Cultural paradoxes

Interesting reflections! I align with your American thoughts. It is a bit similar in Australia too. Looking at Sweden, both countries have great views on the Swedish and the Nordic culture, mindset and structure. However, we do have our "bus complex" in Sweden, where we are not really comfortable to sit next to another person on the bus. But in sports, we are mostly viewed as a solid and relying on great teamwork no matter sport. In sport we, Swedes mostly align ourselves with the athletes who are more down to earth and a team player :) Whereas I experienced more individualistic mindsets in USA and AUS.

Thanks for sharing your post Donnie.

This is something we have been discussing a lot recently with international friends living in Sweden. One of the things we observe is inclusiveness and multicultural/multiracial experiences. Even though Sweden advertise itself as ‘open minded’ which reasons being an ‘innovative country’, we find it very exclusive. Only if you are are member of certain countries, then the country is open minded and inclusive for you. So, it is a very exclusive inclusive country I would say. When it comes to multicultural and multiracial experiences, or what we call ‘diversity’, it is so hard to experience a one in Sweden without getting a judgement. And those judgements generally are in passive aggressive form. Since they are not active judgments, Sweden itself tend to ignore that it is a ‘valid judgment’ which I find pretty questionable. Whereas in The States, you love it or hate it, there are tons of ethnic groups and races living together and experiencing their own culture, which is I believe is a natural result of being an immigrant land. To further reflect on this passive aggressive approach, I also would like point out Swedish people not being comfortable with comforting things in general, when it comes to diversity for example. Since there is no real discussion, the country does not know why it is good to be diverse. However, it is trying to be diverse just for the sake of it. Which no surprise, ends up with so-called-diverse lack of diversity. When it comes to individualism, I guess it is one way a result of how the government is run, as the other comment mentions as well. Sweden has a pretty strong human core as you mention. However, I find it strange when no-Swede wants to bother to help you in case of an emergency. Another point that I can reflect on would be a work culture. Again, I believe, this is also highly affected by how the society has been run. Since people in The States has no social guarantee, same with people in my country, Turkey, and there are high gaps between the rich and the poor, people have to earn it all by themselves. That causes an extreme toxic work culture, which the popular culture reflects as ‘hustle culture’: You have to keep working till you get that paper. Which I believe causes people taking their jobs too personal. Whereas in Sweden, State is backing you in any case. There is no much difference between the rich and the poor in terms of life standards. That, what you does not define you. Which gives people a privilege to do what they are happy doing and the humanity follows at work. Here comes more human values: more holidays, more parental leaves, balanced work-life lives, less stressful working environment, less working hours, less hierarchy, less mobbing and so on. At the end, every country has its goods and bads, so, guess we need to choose what is manageable bad for ourselves. Although all ugh-no moments, I am really enjoying human core of Sweden so far.

Interesting and accurate reflections in my experience (lived in US and Sweden over 2 decades each). I don't see them as paradoxes though. A wonderful book by Berggren and Tr?g?rdh, "?r Svensken m?nniska?" looks at the relationship of individuals, the state, and community in Sweden, US and Germany. They compare the assumed legitimate roles of the individual, the state& community in life, family, love, and interdependence of each. What emerges from their historical weaving helped met really understand all three contexts, and others. In the US for example, the State is less legitimate as a support system than community (say compared to Sweden). If one falls on hard times it is family and church that is there to help far more than the State. The State is secondary. People are far more attentive to trying to show and make connectedness in the US. Whereas in Sweden, the State (in the last and current centuries) represents and provides the basic if not primary support if one needs it (health, income insurance, old age care). Thus, extended community connectedness is less prominent in Sweden compared to US. The authors present Swedish history and "theory of love" thru which they make comparisons that help me understand and see more.