Why post-Soviet Russia did not use the Scandinavia experience
Gorbachev was enormously popular when he came to power. It was clear to all normal people that the country needed serious reforms. But today this politician has an extremely low rating in Russia (some consider him stupid, others curse him, considering him a traitor). I agree with you that he began the very early destruction of the political system (as well as discrediting the entire Soviet history), which led to the loss of control of the country and caused shock and disorientation of society.
And you absolutely rightly noticed that after the USSR, anti-USSR was building largely openly. People were very naive and took for granted the important unique social achievements of the USSR, not believing that they could be lost. And sometimes vice versa — they agreed that it was necessary to break everything and do “as in the West” (read “as in America”).
As for the current Russian model, it is very complex and contradictory. I don’t even know if there is someone in Russia who can describe it quite correctly and comprehensively, and not in any particular aspect.
Real democracy is a huge achievement, and I am glad if this was achieved in the Scandinavian countries. This requires historical background and other conditions. In most modern countries, there is actually an oligarchic system of government under the guise of democracy and its external rituals.
True democracy requires a mature, conscious society, which today is not in Russia (as well as in the United States and many other countries). By the way, according to my observations, the generation that was born between 1915 and 1925 was the most mature and responsible in our country. Those who were born before WW2, during and after it, were brought up in a spirit of passivity and conformism, political and moral dogmas were artificially embedded in their heads, for which they were ready to die thoughtlessly. But, in 1980–1990s it turned out, to be easy to “reflash” them, laying down another program.
The political and economic systems being created in post-Soviet Russia (and other former Soviet republics) were oriented not to the people, but to a few people from the former party (and Komsomol) elite who wanted to get all the power and all property. Yeltsin was not a democrat, but he knew what words needed to be said and what needed to be done to please America, in which he saw the undisputed world leader.
I am sure that the peoples of all countries are interested in good relations with Russia. But today, the foreign policy of Western countries (as well as Japan and South Korea) is highly dependent on US policy. That is why they repeat the American mantras about the lack of democracy in Russia, which supposedly limits the possibilities of cooperation. Moreover, they do not consider the complete absence of democracy in Saudi Arabia to be an obstacle to widespread cooperation with it.
Strengthening the relations between Norway and Russia, it seems to me, would be useful not only economically and culturally, but also politically, since Russian society is very useful to inform about the structure of the economy and political systems of the Scandinavian countries.
