Skip to comments.Norway ponders conservatism and the future of the welfare state
Posted on 08/11/2013 8:13:21 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Parts of Northern Europe have had a bit better luck than some other sectors across the pond during the economic troubles of the past decade, but they still have had to deal with the legacy of welfare states and costly entitlement programs. Earlier this year, Mary Katharine looked at Sweden’s attempts to deal with rising debt and costly entitlements, while Erika covered some steps being taken in Denmark to deal with their long term financial issues arising from the same core issues. This sense of realism and worry about the future seems to be spreading across the region, and John Fund has a great analysis of current events in Norway, where conservatives seem poised to take control of the government there for the first time in ages.
If polls taken over the last year are accurate, the eight-year-old Labor-party government of Jens Stoltenberg is headed for a landslide defeat.
Normally, you would think it would be a shoo-in for reelection. Labors social democrats have long thought of themselves as the natural party of government Labor has been the leading party in Norway for all but 16 of the last 78 years. While much of Europe is wracked by recession, Norways economy grew by 3 percent last year, and the unemployment rate is only 3.5 percent. Norways GDP per capita is now over $60,000 a year.
But Norwegians appear likely to elect a conservative coalition government for the first time in over a decade. Polls show the Conservative party leading with 32 percent of the vote, which should give it 58 seats in the 169-seat parliament, a dramatic increase from 2005, when it won only 23 seats. The Labor party has about 30 percent of the vote, and its left-wing allied parties are floundering. The Progress party a populist party that supports low taxes and stricter limits on immigration, and that worries about Muslim extremism has about 16 percent of the vote, and it and the Conservatives, together with their smaller allies, look to have a clear majority in the new Parliament. Both the Conservative party and the Progress party are headed by women former local-government minister Erna Solberg and economist Siv Jensen, respectively making it very likely that Norway will soon have its second woman prime minister.
We don’t tend to hear much about Norway over here, aside from one tragic shooting by a madman, but that’s likely because things have been going fairly smoothly for them. As Fund notes, the discovery of massive oil deposits off their coast in the sixties led to the formation of a state operated oil company which generates more than a third of the country’s entire revenue. The lion’s share of those profits go straight into Norway’s Government Pension Fund, doled out from there to an extremely generous welfare program. This report provides details of just some of the benefits being funded by the government, including free healthcare, dental care until 19 years of age, and cut rate prescriptions. They also offer essentially unlimited disability payments, pensions for retirees, survivor benefits and more. So in such an apparently successful socialist paradise, why would the voters suddenly turn to the conservatives?
As Fund notes, there is a growing realization and public discussion of the fact that, “the oil won’t last forever.” And with an ever increasing – and aging – army of pensioners to fully support, if either the supply or the profitable demand for oil were to begin to plunge, the system would collapse under its own weight. Rather than waiting for the wolves to actually arrive at the door, it appears that the citizens are actually thinking of planning for the future. Not in any “radical” and massive ways, mind you, but even baby steps can get you started on the road to redemption. If nothing else, this might make the Norwegian elections worth watching this year. Stay tuned.
“The oil won’t last forever”
But the lutefisk will.
Lutefisk, the currency of the future!
A nearly homogeneous society with a population less than that of Houston, Texas. Interracial strife is all but non-existent. Taxes are terrible but they get something for them. As high as taxes are though, they realize that they can and must go even higher without oil or the jobs of oil.
They are almost an insanely cautious society.
Anders Behring Breivik can be called many things, but a madman is not one of them. He had a very well thought out plan to cripple the next generation of socialist leaders, to save his country, and the plan worked, though murderous.
Norway has a very small population, of only 4.7 million. And it was, and remains, an effort of the socialists to dilute the Norwegian population with unrestricted immigration, which would eventually wipe out Norway as a state, a culture, a history, and a people.
Norway would become just a socialist district in the EU, no longer a nation. A generic place. A gray place. And all that Norway had been before would be lost.
To achieve this, the socialist and communist youth movements merged just five years after the German Hitler Youth were created, and created a socialist and communist version of the Jugend. Their purposes were the same, to create an ideologically pure next generation of leaders, to guarantee the future of Nazi Germany or socialist/communist Norway.
And this effort is not unique to Norway. The Socialist International is an organization of left wing political parties from around the world, and they are devoted to doing to their nations what the Norwegian socialists intended to do to theirs.
So imagine, for a moment, if Anders Behring Breivik had lived in 1942 Germany, and decided to slaughter an equal number of German Hitler Youths, in defense of occupied Norway. Would he have still been seen as a villain?
I suppose the difference is that the Nazis just wanted to rule the nation of Norway. The socialists just wanted to destroy it entirely.
The first thing Norway needs to do is expel the Muslims.
Norway is SUCH a joke —the Swedes make fun of their work ethic. (imagine that!) They use Norway as a comparison to scare fellow Swedes from going back to the far, far left.
And a cup of coffee is $12--extrapolate that to everything. There was a Norwegian freeper on here, once, who told us he ate meat twice a year because it was so prohibitively expensive.
Well, yeah, because the Hitler Youth were absolutely victims of nazism. Now, if he'd taken out an SS command post (or the leadership most responsible for perverting the kids) that would be one thing, but to shoot 70 unarmed kids is something else entirely.
I did not know that it was a labor party camp - I had heard that he did not like the islamic immigration into his country and I was baffled by how he thought shooting up a summer camp would somehow stop the situation. I just assumed insane people do insane things and little would be learned by reading anything he wrote; so, thank you for your explanation.
Oh, if there’s danger of the socialists losing, there will probably be another “right-wing” mass murder. Either in Norway or one of the neighbour countries.
Nah. Beef (hi-class stuff) is actually a bit less expensive than real quality fish. Of course, all foods are much more expensive than in the US - I think if you made a bulk comparison you’d end up with US prices at around 30% of Norwegian.
Of course, the way Obama is going, he may have the US more comparable to Europe (or Egypt) real soon.
This is news to me, too.
I would not call Hitler Jugend victims. I actually met a former Jugend in Germany, and he regarded it as the high point of his life. He still had his old party card, and is proud of a picture of him as a boy getting one of the numerous awards the HJ handed out.
Many of them were the last defenders of Berlin against the Russians, killing many before they in turn were slaughtered. The Russian attitude to them was the same as for the SS: to be killed on sight.
The purpose of such training camps is not activities, but memorization and recitation of political doctrine. Those who are best at this are promoted. Freedom of thought, questioning of doctrine, or any form of argument are strongly discouraged. All activities are group activities, be it exercising, eating, sleeping. Individualism is the enemy.
Doctrine always defeats common sense, experience, or caring for others. Lying to achieve doctrinal goals is encouraged. A sense of ruthlessness pervades.
Hell, not only Norway should do that — the entire West should.
The longer it waits, the more severe the bloodletting will be in the future. Countries like China and Japan already understand it to the fullest extent.
By now the West should realize that there is NO WAY EVER that it and Islam can co-exist — plenty of daily examples indicate that Islam is in the West only to conquer and convert it. There is not even an attempt by Islam to integrate into Western society.
The Swedes say food is so expensive in Norway that they sell half cucumbers. And food in Sweden isn’t cheap by any stretch.
Yes, many Norwegians - those in convenient locations - make largescale treks to Sweden to buy food. Crazy stuff.
I spent much of the summer in Stockholm this year. Weird thing going on there --babies. Lots of 'em. (and not the muslims, the ethnic Swedes). They are having four kids a piece. Kids were every where. It was a marked increase from when I left just three years ago.
I am really curious how this will change the priorities of the average Swedish family. It's one thing to pay for everyone else when it's just you. Quite another when you have six mouths to feed and clothe.
It looks like the left is on the way out, the right has been leading in the polls for some time.
I’d rather see the Progress party lead the coalition but what’re gonna do.
I understand your position, but the nazi adults took kids - starting at age 10 - and psychologically and physically manipulated them until they created the fanatics the allies eventually had to face. They were nazi creations. That's why I consider them victims. Having said that, had I been around in WWII, I would have unhesitatingly shot any hitler youth that did not immediately drop his weapons and surrender.
True, the PP does seem to be a bit closer to our kind of conservative I guess.
Yes, would you rather have a percapita income of $60,000. and a twelve dollar cup of coffee or the 1956 per capita average as it was in America and a five cent cup of coffee? I would guess that the latter was a better deal. I was born in 1944 in South Carolina, my father was a carpenter and we ate meat three times a day most of the time. At least no one who has ever seen me has suspected that I was ever undernourished. I think 1956 was the year that I saw the man I considered my Godfather become very angry because he was charged a whole dime for a cup of coffee instead of the nickel he was used to paying. He thought it was outrageous to be charged enough for a cup of coffee to pay for half a gallon of gasoline. In those days my father could afford to buy ice cream cones for himself, my mother and his four sons. The total cost was no more than sixty cents for all six and that was for double dip cones. Who can afford six cones of ice cream now? It would cost what my father spent in a month at the grocery store in 1956.
I tend to think of victimization as being from the individual’s point of view. Most of the boys did not think of themselves as victims, and many were enthusiastic and proud to be supporting their homeland.
For many it was an early recognition of their maturity, even adulthood, and they were destined to be the future leaders of their country.
There’s not much to be proud of in how long it took to pull their head out of the sand, but at least they’re doing it now.
Thought, I am the first to say we are rapidly catching up and we have none of the up side. At least they feel like they get something for all that taxation--we just get to bend over.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.