Short answer: no.
A longer answer follows below.
The belief that an ‘ideal’ society is possible is an abiding and dangerous myth, especially on the so-called ‘left’ side of the spectrum. Left-wing airheads believe we should rip everything down and reconstruct a new society based on ‘fairness’ and ‘equality’. This kind of fluffy idiocy takes us to Paradise one neck-shot at a time.
Note that there are also right-wing airheads. They believe wealth is created through gambling in the financial markets, and that trickle-down will resolve the consequences of massive abuses of power by unfettered rent-seeking. Right-wing airheads are actually more of a problem as they currently hold power in the Anglophone nations.
But let us get back to the question. Sensible people will agree that Norway is a better place to live than North Korea (unless you are Kim Jong-un). Norway is also a better society than the United Kingdom. Norway has the highest Human Development Index in the world (the UK’s HDI is ranked at 13th in the world). Norway’s Gini index is 24.8, while that of the United Kingdom is 33.5. The disgrace of the UK is debt. Although public + private debt as a %age of GDP has fallen in recent years, together they still amount to more than two years’ of national output. Norway has a sovereign wealth fund far in excess of its public debt, while private debt is 86% of GDP (as at July 2026).
Obviously there is more to a society than its high-level numbers. I have never lived in Norway, so I cannot comment on whether it is actually a ‘better’ place to live or a ‘better’ society than the UK. I have lived in Switzerland, Canada, and the United States in addition to the UK, and I have carried out work assignments in Germany, France, Sweden and Russia. Out of all these places, the only two I would even consider moving to from the UK would be Canada (preferably) or the USA (possibly). European societies are overly bureaucratised and do not respect privacy. Language is also a factor, of course, although it would not stop me from moving if I perceived broader advantages.
‘Society’ is in the eye of the beholder. I expect Vasili Blokhin, Stalin’s chief executioner, the most prolific mass-murderer on record, loved the hell-hole that was Stalin’s USSR. He got to murder thousands of people! Similar comments apply to Lavrenti Beria and other bastards amongst Stalin’s heelers. Writing dystopian novels has taught me that hell and heaven are sides of the same coin.
No society can provide real freedoms, real opportunities and real wealth unless the people are adults. They must understand that criminals are not ‘victims’, everything has to be paid for, everyone has to be respected, snobbery and usury are social poisons. Personally, I believe no genuinely legitimate society can exist in the absence of a gold standard, comprehensive state education to graduate/time-served level, strong armed forces, self-discipline and an economically rational transport system. Such a society would control the power of Rent-seekers by banning remote investment (i.e. banning public listed companies and monolithic investment banks). The financial sector would be a mass of small banks integrated into local economies of public sector and private enterprises in line with the German Landesbank/Sparkassen model (so loathed by Wall Street and the City precisely because it presents the correct social model of finance in contrast to Rent-seeker abuses).
Of the nine elements of power I defined here, which would dominate this ‘better’ society? The answer is ‘none’. Some would be represented in the endless conversation of parliament: the Landed Aristocrats, the Rent-seekers, the Capitalists, the Trade Unions, the Intellectuals and the Clerics. The burden of keeping the Rent-seekers and Capitalists under control would lie on the Landed Aristocrats, the Trade Unions, the Intellectuals and the Clerics. The concept of ‘trade union’ would need to be much broader than at present, with a self-conception of guarding society against the temptations of usury and the rise of oligarchies. The view of Landed Aristocrats as effete fossils would need to shift to a role as guardians of tradition and probity. The Functionaries would answer to the public interest. The Mob and the Gangsters would not be significant.
Could it happen? If the people are wise, then yes, it can happen. If they are fools, they will be damned to dystopia.
