The main topics are going to be about Sweden and Nazi Germany. While the other topic is about fascism. The first question is : The standard claim about Sweden is that it shows that society can prosper without such a free market anf extensive government intervention, what would be a good response to this claim? My response is: That the claim is half-way right: about a society can prosper without an extensive government intervention but, not the part where it mentions the a society can prosper without a free market . My reason being is that a free market helps a society to prosper and grow. In addition to that , Sweden grew wealthy due to an free market in the nineteen-th century and early twenty-th century and also due to avoiding wars . By avoiding wars, they saved lots of money to help society and expanded within as a whole, while not by going to war for land. Furhermore, there was more freedom and less taxes (inheritance,gift,wealth taxes abolished). The second question is: What were the primary values of fascism? The primary values if fascism was that it values a charismatic leader: having great charm or appeal as a leader. It also values political centralization,individual rights are subordinate to the good of the nation. As we know, centralization gives power only to those in the government group yet, a political one is the same since it is also the government . Furthermore,we also know that individual rights should be above the good of the nation. which brings us to a conclusion; fascism is bad for a nation and people. And finally the third question: (part one of the question) what is life like for the businessman in Nazi Germany ? The socialist claim that fascism is just a late stage of capital and the freemarket? (part two of question). Life for the businessman in Nazi Germany was very difficult because they had to tons and tons of paperwork. In adddition, they also needed special lawyers to help them plus lots of taxes, and fees on their backs. They have to know who to talk to and who not to talk to. (part two of third question) The socialist claim about fascism being the late stage of capital and free market , seems most unlikely in my opinion. My reason being is because fascism values things that capital and the free market don’t. Such as, it values political centralization when they value decentralization. The only thing that they might have in common is they value a charismatic leader: to help them for selling a product.