This read will probably be of great interest to Americans – it certainly offers a substantial amount of information about the state of affairs on the other side of the Atlantic – as a great number of Norway’s current issues can be seen all over the European continent. It is of crucial importance to understand how global organisations such as The UN view the current “Western & Asian situation.” They have been discussing openly since 2000 that the welfare issues posed by “the ageing population” in our part of the world can be sorted out by “replacement migration.” It doesn’t require much imagination nor intelligence to understand what sort of severe implications this will have for our cultures, ethnic groups and cultural heritage. The UN’s Plan For Europe, Russia & Japan.Here is another article: Africans are becoming greater in numbers…Women in the West freeze their eggs as they struggle to find a partner: The plight of educated women.
This year we are facing National elections in my country of origin – Norway. Which is what this entry is about. I’ve actually taken the time to read the entire “plan of action” of two of our political parties in addition to our constitution.
Our constitution was written in 1814 and is the oldest one in Europe and the second oldest constitution in the world still in use today.
Reading the constitution poses several critical questions in a post-modern time. Especially in an environment where “tolerance” & “openness” are touted as our “modern values.” The issue with these “politically correct” battle cries is that they are neither defining nor unifying principles for a nation or an ethnicity. At best they offer confusion and enable subversion from other competing cultures in a globalised reality. Modern values don’t really offer anything definite in terms of a framework and therein lays the catalyst of a mass existential crisis and the genuine risk of your history, heritage and identity being erased and/or replaced by something new. (This is an interesting project.)
As an actual example of what I mentioned above regarding the fragility of our modern-values you can read about Norway’s “flag debate.” There are those who would like to wave the UN-flag or foreign flags on our National Day – the 17th of May. This is precisely the sort of dilemma you will face if your National values are “openness” and “tolerance.” At worst it can create a constitutional crisis at best an awkward and ridiculous debate. Integration will look like a failure if foreigners are allowed to wave the flag from their country of origin, it can be seen as an act of disrespect, dishonour, confident defiance, and/or royal offence or it can highlight the pitfalls of multiculturalism due to the inherent importance of identity, ethnicity and roots. The Norwegian Flag Debate.
A parallel can also be drawn to the USA where there are those who support the idea of America officially being bilingual, funny enough this request does not come from Native or Afro-Americans but rather from Hispanics. Again I ask the question: How can this request be rejected in a post-modern society where “openness” and “tolerance” are celebrated and enforced values?
Another parallel can also be drawn towards an increasingly politically correct Christian church; where accusations of “heresy” are not far-fetched as the religion has to be “sterilised” in order for it to be compatible with “our shared values.” The Capsizing of The Church. An extremely interesting read!!!
It is particularly eye-opening to see how many times our Norwegian constitution has been amended … it has been amended over 300 times! Our founding document can only be amended by “The Ting,” and nothing can be changed without a 2/3 majority. In 2014 an entire new chapter was added about “human rights,” courtesy of “The Ting.” Civil rights according to our founding fathers were:
- Protection under the law, right to a just sentence and a total ban on torture.
- Laws will not be applied retroactively.
- Freedom of speech and access to public information.
- Protection of private property.
What I’ve pasted in below illustrates a radical modification to one of our constitutional paragraphs. In the first variation it is written that it is the responsibility of the government to create favourable circumstances so that people who are capable can work and earn a living. In other words; it is not the responsibility of the government to outsource jobs or to engage in irresponsible management that would create massive unemployment. BUT an amendment has taken place giving the people of Norway A RIGHT to receive benefits from the state if they cannot sustain themselves financially. This is fatal IF a nation is heading for bankruptcy or if Norway Inc; can’t afford government schemes such as benefit payments. This addition to the constitution makes it now – unconstitutional to cut benefit schemes if it is proven that they are needed – something that does not look good as the welfare state is NOT sustainable. This looks more like FDR’s New Deal (that I haven’t read in full) rather than a responsible method of governance. Your nation has to have a sound economy to sustain this amendment, and there is no way that you can salvage a rotten economy with this new addition as you would be breaching civil-rights if cutting benefit payments. Norway has to re-prioritise in order to rebuild our military for example, we simply have to cut benefit payouts – how on earth can you do that now, with this type of constitutional “legislation?” Another addition to this paragraph – an older one I might add – is that your amount of influence in your workplace as a worker has to be determined by law. But not constitutional law.
In our constitution it also canon that all men should serve in the military to protect the fatherland – regardless of their socioeconomic background. It could therefore be argued that “downsizing” the military is unconstitutional – if you think about it – as it is specifically said that all should be able/prepared to protect the nation. When you are done with your mandatory service to the realm – you simply join the reserves. But you will always be at the ready if someone attacks the fatherland – the ancestral land as specified in the old “Soldier’s Handbook.”
It is also of interest that our founding document begins with The Holy King (who has to be a Protestant ) and his executive powers. According to an article I found you are supposed to read this in an abstract way as the King in large just serves as decoration. (More info here.) But it says right here in what I’ve pasted in below that when The King delivers his oath upon taking The Throne the oath goes as follows: “I promise and swear that I will rule the kingdom of Norway in accordance with its constitution and laws, so help me God the almighty and all-knowing.”
- I will rule the kingdom
- so help me God the almighty and all-knowing
Who manages/employ the administration today is determined by the election results in The Ting. When people vote they either vote for local representatives into the local government or they vote to influence the distribution of ministers in The Ting. The various political parties then have to form a coalition and decide who will occupy various roles within the administration (these individuals can also be civilians, they don’t have to be party members, but the prime minister certainly will) – The Monarch (regardless of gender) will then formally “appoint” the administration, even though there is no interference from The Monarch at all.
HOWEVER Norway was not 100% parliamentary from the start, it functioned like a hereditary monarchy with restricted powers; with the government being divided into three branches. Reading the constitution in a straightforward manner will therefore tell you this:
The King – who cannot be a ruler if born out-of-wedlock – is supposed to staff/employ ministers (the administration) and is the executive branch of the government. He is the commander-in-chief of the military and can be “out in the field” in which case the prime minister takes his place as manager of “the realm.” The King is in other words the CEO of Norway Inc; it is his job to staff the various positions within “his company” to run his nation. If any of his ministers fail to warn him or oppose him in the case of a “royal mistake” the minister who failed to warn the King of his transgression will face legal consequences – as silence from the ministers is translated as a yes … The King can pardon a person; Norway used to have the death penalty. You also have “The Ting” as its own entity which consists of members voted forth by “the people.” The Ting has the power to write laws, laws that can be vetoed by The King and they are also responsible for the state-budget. A minister in “the administration” cannot occupy a “double role” by being active in “The Ting;” in addition there is also a Supreme Court, separate from the other branches of government that has the final say on any legal matters where its judgment is required. These judges cannot be fired if they pass judgement that is unpopular with the administration or The Ting. Everyone is equal before the law. But The King will pass judgement on other Royals of importance and has to approve the marriage of his children! The King is holy and has immunity from earth-bound judges. More about the division of power can be found here. The article is in Norwegian.
The constitution is remarkably small and can be found in various Norwegian forms online; whether in new-Norwegian, official book-Norwegian or the old-fashioned Danish-Norwegian.
Needless to say our country has changed dramatically and The King (and in modern times Queen) holds no real executive power anymore. Rather than having a hereditary CEO of Norway Inc; with the power to “employ” capable ministers to run all of the various institutions within the corporate entity; we now have elections. The party who holds the power through positive election results become the executive branch by providing a prime minister who employ ministers for the administration. The Supreme Court maintains their role as before. The monarch is left behind marginalised and only really holds the power of “veto.” Something The King used against the Nazis when he rejected them. But this power to say “no” hasn’t been put into effect since.
An interesting thing to note is also the ever-expanding size of “Norway’s Laws.”
Norway is marred in bureaucracy from A-Z which I will address further down in this entry. I find it interesting after having read the constitution how far we have departed from our founding principles but also how legal “barbed wire” is being erected continuously – something that you will become aware of when reading various “party programs” and/or if your parents inform you that “the law-book” has expanded dramatically. I haven’t read “Norway’s Laws” as of yet – but both my mom and my aunt had to know it by heart. Any well-stocked personal-Norwegian library will include “Norway’s Laws” in addition to “Skikk og Bruk” a huge book about Etiquette and how one ought to behave …
It is obvious that progressivism and deconstructionism and the politics that these ideas inspire move us into a direction where our founding documents are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
In fact; it can be suggested that we are so far removed from our starting point that we can might as well create a new constitution by starting from scratch. An idea that would probably appeal enormously to those on the left and suit our contemporary times better. Or we can remove amendments so as to go back to “the purity” of the founding of our nation, which would throw us back in time to start afresh – but from a traditional starting point – rather than a neo-contemporary one. This would starkly contradict “openness,” “tolerance,” “inclusion,” or “diversity” as there would be very strict guidelines – even the death penalty.
Much like bureaucracy clouds and muffles the principles of the US Constitution – ours suffers the same fate. In fact lessening the powers of the monarch in this case can be viewed as unconstitutional – the same can be said of taxes and regulations intruding upon a person’s property rights; but what does constitutional or unconstitutional mean when you can amend said document repeatedly which the last paragraph of our Constitution grants The Ting the authority to do?
Regardless of my realisation of Norway’s “unconstitutional” nature; or at least “radical departure from founding principles,” there is still an election coming up … and on that occasion I’ve picked two political parties that I’ll present to you below.
The reason as to why I’ve picked these two political parties is because they are the only ones that are strict on immigration and openly believe in enforcing Norwegian culture rather than working against our national identity and heritage. It is a shame that the options are so few if one chooses to let immigration from historically incompatible cultures, political subversion and crime levels be decisive factors in the casting of ones vote. To give you a sneak peek at our problems before I continue my entry below I’ve pasted in some interesting information … a translation is offered underneath each screenshot – they have a light grey background if you struggle to distinguish them. I would also like to add that a lot of the screenshots pasted throughout this entry offer a shocking insight into a Nation that has been grossly mismanaged over decades. Just if you look at the current lack of respect for the teaching profession this symbolises a massive culture change that can best be described as pre-1968 and post-1968.
Welcome to a post-1968 Europe … it is not a pleasant sight:
Prison sentences in Norway.
“Fremskrittspartiet ønsker strengere straffer for alle typer kriminalitet. Vi mener at maksimumsstraffen skal opp fra 21 år til 30 år. Strafferabatten som innebærer at folk som begår ti lovbrudd blir kun dømt for to lovbrudd skal vekk. De som begår kriminalitet skal straffes for den, og ikke få kvantumsrabatt for å begå enda mer kriminalitet.”
TRANSLATION TO ENGLISH
“The Progress Party wants stricter prison sentences for any type of crime. It is our opinion that the maximum prison sentence should be increased from 21 years to 30. The Prison Sentence Rebate which entails that persons who break the law ten times will only be sentenced for two should be removed. Those who commit criminal actions should be punished for it, not get a discount for committing even more crime.”
The Norwegian Police-Force.
“Gjennom tiår har en snillistisk kriminalpolitikk ført til at den kriminelle har blitt satt i fokus, og at man skal skåne den kriminelle – fremfor å fokusere på offeret. I møte med virkeligheten har dette vært feilslått. Organisert kriminalitet blir stadig tøffere, og politiet møter en helt ny hverdag.
Parallelt med dette har det blitt ført en asyl- og innvandringspolitikk som ikke har tatt tryggheten til folk flest på alvor. Asylsøkere man ikke har oversikt over, som kan være drapsmenn, voldtektsmenn, krigsforbrytere og terrorister har fått gå fritt rundt i landet. Fremskrittspartiet har lenge satt ned foten og sagt at disse må på lukkede mottak inntil deres identitet er avdekket. Vi kan ikke føre en innvandringspolitikk som går på bekostning av en trygg hverdag for folk flest.
TRANSLATION TO ENGLISH
“Through decades we’ve let kindness dictate our crime-politics which has prioritized the wellbeing of criminals – rather than focusing on the victims. This has been a failure when faced with reality. Organised crime is becoming increasingly tougher, and our police force encounters a completely new everyday-reality. Parallel to this we’ve engaged in an asylum and immigration policy where the safety of the common man wasn’t taken seriously. Asylum seekers that nobody could account for, who could be murderers, rapists, war criminals and terrorists have been moving around freely in our country. The Progress Party have long fought for that these asylum seekers should be kept in closed environments until the authorities are aware of their true identity. We cannot engage in an immigration policy that endangers the local population.”
The Progress Party are openly and vocally against Islamification and have been so for years. They are currently in Government and much more established than the other political party I’ve mentioned. I like our current immigration and integration Minister, she is absolutely fantastic and a keeper.
She is trying to do her job and protect Norway and Norwegian interests and has acquired a vast fan base across the nation because of her commitment to her people. Those on the left hate her as they seem to be more concerned with protecting the rights of Jihadis and sub-Saharan Africans rather than Norwegians… Kidding you not. So she is perceived as being “controversial” by the traditionally-left-dominated Norwegian-political-scene and the left-dominated-mainstream media.
She is calling a spade a spade in other words.
The Progress Party – as they are hilariously called – is not as the name of the party might suggest a “politically progressive” party. Quite on the contrary they are a globalist extreme-capitalist party that believes in smashing Norwegian socialist-bureaucracy by making the government smaller and more efficient. It is shocking to read their program as it makes you realise how overly taxed the Norwegian population is. There isn’t exactly a lot of freedom in Norway as the amount of taxes and the general tax level, not to forget how costly products and services are, can in many ways be compared to a hostage situation, blackmailing or a financial prison.
- Norwegian left-wing-politicians are so dictatorial that they want to decide not only where and how you build your house, but also what you do on your boat.
- The elderly at care homes can be placed into shared rooms without their consent and have no influence over their everyday activity, you are not allowed to own a house in Norway unless you pay your taxes there and live there, you are obliged to live in your house for so and so many days a year, your tax return is published for everyone to see and you are taxed on your property regardless of what your income level is which can potentially put you in a rather sticky situation. It is also the duty of politicians to design the school curriculum rather than the teachers … I’ve pasted in more screenshots of these matters further down in my entry.
The Progress Party are currently in a coalition with other parties as is custom in Norway; the last election was the first time they managed to get into national government and become an active part of an administration. Because they are in a coalition and this is the norm in Norwegian politics, I don’t think we have to worry about the more extreme aspects of their economic platform. If they were less Globalists and more protectionists I would join them as a member for sure, I might still vote for them even though I disagree with their anti-protectionism because of this: If more people feel inclined to vote for The Democrats in Norway in the National election it will be bad for The Progress Party as those who would have voted for them might go for an even more Nationalistic Party. We need a party on the right with influence, that’s the thing … I’m swinging between the two, undecided as of now…. A good plan of attack would be for Norwegians to vote for The Progress Party in the National Election, while increasing the influence of The Democrats in Norway during the local elections whenever they may be.
- Read about The Progress Party here: Party Program.
- This is a crucial read for all Norwegians – Crime in Norway.
- Read about The Democrats in Norway here: Party Program.
- This is an important read about how crime statistics are manipulated to make Norway seem safer.
On the other side of the scale you got:
The Democrats in Norway. They are a Nationalistic Democratic Party that are anti-EU, anti-Globalist and pro-public-national health-care to battle a myriad of alarming health issues. They also believe in empowering our military and offer some excellent suggestions in that direction. They are economically centrists promoting a mixed economy. Their founder used to be a politician in The Progress Party but fell out with the other ministers. The founder of The Democrats in Norway was physically attacked by a Norwegian artist ( who was one of the first people to ever endorse my music funny enough) and has received death threats according to Wikipedia due to his critique of Islamism. A stance later adapted in a more moderate packaging, by The Progress Party and funny enough one of the main reasons for their appeal and popularity … The two political parties share several viewpoints and certain segments in their Party Programs are completely identical – yet there are some differences of course. Not to forget that The Democrats in Norway are very precise and offer lots of great information on a number of topics in their Party Program – which makes them seem more high-brow or more concise than their competitor. (There are some typos in certain sections of their Party Program though).
The Democrats in Norway glorify the ancient Democracy in Athens and believe that there should be more referendums that are binding. They are in my opinion extreme-Democrats who inhabit an idealistic belief in the over-all cognitive abilities of their fellow human beings. Not to forget that referendums would go against the three-power-structure of our government as laid out by our constitution. They also believe in cutting through the jungle of Socialist red-tape in Norway like their competitors but The Democrats in Norway seem to be more in-tune with the dark aspects of Globalisation and the need for Norwegians to be prepared and equipped to face unfavourable situations. I really like them due to their anti-EU stance, the only criticism I have is their absolute worship of utopian enlightenment principles, just like their competitor, which is why they champion the idea of empowering other nations through the glory of the free-market and democracy. They also believe in standing together with other democratic nations regardless of where they might be in a strange form of democracy-solidarity-ism. They want to work with the UN to perfect it – so that they can keep on fighting the good fight – which in a neocon fashion means spreading democratic ideas and free-market capitalism. Those nations that aren’t particularly interested in this, because they break human rights, should be rewarded with sanctions … I do not agree with this.
Women will be the driving force of cultural change in The Middle East according to this type of thinking – in other words women should be used as a feminist tool to fundamentally change Middle Eastern societies. I fail to see how “imposing” neo-contemporary values will yield much diversity. In fact it will not. All cultures will have to remove themselves from their founding principles to accomplish these measures, which will put other nations in our shoes. Your religion, your constitution and your values will be watered-down to such an extent that they will no longer bear any meaning or authority.
Strategically it is probably good to promote such things, but I would compare it to cultural abuse and identity-castration. What you will inevitably get is a violent reactionary movement that will spot the discrepancies and call out the heretics for their heresy and the traitors for their treachery. If you then try to argue against this you won’t have much cerebral ammunition as “the traditionalist” is on solid ground while you are in “fairytale-land.” You would have to cull a great amount of the world’s population to accomplish a utopia based on the deletion of differing values – and even if you were to initiate such atrocities bear in mind that diversity in culture and values is just a symptom of genetic diversity within the various “human tribes” on this planet.
It is therefore a good idea to let other Nations govern themselves after whichever principles they find the most rewarding and rather contain our differences so that those who want Sharia can live in a Sharia nation while those who want western democracy can live within a democratic construct. You should not be allowed to live within Swedish territory if you burn the flag and promote The Caliphate in other words.
Is this inclusive? Both yes and no. Yes – because you should not enforce your way of life upon other Nations. No – because you will demand that those who live within your borders adhere to a specific set of rules. Hence there is “openness” and “tolerance” globally but not continentally in the case of Europe or Nationally within the kingdom of Norway or Saudi Arabia for that matter.
I do believe that what I laid out is more just rather than the liberal approach – where all should be liberated and revolutionaries aided all in the name of – enforced liberation. Take a look at what I wrote above – we are meant to be a monarchy for Christ sake and where are we now? One of the parties I’m openly promoting is pro-Athenian-democracy and the other a free-market-globalist-party – but these two are the only parties worth promoting as the other ones believe in over taxation and more migration. You cannot vote for those who don’t even want to uphold and protect your cultural heritage.
Back to Norway and the current election. I believe in an even more Nationalistic approach where the UN quotas are completely ignored and neglected and where foreign aid is scrapped completely as we need to sort out our own issues first. I think that Norway should focus more on independence rather than reliance on NATO for everything. We don’t have the man power to defend our natural resources or borders as of now. The Democrats in Norway also highlights their concerns regarding Norway’s inability to protect itself. We are extremely weak at this point, especially when keeping in mind that Sweden is becoming a security threat in the midst of Scandinavia due to their lack of control over Islamists and migrants. Culturally speaking we should also reach out to our Scandinavian neighbours for the simple reason that it is idealistic to believe that foreigners should care much about Scandinavia and Scandinavian culture. Not even the left cares about Norwegians, Swedes or Danes as ethnic groups anymore. Our current left-infused culture believes in demographic warfare and the annihilation of the Norwegian identity and the Norwegian people as it is of course – offensive to be white or proud of ones ethnic group and origin if white. This sentiment and tactic can be witnessed in Germany where government officials believe in replacing their own population with Muslims and sub-Saharan Africans; it can also be seen in the French government. Ethnic suicide is the current continental orthodoxy. If you think that is some sort of conspiracy, then start reading. Not that it will make you any happier.
I agree with The Democrats in Norway that we should bolster our Nordic Union, but an important matter to keep in mind is that such a union would not be particularly interesting unless we hold the greater influence due to military power. We’ve been subjugated before both by Sweden and Denmark and if one looks at Feminist-Politics in Sweden this isn’t much to celebrate. Sweden as I just mentioned pose a National Security risk both to us and Denmark. But whenever their situation is sorted, and as long as we don’t draw the shortest straw – then it is probably in our cultural interest to stand more together … at least it would look like that from a theoretical and logical perspective.
I believe that you should lose your passport and be deported back to your country of origin if you are guilty of crime or if you’re supportive of terrorism. It doesn’t resemble anything that English has to be spoken in Norwegian prisons. Nor does it make much sense that the Norwegian government should purchase prison cells abroad for foreign criminals who’ve committed crime in Norway. I also think that western-born Jihadis should be executed. We cannot unleash them upon The Middle East, we cannot let them stroll around on our streets, nor can we give them recruitment ground in our prisons. Some organised crime groups literally run their operations from prisons.
I have nothing against Islam or Muslim Nations that use Sharia law. We should respect other cultures and different methods of governance as races and ethnicities are different and will established civic-minded or tribal societies depending on their “nature.” Going against this will only result in destabilised countries, unhappiness and chaos. People are different and will gravitate towards different social-constructs. That said … Europe is not the Middle East. Last time I checked Norway borders to Sweden not Iraq so it is completely unnatural that we should be building Mosques left right and centre, in fact they don’t belong anywhere in Europe, freedom of religion should be restricted to the old Gods (Paganism) and the new Gods (various denominations of Christianity). If you want to worship something else on our continent you can do that within the walls of your house.
Without firm guidelines we will lose. We are already losing. This has to be reversed. If the quote misattributed to Voltaire rings true: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise” – then conservative Islam currently rules Europe. (I honestly thought it was a Voltaire quote, apparently it’s not ;/ It is still a good quote though).
My main concern with The Democrats in Norway is the fact that I’ve never heard of them before and that I don’t know if they are established and branded enough. I do have more of a thing for their party program even though it looks as if though two completely different people, one realist and one delusional idealist have put together their “vision.” But then again it is virtually impossible to find a political party that you’ll agree with a 100% – which is why people start their own party, don’t vote or learn to compromise. At this point I’m just glad if the left lose. They’ve done enough damage already.
To briefly mention someone from the opposition; The Green Party in Norway are at war with one of Norway’s most crucial industries: The Petroleum Industry. They are also on a crusade to stop all traffic into Oslo – hilariously enough they want to focus more on Oslo’s restaurants and vibrant night-life; which instantly made me wonder how on earth musicians would get their amps and gear to venues and how on earth produce would be delivered to restaurants – when all transport ought to be shut down? They’ve now amended their crusade so that it only affects car-drivers; but this still raises obvious concerns for merchants as it is obviously much easier to shop when you can place your groceries or purchases in a car … The Green Party’s crusade against parking spaces in Oslo also raises concerns … for some strange reason there are many who see them as totally nuts. I wonder why … Playing gigs in Oslo will be hopeless in the future unless dealing with major organisers who can hire major transportation companies to deliver gear/backlines etc; No cars in Oslo. Read here about:The Commerce Bureau Furious.
Likewise The Green Party in Gloucestershire, UK, sent out a pamphlet printed on eco-friendly paper laying out their well-meaning plan of how to help everyone through one government program after the other – how all of this was to be financed … they didn’t say.
The reds obviously believe in more taxation and an increase in migrants.
You can marvel at the result of their politics in what I’ve pasted in below (a translation can be found underneath each box), a critical opinion piece about The Progress Party’s economic vision follows ↓
Foreign criminals in Norway.
“Hele straffesakskjeden, og spesielt politiet, har blitt nedprioritert i altfor lang tid. Soningskøene har økt, og politiet har hatt sterk mangel på ressurser. Dette har ført til at politiet ikke har ressurser nok til å oppklare hverdagskriminalitet, og folk flest mister tilliten til systemet. Vi må bygge flere fengsler, og etablere løsninger for å få utenlandske kriminelle til å sone i utlandet slik at vi får ned soningskøene. Samtidig må politiet få de ressursene de trenger. Andelen utenlandske domfelte nærmer seg nå 40 prosent, og den høye standarden i norske fengsler virker lite avskrekkende på disse kriminelle. Vi må etablere egne fengsler for utenlandske kriminelle, og kjøpe fengselsplasser i deres hjemland.”
TRANSLATION TO ENGLISH
“The entire chain of criminal justice, especially the police has been deprioritised for way too long. The queues for criminal processing have increased, and the police suffer greatly due to lack of resources. This has resulted in the decreased ability of the police to solve everyday-crime, and most people have in turn lost their faith in the system. We have to build more prisons, and establish solutions to deport foreign criminals so that we can reduce the queue of criminals waiting to serve their prison sentence. At the same time we have to grant the police-force the resources that they sorely need. The amount of sentenced foreign criminals are now approaching 40%, and the high standard of living within Norwegian prisons is not a deterrent to foreigners. We have to established separate prisons for foreign criminals, and buy prison spaces for them in their countries of origin.”
Screenshots revealing the massive challenges we face in Norway if we want to unravel the nanny-state – a small translation can be found underneath each picture explaining the issue:
The political system in Norway is such that nobody ever really seems to get a clear majority and absolute stronghold, meaning that you always get coalitions. With this in mind it matters little what I’ve written below as an opinion piece on The Progress Party’s extreme-capitalism. The likelihood that they would get a free-pass to re-structure Norway completely, is from a contemporary perspective slim, we need those on the right to battle Islamification and foreign violent crime regardless of what their party program offers in full. The Democrats in Norway and The Progress Party are the two parties we got.
The Progress Party are, in my humble opinion, too capitalistic. As I said they are globalist with a major G. To their credit they obviously realise what sort of negative implications this can have culturally on a population, which might explain why they are so obsessed with protecting Norwegian cultural heritage and openly fight against Islamification. The Democrats in Norway have expressed an even greater commitment to fight Islamification in addition to formulating ways in which “the culture war” can be won.
The Progress Party believe in removing protectionism as free-market capitalism is the remedy to all of the world’s problems including Norway’s issues. I’m pretty sure that unrestrained free-market capitalism can be perceived as “unconstitutional.” Remember it is the responsibility of the government to make sure that Norwegians have a favourable job-market so that they can find employment. Then again I guess that it can be argued that Norway’s international situation will improve if free-trade opens up Norway to anyone who wants to set up camp … I think it is a good idea to protect our national treasures and likewise protect our Norwegian workers.
The Democrats in Norway and The Progress Party believe in fighting world-poverty with the free-market and allow impoverished nations access into the Norwegian market so as to lift them out of their financial misery. Which indirectly means that they want to empower other nations through capitalism something that I’m not supportive of. I think the west has empowered the east & the south way too much. Nothing is really made in England, the USA or Norway anymore. Now how did that happen? Globalism has made the west financially vulnerable if one looks at the situation over in the USA during the end of Bush’s presidency when he wanted the gamblers on Wall Street to fail but felt compelled to let the government interfere due to the fatal consequences if these giga-companies in the USA went under. Bankruptcies of major corporations in the USA have implications far and wide not only for innocent American families but for the “global economy” as well……
I personally believe in Nationalist Capitalism as the only way forward, with heavy protectionism so that foreign companies or multinational corporations cannot get a stronghold within your nation. I believe that the more self-sufficient and self-reliant a nation is the more empowered it will be. The more your nation can produce and fix on its own, the better it is for the nation especially in a crisis situation. The more “knowledge” you invest in and harvest and keep within your borders the better it is for your people. The stronger your military is and the more prepared the general population is to handle crisis situations such as climate change or war, the better. Overly depending on the “globalist network” is something that I would strongly advise against. Sure you will always need trade and trade partners, but I think the aim of any nation should be to be able to stand on its own two feet if a natural catastrophe all of a sudden would sever the lines of international trade. If you export all of your skilled labour and all of your factories you put an entire nation in the role of dependers and easy victims.
A new general attitude also has to be introduced into the subconsciousness of the populace – that having access to anything you want at any given time is unnatural and unsustainable. People now lose the plot if they cannot get hold of their favourite snack without realising that this is due to bad crops in some far away distant place.
As The Democrats in Norway points out in their Party Program – Norway imports the majority of the food it consumes as a Nation. In addition to this we don’t really have a food-storage for crisis situation. None of this bodes well.
Governments in the west have a moral obligation to prepare younger generations for survival outside our societies of convenience. The general population should be told to start prepping and brace themselves for shortages when it comes to certain foods.
Back to a civilised, convenient, high-functioning, construct:
The Progress Party believes that demand should drive the entertainment industry and that modern art/music/entertainment should cater to the consumer. With the current popularity of “The Kardashians” and all sorts of “McDonalds-entertainment” there is little doubt in my mind that simply catering to the consumer will only yield trashy, accessible art and literally function like a sledgehammer on anything resembling high-culture.
If artists are to be forced to create “accessible” music as well it will work against progress and artistic creativity as many if not most of the greatest artists throughout our times had patrons, whether the church or the court, facilitating their artistic growth. Some influential artists didn’t really sell anything until after their death as well. So to let average consumers dictate the course of art seems like a dubious idea.
The Progress Party present great points in terms of Norwegian education. Norway is a pretty “brainy country” in terms of international genetic studies, so there is really no need “to make the population stupid” through our education programs. There is scientific reason to believe that ethnic-Norwegians could lead internationally in terms of their cognitive abilities. The potential is huge, in terms of brain-power. To dull this is a crime against Norwegians and goes against our national interest.
Yet I think that extreme-capitalists such as The Progress Party put too much faith into the power of the average consumer in terms of “what the masses want.” They do not believe in social-engineering but rather in unrestrained liberty due to an unwavering belief that people, regardless of where they are or who they are, can govern themselves a 100%. This of course sounds very nice and emphatic but in the current climate of “transgender children” not to forget the “obesity crisis” and also the fact that worldwide access to the biggest library ever available have not given way to a “knowledge boom” speaks volumes. There are those who “drive society forward” but then you have an awful lot who don’t have much to say for themselves. In the spirit of liberty we might end up with completely dysgenic societies, something that can currently be noticed all over the “free and developed” western world. Something to bear in mind as neither obesity nor the normalisation of abstract identity movements are in the national interest of any nation.
Lots of physically and psychologically healthy children, presented with an education designed to exploit their individual genetic inheritance to the fullest, raised with a deep knowledge and appreciation of their national heritage and prepared for survival in the case of an absolute breakdown of their nation, is what we need. We need to raise warriors intellectually and physically that can improve the chances of our people’s survival. Rewarding obesity, victim mentality, making people stupid through education and ignorant of their history, while indulging dysgenic behaviour is a bad idea. Yet it is precisely bad ideas that the left has a tendency to promote in order to be “nice.” Too much liberty also has the potential to work against the best interest of the nation, as a common goal, a common social unifying objective is probably more in line with national interest than social and ideological fragmentation which is the inevitable risk of unregulated freedom as preached by many conservatives.
The west cannot afford to be as vulnerable as we are. We do not have the luxury of numbers.
More screenshots from BOTH political parties can be found below – A small translation can be read underneath each picture. As always I recommend my readership to read the text in full but in the name of sharing important information I’m sharing all of this with you now. Please take the time to do your own research and make up your own mind.
More from The Progress Party:
More from the Democrats in Norway – a small translation can be found underneath each picture: