Thank you for your comment, which brings a valuable perspective to the discussion. The distinction between collectivism, socialism, and the Nordic model warrants a more nuanced understanding.

Collectivism, as a principle, emphasizes the priority of group goals over individual goals and can manifest in various social, political, and economic systems, including socialism. However, it's crucial to note that collectivism as a value does not necessarily dictate the economic structure of a society. A society can value collective well-being (which the Nordic countries do) while still maintaining a capitalist economic framework.

The Nordic model exemplifies this blend: it incorporates collectivist values in the sense of prioritizing social welfare and collective well-being, but it does so within a capitalist, free-market economy. The state’s role in the Nordic model is largely to regulate and provide social welfare, rather than to own or control the means of production, which is a defining characteristic of socialism.

In this light, defining the Nordic countries as socialist based on their focus on social good conflates the values of collectivism (social welfare and collective well-being) with the economic structure of socialism (state or collective ownership of the means of production). The Nordic model’s core is a free-market economy complemented by a strong social safety net, distinct from a socialist economy where the state plays a central role in controlling economic activity.