[Jim Noble]

It's pretty clear that Trotsky's "international socialism" fails catastrophically, because the diversity involved creates oppression of one group to benefit another.

It's not so clear that "socialism in one country" fails IF the country is ethnically homogeneous, such that (for example) paying taxes to the NHS benefits what are in effect your cousins.

The NHS was EXTREMELY popular with the British people. It's popularity is declining as immigration is rising, which is what you would expect.

Most of the "right-wing" parties in Europe are openly socialist, proposing a "socialism in one country" or, in the case of Generation identitaire or Golden Dawn, a socialism linked to nationality rather than citizen status.

They can't very well call their programs "national socialism", but that's what they are.

[driftless2]

Yes, if you can get everybody to go along with the plan, "socialism" can work. But it's a different kind of socialism from Soviet Union style socialism.

In western European type socialism people are allowed to make money, but like George Harrison said, "one for you, nineteen for me," me being the government. How many Americans would be happy with that?

And as Mark Steyn writes in his book "America Alone" Western Europeans are living a lie. They have a negative birth rate, and expect a decreasing supply of workers to cover their enormous early retirement benefits.