That's OK! There are a lot of things you don't know. What's important is that you're learning.
Consider that your assumption that Norway is not socialist is incorrect. Just because Norway may not meet whatever definition the Heritage Foundation is telling you when you look it up, doesn't mean that Norway does not nevertheless use the word "Socialist" to describe their own government.
Hilarious comment. I am hoping it is tongue in cheek.
If not, it does highlight something worrying: Too many people either don't understand what "socialism" means or, perhaps even worse, think you can make it mean whatever you want it to mean.
> Too many people either don't understand what "socialism" means or, perhaps even worse, think you can make it mean whatever you want it to mean.
Gosh, you should tell the Norwegians! I'm sure they will want to know that their government doesn't meet your preferred objectively-universally-correct definition of "socialist" and so they should stop calling themselves that.
Personally I have no issue with it in the same way I have no problem with Americans calling their government a "democracy".
Last time I spent a month in Norway I repeatedly had various residents explain to me that various things were the way they were "because we are a socialist country".
If they call themselves "socialist" then I will too.
Well, there is a difference between "this is a socialist country" and "I am a socialist".
Granted though, that under a functioning democracy, there will be overlap: if the country is x then most likely at least a plurality of voters support x. It doesn't mean that "all citizens support x" or "any specific citizen supports x and self identifies themself an x-ist".
> Well, there is a difference between "this is a socialist country" and "I am a socialist".
To be clear, the former is what I was repeatedly told. Nobody personally self-identified themselves as a socialist to me, they described their country as socialist.
Norwegians self identify as socialist for example.