Fun fact: the so-called 'Nordic model' could never have been achieved without the West being menaced by the threat of the Soviet Union and the proletarian and global south movements which it supported. The 'Nordic mode' was a historical concession.

Those economies were enabled by socialists pushing for socialism as hard as they possibly could for many years, not fence-sitters who suggested compromises.

why bother with diet socialism when the real thing is right there

It isnt because of the capitalism, it's because socialism/communism is a liberative force, and the only reason these countries do better is because they have implemented socialist policies in place. It isnt because of the capitalism.

Since the fall of the Soviet Block the Nordic countries' welfare state model has been withered down as a result of adopting neoliberal policies. It was never really about socialism, or a hybrid model, it was about fear of socialism which forced local elites to make compromises.

Most of them are also colonial and extract resources from the global south to enrich their own countries while keeping the global south poor. Capitalism inherently means “at the expense of another”. Scandinavian countries are social democracies. Not “socialism + capitalism”.

So you're an imperialist.

I think this read depends on what one's definition of capitalism is. Many confuse it for free markets, though you can still have free markets as a series of public and/or private co-ops.

Capitalism + high taxes = socialism

What is enlightened about human slavery, genocide, the common worker having less than half free time of literal serfs, inequity, damaged environment, climate change, boom & bust economic cycles, child labor, etc.?