan reāls stāsts, pilns ar faktiem, skaitļiem no aptuveni 2016.gada, un it kā mēģina skaidrot lielās atškirības starp ziemeļnieku sabiedrību un sapņu valsti ASV.
Pilnīgi lieka grāmata, it kā kāds normāls (tiešām normāls, ne slavu un super karjeru alkstošais) cilvēks aiz brīva prāta gribētu pārcelties uz dzīvi ASV. Protams, es nesteidzos ar pārcelšanos uz Somiju... tāpēc piekrītu, ka katram savi iemesli.
Autores galvenie argumenti balstās Ziemeļnieku mīlestības teorijā - citējot Stingu, if you love somebody, set them free. Dot cilvēkiem pēc iespējas lielāku brīvību pašiem darboties, pieļaut kļūdas, gūt panākumus, utt, galvenokārt tas attiecināms uz bērnu - vecāku attiecībām, nekādas auklēšanās līdz 30 gadu vecumam un studiju kredītu apmaksas, vecāki savu jau ir izdarījuši bērnībā, izmantojot valsts nodrošinātos bērna kopšanas atvaļinājumus. Tas stiprina nāciju, audzina neatkarīgus, par sevi parūpēties spējīgus pilsoņus.
Liekam pretī ASV, kur sabiedrība iekuļas apburtajā lokā - vecāki ir spiesti plānot savu bērnu potenicāli veiksmīgās dzīves jau līdz ar ieņemšanu, un vada tās nepaguruši līdz koledžas beigām, līdz lomas mainās, un bērniem ir jāuzņemas rūpes par vecākiem. Bez ģimenes tev var nebūt nodokļu atvieglojumu, veselības apdrošināšanas, pietiekamu ienākumu. Pieliekam klāt vēl šausmu stāstus par veselības aprūpi, kas maksā simtus tūkstošus un ir neparedzamāka par Eirovīzijas rezultātiem. Nevienlīdzīgā izglītības pieejamība, neeksistējošais atbalsts jaunajiem vecākiem (10 nedēļas vecs bebis jādod silītē, lai mamma var saglabāt darbu). Kā to var saukt par iespēju un sapņu zemi? Pirms 70 gadiem varbūt. Uz to arī autore pastāv, ka ASV izglītības, veselības, sociālās apdrošināšanas un nodokļu principi neder "modernajam 21.gs". To viņa pagūst pieminēts katrā trešajā rindkopā.
Skaidrs, ka ideālā valsts pārvalde pastāv tikai uz papīra, un pat labākajiem no piemēriem ir iespējas uzlabojumiem (Somijā uz valsts apmaksātu kataraktas operāciju jāgaida daži mēneši! Ārprāc!), bet autores centieni izglābt ASV ir tik nožēlojami - amīši kritizē ziemeļvalstis kā ņuņņu sabiedrību, kur valsts par visiem parūpējas, kas viņi paši par sevi nevar parūpēties? "Man ir svarīgi pašam izvēlēties dakteri, valsts (kā Somija) ierobežo manu brīvību," kopkorī mauc redneki, un nabaga somiete domā, tiešām, vai valsts pieņem lēmumus manā vietā? Tas nav labi!
Man visa šī grāmata škita kā spēle pie vieniem vārtiem, tikai autore otrā pusē mēģina kaut kādu karsējmeiteņu kombināciju. Pati vainīga, ka apprecēja amerikāni, es biju gudrāka!
April 10, 2016
This book makes me want to move to Finland.
October 1, 2016
This was disappointing. I wanted much more but this turned out to be a very shallow overview of the differences between the U.S. And Nordic countries. I knew I wouldn't like this when the author quoted David Brooks and made the argument that the U.S. should institute more humane policies because they make people better workers. Yikes. My main gripe with this book is that it didn't dive deep into the reasons why the U.S. doesn't have sufficient public healthcare, parental leave, and childcare infrastructure. There are reasons and this book doesn't even touch them. The author ignores the differences in our histories and how capitalism was implemented in both countries. I don't know much about Nordic history but I do know that their economic system wasn't built around chattel slavery. If you don't think that has anything to do with present day policies, you don't understand America.
Also, any book about American policies has to center race. The author completely sidestepped this. There was a moment when the author compared Nordic women and white American women but left out everyone else. I was stunned. How did this get past an editor? And while I'm on the topic, her explanation of why visitors and immigrants feel unwelcome in Finland was mighty convenient. It's because of their cold character? I'd love to know what a person of color in Finland thinks of this explanation. I am 100% certain I could move there and be treated very differently from any African immigrant.
The author's understanding of the American political and economic landscape was lacking in other ways as well. What about our obsession with states rights? That's part of why we don't have these policies and it was ignored. What about our the trend of lean production in workplaces? We're living in a very different world than we were 20 years ago. The anecdotes about Finnish workplaces remind me of stories I hear from older people about internal capacity. I don't think I know anyone who has job where their duties could be easily taken over by another employee if they were on leave without considerable strain. That doesn't much happen here. In the words of Joanne the Scammer, "That's over. That's canceled." This, too, was completely ignored. It surprises me because the author and her husband are journalists! That field has been hit incredibly hard in the last years by economic downturn. It obviously affected them but she barely comments on it.
I've saved my favorite gaffe for last. At one point, she suggests that we put an end to gerrymandering by creating nonpartisan councils that create districts. Girl, what? LOL! Not in America. Never gonna happen. It's a beautiful dream but it will never fly here. Our system is basically set up to cater to gerrymandering. And, again, why is this happening here? Why is it such a problem? Why isn't it happening in Finland? The author really excelled at ignoring the elephant in the room.
I couldn't get through a page without having something to criticize. I get what this author was trying to do but without accurate historical context, her argument is weak.
Also, any book about American policies has to center race. The author completely sidestepped this. There was a moment when the author compared Nordic women and white American women but left out everyone else. I was stunned. How did this get past an editor? And while I'm on the topic, her explanation of why visitors and immigrants feel unwelcome in Finland was mighty convenient. It's because of their cold character? I'd love to know what a person of color in Finland thinks of this explanation. I am 100% certain I could move there and be treated very differently from any African immigrant.
The author's understanding of the American political and economic landscape was lacking in other ways as well. What about our obsession with states rights? That's part of why we don't have these policies and it was ignored. What about our the trend of lean production in workplaces? We're living in a very different world than we were 20 years ago. The anecdotes about Finnish workplaces remind me of stories I hear from older people about internal capacity. I don't think I know anyone who has job where their duties could be easily taken over by another employee if they were on leave without considerable strain. That doesn't much happen here. In the words of Joanne the Scammer, "That's over. That's canceled." This, too, was completely ignored. It surprises me because the author and her husband are journalists! That field has been hit incredibly hard in the last years by economic downturn. It obviously affected them but she barely comments on it.
I've saved my favorite gaffe for last. At one point, she suggests that we put an end to gerrymandering by creating nonpartisan councils that create districts. Girl, what? LOL! Not in America. Never gonna happen. It's a beautiful dream but it will never fly here. Our system is basically set up to cater to gerrymandering. And, again, why is this happening here? Why is it such a problem? Why isn't it happening in Finland? The author really excelled at ignoring the elephant in the room.
I couldn't get through a page without having something to criticize. I get what this author was trying to do but without accurate historical context, her argument is weak.
July 7, 2017
I originally picked up this book because I was curious about the Nordic countries and the social policies that underpin their economic strength and happy populations. I learned a great deal about the successful education, healthcare, and labor policies there, but what I also got was a comparison of life in the Nordic region with life in the United States. These two parts of the world share many democratic values such as freedom, independence, and equality. But they differ in their practical approaches toward these goals.
The central theory of the book and a core tenet of policies in the Nordic region is the Nordic theory of love, or more precisely the Swedish theory of love. It is the idea that authentic friendship can only exist between independent individuals who need not rely on each other, who are in no way dependent on one another. The Nordic countries have built their societies around this notion. A counterexample taken from the US would be someone who does not work in order to care for a child and who must rely on their spouse to provide health insurance that makes healthcare affordable. The caregiver's dependence on their spouse for healthcare can become a source of resentment. This next example, taken from education, does not demonstrate the theory as clearly, but it resonates strongly with me. Only by providing the same high quality education to citizens can you guarantee that they will have equal access to opportunities in life and not become unnecessarily reliant on one another.
With its structure and perspective, the book is able to present and tackle difficult policy questions. The book presents social policies in the Nordic countries - and the Nordic theory of love that lies at their core - through a simple, human-centric structure. The author presents the individual's relationships toward various arms of the state. She begins with birth, childcare, family leave policies, and care for family members across the age spectrum before proceeding to education, healthcare, taxes, labor, and business. Partanen's perspective as a Finnish citizen married to an American living in New York allows her to examines these policies and relate them to an American audience. Her ties to American and Nordic society help her to deliver praise and criticism judiciously.
As the book's title suggests, the author is really searching for a better life, one that combines aspects of life in both parts of the world. The book really lit a fire in me. Below are a few thoughts on the state of affairs in the US in relation to the Nordic world:
I see the social policies of the Nordic countries as offering a much more democratic way of life than the United States, where we are witnessing the erosion of social mobility and exacerbation of inequality. The greatest predictor of academic success in the United States is the affluence of an individual's family. How can a nation call itself democratic when the biggest predictor of success is the family you're born into?
Born into above-average circumstances, I am prone to apathy when it comes to social policy in the US. This book served as a wakeup call. Americans need to realize that the arrangements offered by the government for healthcare, education, work, and relationships are substandard for a nation as prominent and wealthy as the US.
Here are a couple of really stupid things that persist in the US. First, schools are funded at the local level. This means that some schools are funded at many times the level of others, and that the quality of education a kid receives is based on the wealth of their neighborhood, city, or county. Second, healthcare is provided by employers. Why should businesses provide this social benefit and bear the financial and administrative costs? Even those who are fortunate enough to have health insurance end up paying for those who don't and seek emergency care in hospitals - through the rising cost of healthcare and through taxes.
I definitely recommend reading this book.
The central theory of the book and a core tenet of policies in the Nordic region is the Nordic theory of love, or more precisely the Swedish theory of love. It is the idea that authentic friendship can only exist between independent individuals who need not rely on each other, who are in no way dependent on one another. The Nordic countries have built their societies around this notion. A counterexample taken from the US would be someone who does not work in order to care for a child and who must rely on their spouse to provide health insurance that makes healthcare affordable. The caregiver's dependence on their spouse for healthcare can become a source of resentment. This next example, taken from education, does not demonstrate the theory as clearly, but it resonates strongly with me. Only by providing the same high quality education to citizens can you guarantee that they will have equal access to opportunities in life and not become unnecessarily reliant on one another.
With its structure and perspective, the book is able to present and tackle difficult policy questions. The book presents social policies in the Nordic countries - and the Nordic theory of love that lies at their core - through a simple, human-centric structure. The author presents the individual's relationships toward various arms of the state. She begins with birth, childcare, family leave policies, and care for family members across the age spectrum before proceeding to education, healthcare, taxes, labor, and business. Partanen's perspective as a Finnish citizen married to an American living in New York allows her to examines these policies and relate them to an American audience. Her ties to American and Nordic society help her to deliver praise and criticism judiciously.
As the book's title suggests, the author is really searching for a better life, one that combines aspects of life in both parts of the world. The book really lit a fire in me. Below are a few thoughts on the state of affairs in the US in relation to the Nordic world:
I see the social policies of the Nordic countries as offering a much more democratic way of life than the United States, where we are witnessing the erosion of social mobility and exacerbation of inequality. The greatest predictor of academic success in the United States is the affluence of an individual's family. How can a nation call itself democratic when the biggest predictor of success is the family you're born into?
Born into above-average circumstances, I am prone to apathy when it comes to social policy in the US. This book served as a wakeup call. Americans need to realize that the arrangements offered by the government for healthcare, education, work, and relationships are substandard for a nation as prominent and wealthy as the US.
Here are a couple of really stupid things that persist in the US. First, schools are funded at the local level. This means that some schools are funded at many times the level of others, and that the quality of education a kid receives is based on the wealth of their neighborhood, city, or county. Second, healthcare is provided by employers. Why should businesses provide this social benefit and bear the financial and administrative costs? Even those who are fortunate enough to have health insurance end up paying for those who don't and seek emergency care in hospitals - through the rising cost of healthcare and through taxes.
I definitely recommend reading this book.
February 2, 2018
I seem to be on Nordic kick, devouring books right and left about this stretch of Europe that seems to hold so much promise for a better way of life. I've read at least two Anglo-goes-to-Denmark books, and this seemed like it would provide a nice counterpoint, insofar as the author is Finnish and moves to New York to be with her long-distance partner.
Now, I should preface this by saying that the author seems like a nice person. She worked as a journalist in Finland, and the book has a kind of journalistic reportage that would be perfectly fine in, say, a newspaper. When stretched into a couple hundred pages, however, it quickly wears thin.
Part of the issue is that the book can't decide what it wants to be. Is it about how Anu and Trevor meet and make their way in this place that is new to her? Not really, no. I have no idea who Trevor is or what he is like as a person. Which is fine, if he's only the impetus for her moving to America. But her experiences with America are, frankly, equally shallow and completely anodyne. Did you know that health care in the U.S. is a mess? Wow, we sure suck at childcare! Schooling? Gender equity? Pah!
Yet the book manages to not be any kind of real critique because, urban dwelling aside, I would chance that this author knows very little about why America is the way it is. Sure, there's like a super brief mention of Ayn Rand somewhere in there, and I do think she understands that the fundamental attribute of many Americans is to be deeply individualistic rather than socially-minded. And we care way too much about money. And we're not into taxes. And we worship guns. So far, so mediocre. But to write an entire book about the flaws in the American system and to mention race and religion like, twice? It strikes me as naive at best, woefully ignorant otherwise.
She trots out this "Nordic theory of love" so often, as a catchall for literally every social good that you have to wonder if she's being sponsored to say it. She also makes the argument, at essentially the same time, that "values don't dictate policy." Both of these things cannot simultaneously be true. I'd go so far as to say that in America, values overwhelmingly dictate policy, insofar as they're all about maintaining the (racist, classist, sexist, etc) status quo.
To sum up, I wouldn't bother with this book itself. The bibliography is actually very solid, and points to another, better book, that could have come about from the same sources. Maybe someone will write that one.
Now, I should preface this by saying that the author seems like a nice person. She worked as a journalist in Finland, and the book has a kind of journalistic reportage that would be perfectly fine in, say, a newspaper. When stretched into a couple hundred pages, however, it quickly wears thin.
Part of the issue is that the book can't decide what it wants to be. Is it about how Anu and Trevor meet and make their way in this place that is new to her? Not really, no. I have no idea who Trevor is or what he is like as a person. Which is fine, if he's only the impetus for her moving to America. But her experiences with America are, frankly, equally shallow and completely anodyne. Did you know that health care in the U.S. is a mess? Wow, we sure suck at childcare! Schooling? Gender equity? Pah!
Yet the book manages to not be any kind of real critique because, urban dwelling aside, I would chance that this author knows very little about why America is the way it is. Sure, there's like a super brief mention of Ayn Rand somewhere in there, and I do think she understands that the fundamental attribute of many Americans is to be deeply individualistic rather than socially-minded. And we care way too much about money. And we're not into taxes. And we worship guns. So far, so mediocre. But to write an entire book about the flaws in the American system and to mention race and religion like, twice? It strikes me as naive at best, woefully ignorant otherwise.
She trots out this "Nordic theory of love" so often, as a catchall for literally every social good that you have to wonder if she's being sponsored to say it. She also makes the argument, at essentially the same time, that "values don't dictate policy." Both of these things cannot simultaneously be true. I'd go so far as to say that in America, values overwhelmingly dictate policy, insofar as they're all about maintaining the (racist, classist, sexist, etc) status quo.
To sum up, I wouldn't bother with this book itself. The bibliography is actually very solid, and points to another, better book, that could have come about from the same sources. Maybe someone will write that one.
March 16, 2022
با اینکه کمی آشنا بودم، حین گوش دادن به نظرم کشورهای کشورهای نوردیک مثل تنها بهشت ممکن به نظرم میومدن ( که خوب بیان واضحات برای همه همینه..) ولی بعد از تموم شدن کتاب غم عجیبی رو حس میکنم نه از اینکه من اینجام و… نمیدونم در حال تجربه حس عجیبی هستم.
از کتاب:
the Scandinavians—that is, the Swedes, Danes, and Norwegians—even have a literary phrase to describe this tendency.
The phrase is “the Law of Jante,” and it is shorthand for a list of ten commandments created by the Danish-Norwegian writer Aksel Sandemose in his 1933 novel A Fugitive Crosses His Tracks. Sandemose’s ten commandments referred to the mentality of a fictional town called Jante, but the rules were immediately understood to capture the larger disposition of Scandinavians in general. The commandments are:
1. You are not to think you are anything special.
2. You are not to think you are as good as we are.
3. You are not to think you are smarter than we are.
4. You are not to convince yourself that you are better than we are.
5. You are not to think you know more than we do.
6. You are not to think you are more important than we are.
7. You are not to think you are good at anything.
8. You are not to laugh at us.
9. You are not to think anyone cares about you.
10. You are not to think you can teach us anything.
از کتاب:
the Scandinavians—that is, the Swedes, Danes, and Norwegians—even have a literary phrase to describe this tendency.
The phrase is “the Law of Jante,” and it is shorthand for a list of ten commandments created by the Danish-Norwegian writer Aksel Sandemose in his 1933 novel A Fugitive Crosses His Tracks. Sandemose’s ten commandments referred to the mentality of a fictional town called Jante, but the rules were immediately understood to capture the larger disposition of Scandinavians in general. The commandments are:
1. You are not to think you are anything special.
2. You are not to think you are as good as we are.
3. You are not to think you are smarter than we are.
4. You are not to convince yourself that you are better than we are.
5. You are not to think you know more than we do.
6. You are not to think you are more important than we are.
7. You are not to think you are good at anything.
8. You are not to laugh at us.
9. You are not to think anyone cares about you.
10. You are not to think you can teach us anything.
July 6, 2016
This was almost nothing like The Almost Nearly Perfect People by Michael Booth, which I read last summer. I liked that one a lot, too, but that was a sort of travelogue and humorous survey of all the Nordic countries by a non-Nordic admirer of the lifestyles and social policies of the five nations. This book, by contrast, is told by a Finnish journalist who moves to the USA for love and then applies her Finland-honed sense of justice to her new country, comparing and contrasting Finland and the USA. As you might guess Finland comes out better in many areas, but she's also pretty balanced and has enough distance to criticize her home country, too.
I'd downloaded the audio without having read any reviews or even any dust-jacket blurbs, feeling anticipatory delight at another wistful exploration of Scandinavia. In the beginning I began to fear that this was a sort a chick-lit memoir about following the handsome love-of-your-life and giving up everything you've ever cared about and worked for to be with the guy. But it quickly became a very different sort of book: a critical and well-reasoned examination of American policies in health care, education, child care, the American idea of success and social mobility, and gender roles and marriage. At the same time it remains a very personal book, as Partanen frames her arguments around her own adjustment to living and working in the US, along with her impressions of American culture and her bewilderment at our acceptance of many unjust and illogical traditions and public policies. It's so trenchant and well reasoned that I several times found myself near to weeping with frustration during her discussions of the US health care/health insurance system. I think my audio book parts were either playing out of order or she kept returning to the subject for hours and hours. God please stop ... but yes, Anu Partanen you are so right!! (I'm overly sensitive lately, due to a four-month long and still-unresolved insurance over-billing, not to mention the unease many of us live with that our insurance will not support us if we become truly sick, and the fear that we freelancers have that the ACA might be undermined.)
I'd downloaded the audio without having read any reviews or even any dust-jacket blurbs, feeling anticipatory delight at another wistful exploration of Scandinavia. In the beginning I began to fear that this was a sort a chick-lit memoir about following the handsome love-of-your-life and giving up everything you've ever cared about and worked for to be with the guy. But it quickly became a very different sort of book: a critical and well-reasoned examination of American policies in health care, education, child care, the American idea of success and social mobility, and gender roles and marriage. At the same time it remains a very personal book, as Partanen frames her arguments around her own adjustment to living and working in the US, along with her impressions of American culture and her bewilderment at our acceptance of many unjust and illogical traditions and public policies. It's so trenchant and well reasoned that I several times found myself near to weeping with frustration during her discussions of the US health care/health insurance system. I think my audio book parts were either playing out of order or she kept returning to the subject for hours and hours. God please stop ... but yes, Anu Partanen you are so right!! (I'm overly sensitive lately, due to a four-month long and still-unresolved insurance over-billing, not to mention the unease many of us live with that our insurance will not support us if we become truly sick, and the fear that we freelancers have that the ACA might be undermined.)
July 10, 2019
Книгата е представена от издателството като съветите на една жителка на Скандинавия за това как да се "подобри" САЩ. Ако това беше вярно, книгата щеше да е доста смотана, но за щастие не е.
Авторката е финландка която се жени и живее в САЩ и в The Nordic Theory of Everything: In Search of a Better Life тя описва скандинавския характер на хората, начина им на живот и управление така, както ги вижда и прави паралели с това, което вижда в САЩ.
Интересно е да се научи за светогледа на скандинавците (доколкото тя и представените от нея автори го представляват), а във вижданията й относно живота в САЩ има доста истина.
За съжаление стилът й на писане е разхвърлян, разсеян и многословен, повтаря многократно една и съща теза с различни думи, връща се внезапно към изоставени преди страница-две идеи и като цяло прави всичко възможно да направи иначе любопитната си книга трудна за четене.
Това което ми направи най-силно впечатление е описанието й на скандинавския характер на краен индивидуализъм, който е в пълно противоречие със "социалистическата" утопия, която целия останал свят вижда в Скандинавия.
Според нея и цитираните от нея скандинавски интелектуалци, цялата социална система на скандинавските държави е ориентирана така, че да направи отделния човек абсолютно незвисим от роднини, приятели и семейство, защото само когато е независим, той е пълноценен човек и може да има пълноценни връзки с други хора и обществото като цяло.
Така според авторката северните държави не са ни най-малко "социалистически" а точно обратното - те са в челото на световните класации за свобода на икономиките и политиките им са продукт на крайния индивидуализъм на обществото - много повече, отколкото в САЩ.
Авторката е финландка която се жени и живее в САЩ и в The Nordic Theory of Everything: In Search of a Better Life тя описва скандинавския характер на хората, начина им на живот и управление така, както ги вижда и прави паралели с това, което вижда в САЩ.
Интересно е да се научи за светогледа на скандинавците (доколкото тя и представените от нея автори го представляват), а във вижданията й относно живота в САЩ има доста истина.
За съжаление стилът й на писане е разхвърлян, разсеян и многословен, повтаря многократно една и съща теза с различни думи, връща се внезапно към изоставени преди страница-две идеи и като цяло прави всичко възможно да направи иначе любопитната си книга трудна за четене.
Това което ми направи най-силно впечатление е описанието й на скандинавския характер на краен индивидуализъм, който е в пълно противоречие със "социалистическата" утопия, която целия останал свят вижда в Скандинавия.
Според нея и цитираните от нея скандинавски интелектуалци, цялата социална система на скандинавските държави е ориентирана така, че да направи отделния човек абсолютно незвисим от роднини, приятели и семейство, защото само когато е независим, той е пълноценен човек и може да има пълноценни връзки с други хора и обществото като цяло.
Така според авторката северните държави не са ни най-малко "социалистически" а точно обратното - те са в челото на световните класации за свобода на икономиките и политиките им са продукт на крайния индивидуализъм на обществото - много повече, отколкото в САЩ.
May 18, 2019
This book reinforced what I've been thinking about: the United States can--and must--do better by its citizens. While far from perfect, Partanen portrays a society in which children have a much better opportunity for social mobility than is currently the situation in the U.S. Work is much more integrated into life, giving generous parental leaves and allowing parental responsibilities to be better and more comfortably met, not only by more reasonable working hours than we currently have here in the U.S. but by providing educational opportunities and better affordable (actually free) medical care than children, unless born to the wealthy have here.
While I would not want to move out of the U.S. I would like us to learn more from the rest of the world and create a government more responsive to the needs of our people. I don't actually mind paying taxes; what I mind is that more of them don't go to meet the needs of my children. And Partanen makes a compelling case that taxes in the U.S. are not actually that much lower than those in the Scandinavian countries when paying for health care (or high deductibles and co-pays) as well as education for those with children (and the economic health of the entire country depends upon the education and employment of those children) are factored in.
I was disappointed in the writing which was somewhat awkward, although suggested a likeable person who would be nice to meet). The book did not reveal much that I didn't already know but put it all together.
Altogether, an interesting read from a person who in fact loves the U.S. but also recognizes those areas in which it needs to change and grow.
While I would not want to move out of the U.S. I would like us to learn more from the rest of the world and create a government more responsive to the needs of our people. I don't actually mind paying taxes; what I mind is that more of them don't go to meet the needs of my children. And Partanen makes a compelling case that taxes in the U.S. are not actually that much lower than those in the Scandinavian countries when paying for health care (or high deductibles and co-pays) as well as education for those with children (and the economic health of the entire country depends upon the education and employment of those children) are factored in.
I was disappointed in the writing which was somewhat awkward, although suggested a likeable person who would be nice to meet). The book did not reveal much that I didn't already know but put it all together.
Altogether, an interesting read from a person who in fact loves the U.S. but also recognizes those areas in which it needs to change and grow.
February 15, 2024
I thought from the title this would be a cute book about hygge or whatever, but I came out ready to storm the castle. LET THIS RADICALIZE YOU.
This is a truly fantastic book, equal parts inspiring and disheartening. From a measured, respectful, well-researched, and empathetic perspective, it covers all the things the US is doing wrong when it comes to schooling, healthcare, employment, and even familial relationships. I call it inspirational because it shows that a better life for all (most?) *is* within reach—and there’s a proven track record to boot!—but of course the disheartening side of it is that policymakers already know this but refuse to reform our systems because of greed, pride, and (I wish the author had addressed this more fully/at all) misogyny and racism. The fact is, a lot of the people in power in this country truly aren’t interested in equal opportunity and better quality of living for all because they have a vested interest in keeping some people down/dependent/desperate.
This is really, really well done (and the audio did the job, although I was put off by the narrator’s completely unnecessary “growly voice” when quoting men), and you and everyone you know should absolutely read this and then weep with me for what this country could be if it rejected the path of struggle, dependency, and capitalism at all costs and followed instead the path of wisdom, maturity, and a desire for collective wellbeing.
This is a truly fantastic book, equal parts inspiring and disheartening. From a measured, respectful, well-researched, and empathetic perspective, it covers all the things the US is doing wrong when it comes to schooling, healthcare, employment, and even familial relationships. I call it inspirational because it shows that a better life for all (most?) *is* within reach—and there’s a proven track record to boot!—but of course the disheartening side of it is that policymakers already know this but refuse to reform our systems because of greed, pride, and (I wish the author had addressed this more fully/at all) misogyny and racism. The fact is, a lot of the people in power in this country truly aren’t interested in equal opportunity and better quality of living for all because they have a vested interest in keeping some people down/dependent/desperate.
This is really, really well done (and the audio did the job, although I was put off by the narrator’s completely unnecessary “growly voice” when quoting men), and you and everyone you know should absolutely read this and then weep with me for what this country could be if it rejected the path of struggle, dependency, and capitalism at all costs and followed instead the path of wisdom, maturity, and a desire for collective wellbeing.
April 23, 2017
I was really impressed with this book. The author, Finnish-born, is a journalist with both personal and professional perspectives on Scandinavian policy, government, and culture. She has lived in the States for many years and her specific comparisons of what I now understand as the "well-being state" (as opposed to the "welfare state" or the "nanny state") and our current policies regarding the health and welfare of our citizens are clear and persuasive. She speaks often about smart policy being the answer to a lot of our ills, and she's absolutely correct. It inspired me to communicate more with my government officials to encourage them to look at the policies of Scandinavian countries that are effective in maintaining a society wealthy in both compassion and economy. Highly recommended for anyone interested in improving the inequalities among citizens (in regard to family leave, childcare, health care, elder care, and more), and for those Scandiphiles among us!
December 1, 2018
I’m ready to move to Finland. I’m used to ice, snow, and wind here in South Dakota, and Finland’s approach to freedom from want seems very attractive.
What could be wrong with a system that provides each of its citizens with health care, day care, excellent schools from Pre K through PhD, and a reliable pension system? Taxes you say? If you count the cost of day care, after school care, health insurance, and a university education, the Finns get a better deal financially. Taxes in Finland are not much higher if you sum all of the taxes Americans pay (for budget nerds, this would be to Effective Total Tax Rate) vs. taxes the Finns pay. In exchange for their taxes, citizens don’t have to worry about the astronomical cost of higher education, for example. We sent two children to elite universities at a cost of nearly $200,000. In Finland, this would have been free.
Americans are in love with the libertarian definition of freedom, but how free are we really when we are married to the jobs we need to afford health care and to provide social minima for our families. The author makes a convincing argument that the true test of national policy is gross national happiness and freedom from dependency on the state or family for bailing you out.
As a political scientist, I was aware of the flaws in the US system but didn’t know much about the Nordic alternative view. The book is well worth reading for that view.
What could be wrong with a system that provides each of its citizens with health care, day care, excellent schools from Pre K through PhD, and a reliable pension system? Taxes you say? If you count the cost of day care, after school care, health insurance, and a university education, the Finns get a better deal financially. Taxes in Finland are not much higher if you sum all of the taxes Americans pay (for budget nerds, this would be to Effective Total Tax Rate) vs. taxes the Finns pay. In exchange for their taxes, citizens don’t have to worry about the astronomical cost of higher education, for example. We sent two children to elite universities at a cost of nearly $200,000. In Finland, this would have been free.
Americans are in love with the libertarian definition of freedom, but how free are we really when we are married to the jobs we need to afford health care and to provide social minima for our families. The author makes a convincing argument that the true test of national policy is gross national happiness and freedom from dependency on the state or family for bailing you out.
As a political scientist, I was aware of the flaws in the US system but didn’t know much about the Nordic alternative view. The book is well worth reading for that view.
May 12, 2017
2.5. The argument is not bad, but the execution isn't great. It's pretty simplistic for 300 pages, it's unnecessarily long-winded, and it doesn't get to some of the real reasons the American system is so difficult to change.
October 25, 2020
I am an American living in Finland. I love the US and miss it nearly as much as I miss my people. Finland is a wonderful country with so much to offer, but it is not the USA. Even if I never live in the US again, it will always be my home country. I believe in the US, and it's people, but I think we seriously need to open our minds to the future. There are other perspectives that are worth considering. Considering those perspectives, thinking about other approaches, and visions for the future does not mean one believes certain changes need to be made, or that one is unpatriotic. That being said, I recommend reading The Nordic Theory of Everything: In Search of a Better Life by Anu Partanan. She is a Finnish woman who immigrated to the US. Let me say up front that she loves the US, and has become a citizen. I listened to the audiobook and found it unexpectedly listenable.
I recommend reading this regardless of your political ideology. I recommend you push on even if you get annoyed, your eyes are getting tired from rolling, if you just can't imagine how these ideas could possibly be adapted to the US, or if any even should be. I recommend you push on because she considers and talks about so many of the questions that come up in later chapters. I recommend it because I believe that the US needs to make changes to adapt to the modern world, stay competitive in this changing world, and to remain true to the values we hold so dear but which may be slipping away without us being aware enough of it happening. I'm not saying the answers are in this book, but, perhaps, some answers are, or the ideas in this book could inspire someone to come up with an even better approach
Early in the book, Partanen starts describing the anxiety that began building in her as she settled in NY. What she had to say really resonated deeply with me as I, over time, felt much of that same anxiety fall away from me after my immigration. Also, I know so many Americans who struggle with anxiety nowadays. I get anxious, and I have stress, but not like I understand their's to be. For the first five chapters, I think, I kept sending texts to my sister insisting she get her hands on this book. She got the message so I stopped saying it, but feel just as strongly at the end as I did in the beginning. I learned a lot from this book and gained a greater appreciation for the approach of Nordic countries.
I recommend reading this regardless of your political ideology. I recommend you push on even if you get annoyed, your eyes are getting tired from rolling, if you just can't imagine how these ideas could possibly be adapted to the US, or if any even should be. I recommend you push on because she considers and talks about so many of the questions that come up in later chapters. I recommend it because I believe that the US needs to make changes to adapt to the modern world, stay competitive in this changing world, and to remain true to the values we hold so dear but which may be slipping away without us being aware enough of it happening. I'm not saying the answers are in this book, but, perhaps, some answers are, or the ideas in this book could inspire someone to come up with an even better approach
Early in the book, Partanen starts describing the anxiety that began building in her as she settled in NY. What she had to say really resonated deeply with me as I, over time, felt much of that same anxiety fall away from me after my immigration. Also, I know so many Americans who struggle with anxiety nowadays. I get anxious, and I have stress, but not like I understand their's to be. For the first five chapters, I think, I kept sending texts to my sister insisting she get her hands on this book. She got the message so I stopped saying it, but feel just as strongly at the end as I did in the beginning. I learned a lot from this book and gained a greater appreciation for the approach of Nordic countries.
March 15, 2018
Anu Partanen, a Finnish journalist, examines the disparity between the American dream and its current reality, and shows how America might adapt its current healthcare, childcare, education, and taxation approaches to resemble more effective models demonstrated by Scandinavian countries. She points out the irony of a county forcing the majority of its people into systems of inequality and dependence under the illusion of preserving their freedom, while asking the relevant question: can you truly claim to have freedom if all the people in a country do not have equal opportunity? Partanen dispels the libertarian myths about Scandinavian "welfare states", while acknowledging that what the U.S. needs is not bigger government, but smarter government. Americans are simply unaware of "how much better things could be." In a county with an ever-growing class divide and severe inequality, America is lagging behind other modern democracies by not valuing healthcare and education as basic human rights. As Partanen states, "The lottery of whether or not a child is born into the sort of family wealth necessary to fund a private education should have nothing to do with it. The U.S. system of paying for education...firmly cements the dependency of almost every child, first and foremost, on his or her parents' wealth- or lack of it. A county has to prepare not just some, but all of its population well. In the country that experimented with perfecting freedom and democracy in the first place, shouldn't it be possible to rethink government in the twenty-first century?" A powerful and timely question indeed.
November 29, 2016
Finnish-born journalist Anu Partanen is too polite to say it herself, so I'll say it for her. Compared to what the Finns and citizens of other Nordic countries are doing, the way Americans handle wages, unemployment, health insurance, and education stinks.
Parnatanen shows how the Finnish system fosters ambition and success by securing each individual's connection to basic resources, education, and medical care. The key to understanding the system, according to her, is that it is not altruistic. All Finns pay into the system, and all Finns expect to benefit. These are shared resources, not handouts.
When you contrast this approach to the American approach -- which leaves supposedly free citizens dependent on family members or employers, which makes child care a nightmare and getting a good education an exercise in geography, where social mobility is falling like a rock -- I'm a little puzzled that Partanen didn't tell her American boyfriend-now-husband to suck it up, learn Finnish and move. I can see the appeal and excitement of being a writer in New York City, but Ed Miliband seems to have been right: "If you want the American Dream, go to Finland."
Parnatanen shows how the Finnish system fosters ambition and success by securing each individual's connection to basic resources, education, and medical care. The key to understanding the system, according to her, is that it is not altruistic. All Finns pay into the system, and all Finns expect to benefit. These are shared resources, not handouts.
When you contrast this approach to the American approach -- which leaves supposedly free citizens dependent on family members or employers, which makes child care a nightmare and getting a good education an exercise in geography, where social mobility is falling like a rock -- I'm a little puzzled that Partanen didn't tell her American boyfriend-now-husband to suck it up, learn Finnish and move. I can see the appeal and excitement of being a writer in New York City, but Ed Miliband seems to have been right: "If you want the American Dream, go to Finland."
June 18, 2023
Anu Partanen is a Finnish journalist who immigrated to the US for love in 2008. She encountered a harsh cultural shock:
“Yet, the longer I lived in the United States of America as a Nordic immigrant, something became clear to me: regardless of whether Finland was the best country in the world or not, most people in the United States as well as many of my Nordic countrymen back home, did not fully realize that to leave Finnand or any other Nordic country behind and settle in America at the beginning of 21st century, was to experience an extraordinary and extraordinarily harsh form for travel back in time. ”
That echos the experience of my Swedish friend who moved to Seattle, and some experience of mine, as I also lived in Europe for many years, although not in a Nordic country.
In The Nordic Theory of Everything, Partanen explains the Nordic Theory of Love (based on The Swedish Theory of Love: Individualism and Social Trust in Modern Sweden by Henrik Berggren and Lars Trägårdh), where the core idea is that authentic love and friendship are possible only between individuals who are independent and equal. She then compares how things are done in the US and the Nordic countries for citizens from womb to grave: pregnancy care, childbirth, maternal and paternal leave, medical care and health insurance, school systems, universities, teaching and teachers, tax, work attitude and innovation, and retirement. The book was published in 2014, but the problems existed then only got worse in recent years.
The author says:
“For the citizens of Nordic countries, the most important value in life is individual self-sufficiency and independence in relation to other members of the community.” To achieve that, “The overarching ambition of Nordic societies during the course of 20th century and into 21st century has not being to socialize the economy at all, as it is often mistakenly assumed, rather, the goal has to free individuals from all forms of dependency within the family and in civil society: the poor from charity, wives from husbands, adult children from the parents, and elderly parents from their children. The expressed purpose of this freedom is to allow all those human relationships to be unencumbered by ulterior motives and needs and thus be entirely free, completely authentic and driven purely by love. ”
I strongly agree with her regarding the absurdity in many US public policies, such as the lack of universal, affordable, functional health care system, the lack of federal law sanctioned maternity leave, the unequal and uneven quality of public schools and the strange way that they are funded by the local property tax, the ridiculously high price in health insurance and college education, etc...Compared to not only the Nordic countries, but western Europe in general, the benefits granted to ordinary American citizen in need is laughable. The author refutes the argument that the Finnish school system works because Finland is a small and homogeneous country by stating that US school systems are managed at state level and many US states are similar in size as Finland and have similar homogeneity.
The author’s comments on Ayn Rand and libertarianism:
“The iconic defender of libertarian ideas and self-interests, Ayn Rand, the author of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, experienced first hand the most virulent and destructive form of socialism in the Soviet Union. Under communism inspired totalitarianism, people did lose their incentive to work, because all independence and individual agencies were taken away from them, but the United States and the Nordic countries today are all free market capitalist democracies. In this context, concerns that providing citizens with generous services and workers with generous rights, and asking successful to pay their share, would take away their incentive to work, represents the sadness judgment of human nature.”
However, I don’t think it is a sad judgment of human nature by libertarians. It’s a deliberate choice by them. For some high profile libertarians, libertarianism is only a disguise.
“Yet, the longer I lived in the United States of America as a Nordic immigrant, something became clear to me: regardless of whether Finland was the best country in the world or not, most people in the United States as well as many of my Nordic countrymen back home, did not fully realize that to leave Finnand or any other Nordic country behind and settle in America at the beginning of 21st century, was to experience an extraordinary and extraordinarily harsh form for travel back in time. ”
That echos the experience of my Swedish friend who moved to Seattle, and some experience of mine, as I also lived in Europe for many years, although not in a Nordic country.
In The Nordic Theory of Everything, Partanen explains the Nordic Theory of Love (based on The Swedish Theory of Love: Individualism and Social Trust in Modern Sweden by Henrik Berggren and Lars Trägårdh), where the core idea is that authentic love and friendship are possible only between individuals who are independent and equal. She then compares how things are done in the US and the Nordic countries for citizens from womb to grave: pregnancy care, childbirth, maternal and paternal leave, medical care and health insurance, school systems, universities, teaching and teachers, tax, work attitude and innovation, and retirement. The book was published in 2014, but the problems existed then only got worse in recent years.
The author says:
“For the citizens of Nordic countries, the most important value in life is individual self-sufficiency and independence in relation to other members of the community.” To achieve that, “The overarching ambition of Nordic societies during the course of 20th century and into 21st century has not being to socialize the economy at all, as it is often mistakenly assumed, rather, the goal has to free individuals from all forms of dependency within the family and in civil society: the poor from charity, wives from husbands, adult children from the parents, and elderly parents from their children. The expressed purpose of this freedom is to allow all those human relationships to be unencumbered by ulterior motives and needs and thus be entirely free, completely authentic and driven purely by love. ”
I strongly agree with her regarding the absurdity in many US public policies, such as the lack of universal, affordable, functional health care system, the lack of federal law sanctioned maternity leave, the unequal and uneven quality of public schools and the strange way that they are funded by the local property tax, the ridiculously high price in health insurance and college education, etc...Compared to not only the Nordic countries, but western Europe in general, the benefits granted to ordinary American citizen in need is laughable. The author refutes the argument that the Finnish school system works because Finland is a small and homogeneous country by stating that US school systems are managed at state level and many US states are similar in size as Finland and have similar homogeneity.
The author’s comments on Ayn Rand and libertarianism:
“The iconic defender of libertarian ideas and self-interests, Ayn Rand, the author of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, experienced first hand the most virulent and destructive form of socialism in the Soviet Union. Under communism inspired totalitarianism, people did lose their incentive to work, because all independence and individual agencies were taken away from them, but the United States and the Nordic countries today are all free market capitalist democracies. In this context, concerns that providing citizens with generous services and workers with generous rights, and asking successful to pay their share, would take away their incentive to work, represents the sadness judgment of human nature.”
However, I don’t think it is a sad judgment of human nature by libertarians. It’s a deliberate choice by them. For some high profile libertarians, libertarianism is only a disguise.
February 8, 2017
Its an interesting book, but despite her pages and pages of bibliography in the back, I felt that this book lacked any valuable depth. Her common theme (on every single page of the book) is that the US government doesn't take care of its citizens and look how wonderfully the Finnish government does. Look how it easy it is to implement this. Why can't you do it America? It got really tiresome towards the end. She lives in two worlds, New York and Finland. Although her appreciation and love for America is evident throughout the book (its not the typical US bashing one would expect), its still pretty bare-bones. She tries so hard not to pick sides, that her anecdotes and examples are superficial and cliché. Yes, there are a number of things the US could do to help bolster its vulnerable demographics (the middle class and lower classes). But I think what she's missing is that we are so ingrained in our culture and society, so entrenched in supporting ourselves without the government, that its not an easy fix. All of her suggestions were given with a tone of "try this policy and call me in the morning." And its frustrating to read that. Its really just stating the obvious then saying "fix it, we did it." Younger generations in America are probably ready for the socialist policies she's advocating in this book (parental leave, universal health care, quality free day cares, public school and colleges, etc). But this country is still very much run by older generations who don't give a damn. I'm not quite sure who her book is aimed at. All of her suggestions are useless to me, I'm not in a place to institute change on any level beyond hoping my vote at the polling booth actually goes towards the change I want to see.
October 14, 2022
I like how this book tackles head-on the most salient arguments that come from Americans about Nordic values, lifestyles, and governmental policies.
The book is a bit long and repetitive, especially towards the middle-end. The most striking points are made early on. But I think some of the repetitiveness is actually helpful in driving home the sincerity of the author, whether or not you see her beliefs/points as valid.
I'm sold. I want to live in a Nordic country. Uh, maybe. Not sure about those long winters. Or maybe, as my friend would say, just maybe I've just subjected myself to 10.5 hours of propaganda?
It's good food for thought, even if you dismiss it all as propaganda. I think that most Americans would agree that there are problems with America these days. Perhaps some of those problems are worth questioning or exploring in new ways. It's useful to have an outsider's perspective. This book made me reconsider the quality of life I have, and also the general sense of financial insecurity that I never expected to have when I was growing up. It pointed a spotlight on the visible draining of wealth (generational, income, etc) that quite a lot of middle class and upper class Americans are experiencing.
The book is a bit long and repetitive, especially towards the middle-end. The most striking points are made early on. But I think some of the repetitiveness is actually helpful in driving home the sincerity of the author, whether or not you see her beliefs/points as valid.
I'm sold. I want to live in a Nordic country. Uh, maybe. Not sure about those long winters. Or maybe, as my friend would say, just maybe I've just subjected myself to 10.5 hours of propaganda?
It's good food for thought, even if you dismiss it all as propaganda. I think that most Americans would agree that there are problems with America these days. Perhaps some of those problems are worth questioning or exploring in new ways. It's useful to have an outsider's perspective. This book made me reconsider the quality of life I have, and also the general sense of financial insecurity that I never expected to have when I was growing up. It pointed a spotlight on the visible draining of wealth (generational, income, etc) that quite a lot of middle class and upper class Americans are experiencing.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,289 reviews