Home | About | Donate

What's the 'Goodest' Country? Hint: It's not the US


What's the 'Goodest' Country? Hint: It's not the US

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

Which country is doing the most to serve humankind? Sweden, according to the latest Good Country Index.

The biennial index, which ranks 163 nations, "is all about encouraging populations and their governments to be more outward looking, and to consider the international consequences of their national behavior," the Good Country website explains.


Sweden has nukes. Norway doesn't, right next door! Why is it, that a nation so blessed with "Goodness", is still stockpiling nuclear "waste" from their nuclear powerplants ("Waste" is still fissioning fuel rods, that are so-called "spent") in such a beautiful environmental paradise, no snarkyness intended, just bewilderment.

When Germany, Switzerland, Italy and others are decommissioning their unconscionable mistakes. Having built these doomsday machines, it took juevos to cough-up the $trillion$ of bucks, down the road, to cut-up and bury these Franken-monsters - countries that, who at first, accepted the lying safety assertions of the criminal banksters, learned better - and turned against lies, with true "Goodness".


Maybe it's just me but I'm getting really frustrated with all the hype about the Scandinavian model when in actuality there is a very real disconnect between perception and reality.

I don't doubt the results of the Good Country Index as it was designed to produce the results it intended. Case in point, just look how the E.U. (especially Germany #5 on the list) is treating all the refugees ... since most of the countries listed are in the E.U. Just consider how the majority of the E.U. is treating Greece, for gawd sake!

Is this a true example of international peace, security and world order? If it is, we're screwed worse than we think we are!

The intend and moral values of the index has validity. However, when the data is so manipulated to exclude the reality of what is actually going on ... it is appalling.

This article represents neo-liberal journalism at its best. Anyone with an once of morality, common sense, and has eyes to see what is going on around them can see right through the results of this index. Are there people really stupid enough to buy into this shit?

I recommend reading the following article that talks about Sweden and the Scandinavian model. There is the reality and then there is propaganda/illusion.

There’s this joke on the Swedish left that everyone would want the Swedish model, and the Swedes would want it perhaps more than anyone. What’s considered to be the Swedish model peaked in maybe the late ’70s, early ’80s and has since gone through quite the same developments as the rest of Europe with the neoliberal wave.

Source: How Swedish Socialism Failed


“...UK poodle..."

Yes, the very idea makes the thought high up there - among the jokes of the century. Sweden and other Scandinavian countries used to be very respectable in terms of international responsibility, until the Assange and other stains on their neutrality in world power games.


What a surprise. A European found the the six "goodest" countries are in Europe.


What a crock! Let's see:
Sweden - Forcing Assange to stay in the Ecuador Embassy for four years and counting
Denmark - Closing its borders to keep out Syrian and other refugees
Netherlands - ?
United Kingdom - The people are the most highly surveillanced of all
Germany - Land of the banksters who are garroting Greece
Finland - the current right-wing government is trying to undo all that was once good
Canada - Tar Sands, TTIP, TPP
France - Labor 'reforms' that have the workers on strike and up in arms
Austria - ?
New Zealand - Five eyes and proud of it

This is so not my list. Bolivia and Ecuador would be on or very near the top as would Venezuela and Cuba. Looks like we have different criteria at work.


Fuel rods out of very precisely controlled conditions of the reactor (presence of a neutron moderator, precise rod spacing) are not "still fissioning" but I guess you are smarter than, say Enrico Fermi.

And does your colorful language like "doomsday machine" "Franken-monster" somehow increase the logical and scientific validity of your assertions?

Every available piece of data has shown that nuclear is by far the safest way of generating electric power, and at least as clean as wind or hydro in terms of environmental impacts.

The volumes of high level waste in question are tiny, and are a enormous source of clean energy if reprocessed. But even if they are not, there are abundant places where it can be placed underground. The waste problems are entirely political, not technological.


Greece should top the list. Their response to the humanitarian disaster is remarkable considering their economic difficulties. Greeks are volunteering by the thousands with food, clothing, and shelter. The Greek government has been scrambling against all odds to provide safety and process over a million asylum applications.

This is a country of only ten million people, so the disruption is breathtaking. Yet we don't hear Greeks blame refugees or fear monger about their Muslim religion.

Meanwhile, the rest of Europe has been a disgrace with its finger pointing and scapegoating, and they have been merciless in demanding crippling austerity for Greece, a peaceful and beautiful place that has provided nothing but good to the world.

Greece is also the only country in Europe to stand by a truly left wing government that actually cares about its poorest citizens.

That Greece is not on this list is a major oversight.


I couldn't agree more.


Welcome to posting on Common Dreams! We hope to hear more from you.


Austria came close to having a fascist as their national leader in the recent elections. Sadly, it appears that there are efforts by the world-wide corporate oligarchy to dismantle social programs that benefit average citizens in all nations.


Switzerland, with its Basic National Income of $2,500 per citizen, deserves a high rating.


Thank you for those words of wisdom. Please repeat them to Mr. Trump and Mme. Clinton. Senator Sanders already knows them.


I'll take that challenge! Sooooooooooooo,
There are 450+ reactors running RIGHT now, worldwide (plus research, medical and propulsion reactors (for the world navies and space satellites with their "star wars" lasers, etc).

Maybe, another 30 or so are in a "decommissioning" process - moth-balled, if you will. (They operate with a skeleton crew of technicians and property security who watch for terrorists and who babysit the still-fissioning "spent" fuel that has been removed from the moderated reactor vessel. Many thousands of tons of this crap, from a single 1-GW reactor, can accumulate - figuring an average of 40+ years of operation. (But the greedster nuke owners always go for another, dangerous, extension, rather than performing their responsibility - to cut-up and dry-cask the whole damn mess.)

AS YOU CORRECTLY stated, the normal operating scenario includes neutron moderators, so that the fissioning fuel doesn't go to into a"runaway" critical mass mode. A runaway reactor (un-moderated or spent fuel not cooled sufficiently with water) would lead to a meltdown, (like in Fukushima-Daiichi's three 100% meltdowns, 51/2-years ago that has STILL not stopped!) When these babeees are pulled outa the reactor, they are still fissioning, hotter than hell, and quickly immersed into millions of gallons of water, a YUGE water-filled pool, with all of the previously pulled bundles, since its first years of operation.

A GIGANTIC "spent fuel" pool of water must circulate millions of gallons of water, every minute of every day, for some years before they can be dry-casked for a permanent thousand-year burial. Today, the only site is WIPP in New Mexico.
These radioactive monsters of US technology will either bankrupt us or kill us. Either is preposterous and must be stopped.


No country that is a member of NATO and therefore the empire's death machine

is good.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


I guess they are not considered "white or rich enough" to be considered good.


Wonderful concept. All my best regards.


You haven't looked at the Good Country website have you? The criteria are laid out very clearly and cover global contributions by each of 163 countries in terms of science and technology, culture, world order, health and wellbeing, and prosperity and equality, international peace and security, climate and planet. Each of those is broken down further.

I don't see that you have any criteria at all.