All systems have corruption. However, when the government nationalizes food distribution and production, that corruption has a much larger impact.

Mismanaging/squandering/embezzling your country’s oil revenues and a steep decline in said oil revenues without a sovereign wealth cushion was what caused this, not nationalizing food distribution or production.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_in_Venezuela_(2012%E2...

Certainly the nationalizing seems to be part of it. Attacking the people producing said food for "hoarding" just to appease your socialist backers [1] [2], I must say, also seems less than helpful to my admittedly uninitiated brain. They've been at it for a decade.

[1] https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/11478

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/17/world/americas/17venezuela...

Genuinely curious and not trying to troll: how successful would Scandinavian socialism be without oil?

Norway's is the only Scandinavia country with substantial amounts oil. Taxation is largely what is funding the welfare state.

That may be true, but all 3 countries are tiny with a large natural resource sector (so is Russia, incidentally, except on the "tiny" front). None depend on manufacturing or resources, despite all their European neighbors doing just that. Of course, sure, only 1 has a real oil sector. Like the middle eastern countries, though, Norway is somewhat guilty of sabotaging their own agricultural sector to appease political interests (ie. the greens), and compensating large amounts of importing from their immediate neighbors.

None of the scandinavian countries are socialistic.

That’s not quite accurate. They also have the US paying largely for their defense needs. That saves them a ton of money.