Bo Rothstein, professor in social science, discusses in an article the - according to his opinion - unsuccessful idea of democratic socialism. His main thesis is that the idea is both poor in its thought construction and in its practice - not the least because of its lack of constitutional democracy. In its practical experiment the idea leads to several constitutional problems, as there is no thoroughly thought order for how authorities should make decisions. The state in the end becomes the only authority for economical decisions. And this is problematic, when the state shall control the market and the civil society.

Rothstein gives a satirical example: If a state company produces well-fitted shoes, and the demand in the market says high heels, and the employees with influence over the production refuse to change the production, then the state must intervene and settle the question. Through governmental decision the politicians in the example choose, after conferring with orthopaedic experts, to continue produce low heels due to public health reasons. One thereafter decides to found a national information campaign and the authority Swedish Secretariat for well-fitted shoes is created with a huge budget. The orthopaedic expertise in the country is engaged in shaping a particular campaign directed towards school children with cool slogans about well-fitted shoes, and an extensive information effort takes place. The prime minister is holding engaging speeches, but nothing helps, the consumers simply won’t but the well-fitted healthy low heel shoes anymore... The economy crashes.

It isn’t difficult to recognize the satire. It touches perhaps mostly the political practise which Rothstein has criticized for a long time, and is perhaps not first and foremost a socialistic experiment, but a long dependable social democratic way of governing. Swedish Secretariat for Gender Research is obviously one of the “unnecessary" authorities which Rothstein apostrophize. Another is Swedish National Institute of Public Health, and a third is perhaps Institute for Future Studies.

Obviously Rothstein is wrong, if we look at how the above mentioned authorities deal with their political mandate. Neither Swedish Secretariat for Gender Research nor Swedish National Institute of Public Health and similar defend some sick aunt... The political motivation behind the guidelines is that the state and the politicians want both equality and good health. We need more knowledge to achieve the democratically chosen goals. The methods to reach the goals, however, can vary a lot depending on how the state understands its own role in the governing of equality and health. And Rothstein is right if one initially has decided that there is only one valid principle on how equality should be understood and changed, and other possible principles are ignored. Then the goals will hardly be achieved. The state chooses in that case something the citizens do not want. Equality is however without doubt a question which cannot be solved without engagement and participation from those who are concerned. There are no ready made prescriptions to order from the researchers. There is only a tentative foundation. Equality demands purposeful work and is shaped in the social movement which people take part in.