Marianne Stigset and Meera Bhatia, Bloomberg, March 27, 2009
Support for Norway’s Progress Party rose this month, with one pollster ranking it the country’s biggest political group, as voters backed its anti-immigration stance less than six months before parliamentary elections.
While governments in other parts of Europe lose support as voters condemn their handling of the financial crisis, Norway’s Labor government is struggling in polls after it tried to push through laws banning blasphemy and allowing police women to wear the hijab. The laws were withdrawn after a public outcry. Justice Minister Knut Storberget, whose ministry issued the proposals, has since gone on sick leave.
“People are losing their jobs, the economy seems to be going into recession but people are focusing on these issues instead,” said Torkel Brekke, professor of culture studies and oriental languages at the University of Oslo. “It tells you how important issues of identity are to small European countries and how people feel insecure about immigration.”
The Progress Party has support from 27.9 percent of voters in a Norstat poll published in the Vaart Land newspaper today, compared with 22.1 percent in the 2005 election. Backing for the ruling Labor Party fell to 31.7 percent from 32.8 percent in 2005. The poll, which had a margin of error of 2-3 points, was conducted March 17-22 and based on interviews with 1,000 people.
A survey by Opinion, published by news Web site Hegnar on March 18, gave the Progress Party a backing of 30.9 percent after gaining 6.4 percent in March, making it the country’s largest party.
‘Radical Islam’
The government of Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg in February had to retract a proposal to restrict verbal and written attacks on individuals based on their religious or spiritual beliefs. The law would have “done the bidding of radical Islamic states” such as Iran, Progress Party Chairman Siv Jensen has said. Jensen has warned Norway is in danger of “sneak-Islamization.”
Muslims account for 1.8 percent of Norway’s population of 4.8 million, where citizens enjoy the world’s second-highest gross domestic product per capita, according to the Central Intelligence Agency World Fact Book. That compares with 3.7 percent in Germany and as many as 10 percent in France, the CIA estimates.
{snip}
No Such Threat
{snip}
The Progress Party’s popularity rose because it’s “had the clearest stance on these policies and has credibility in this regard,” Jensen said in an interview. “The government has been marked by so much mess and chaos recently. Kolberg’s comments have revealed the disagreements within the Labor Party.”
A poll conducted by InFact for Verdens Gang this month showed that 51 percent of Norwegians believed radical Islam to be a problem in Norway, with 26 percent saying it constituted a significant terror threat.
‘Completely Off Track’
“I vote for the Progress Party because of their policies on transport, elderly care and not least immigration, as the current policy has veered completely off track,” said Anita Marie Dahl Solheim, a port document controller from Sandefjord southern Norway. Immigrants “generally do whatever they want and nobody ever puts their foot down.”
{snip}
While the party’s surge forward in the polls is mainly due to its stance on immigration, Jensen says the financial crisis has also helped them gain popularity. The economy of the world’s fifth-biggest oil exporter will contract 1.7 percent this year sending unemployment up to 4.7 percent by 2010, compared with a jobless rate of 1.5 percent in the middle of last year, according to the government statistics agency.
{snip}
Original article
Email
Marianne Stigset
at mstigset@bloomberg.net .
(Posted on April 1, 2009)
Comments
Economies always tend to bring about change, especially when they are bad. In fact, for most white people still, economic concerns are number one, and the worsening economy is a good opportunity for Euronationalist parties to gain ground.
After the Great Depression, some white countries’ voters expelled conservative parties and installed liberal-socialist ones, and others expelled liberal-socialist parties and installed conservative ones. It was all a visceral reaction to the Depression.
This should be celebrated. I speak Norwegian and lived there for a time. Back in the 1980s, the Progress Party and its leader Carl I. Hagen were portrayed in the press as marginal xenophobes but public support hovering around 5%, if that even. That it is now the largest party in Norway is astounding in a positive way.
Here are a couple of paragraphs from the original article that were snipped. Note the arrogant assumption that muslims have a right to be there ‘long-term.’
Norway’s Muslims warn the debates on the hijab and radical Islamists may lead to a long-term rift between local and Islamic communities.
“The debates have had an unfortunate effect and many Muslims feel shut out from the Norwegian community,” said Shoaib Sultan, general secretary of Norway’s Islamic Council. “This is regrettable for any society in the long-run.”
“People are losing their jobs, the economy seems to be going into recession but people are focusing on these issues instead,” said Torkel Brekke, professor of culture studies and oriental languages at the University of Oslo.
Excellent. Economic crises come and go, but demographics is destiny. Two centuries after The Enlightenment some Western politicians try to make blasphemy illegal. It certainly wasn’t due to pressure from Norway’s dwindling Christian population.
It’s too bad that America has only two parties that matter, both of them traitors to its citizens. Only the 1st Amendment stops politicians from banning blasphemy here, and that part of the Constitution is hanging by a thread, ready to join the 9th and 10th Amendments in the “dead letter” section of U.S. law.
Norway is a white country whose worldwide scale of admiration stems from the nations genetic integrity.
What a shame, Norway used to be such a clean country.
I can only surmise that the politicians have been re-programmed by aliens to conduct themselves in a manner that is designed to destroy an entire nordic race.
How else can you explain the entire European continent proceeding on the path to extinction of its native people?
Wow. Makes you feel there’s some sanity left in Europe after all. Great how the relentless leftist PC argument has just worn so thin that people have had enough and are no longer afraid to say so.
I just hope with the economic downturn (it’s my opinion it is going to get a lot worse) they will actually start throwing them out, one would think once locals start lining up in the unemployment queues with all the foreigners, it would have to happen. Once it comes down to putting food on the table all this other multicultural integration acceptance garbage will be forgotten. I bet a lot of people are going to be wishing their countries didn’t naturalize so many foreigners during the times of plenty - if it didn’t impact on me personally I would almost say it serves them right!
Who knows, maybe this economic crisis is just what the world needed. It might turn out to be what saves Europe and the world.
Why are there muslims in Norway anyways?
“Why are there muslims in Norway anyways?”
Because it’s in their holy book to proselytize the whole world. If not convert the people, take over. This is not hate-talk. It’s right there for a person to read for himself.
The muslims are in Norway because the “anti-racists” are nothing but anti-white genocidal lunatics who hate themselves or us. Fix the anti-white problem and the economy will be righted one way or another, it is a tertiary issue.
How many Muslims are there in Norway, proportionately?
The 1.8% figure is misleading. You can be certain that it’s much higher than 1.8% if you count only the under-fives. Good. Now hit the FAST FORWARD button and go to the year 2029.
Given continued Muslim immigration and fecundity, try to guess the percentage of young adult Muslims in Norway by 2049.
Some demographers have calculated that, given the continuation of present population trends, mighty Russia will have a Muslim majority by 2050.
Why are there Muslims in Norway? Because Norway, like Sweden and Finland, is a sap-headed welfare state country ready and willing to let them in. That’s why!
But when the cost of their cultural, ethnic, and religious cohesion comes down to raping, murdering, and terrorizing
The muslim ideaology will allow the muslims to do ANYTHING to infidels they feel like doing, so they DO anything they feel like doing, knowing the western governments will allow them to do so.
Has anyone ever looked at a map and noticed how small these European countries really are?
The countries immigrants are coming from are often 2 to 3 times bigger. Why should these tiny European countries, about the size of US States take in the world’s surplas population? This is a good thing to mention when discussing this issue. Pull out a map and show people. It’ll wake them up.
“Why are there muslims in Norway anyways?”
Because it’s in their holy book to proselytize the whole world. If not convert the people, take over. This is not hate-talk. It’s right there for a person to read for himself.
Posted by Anonymous at 10:44 AM on April 2
____
“How did they get in Norway?” would be a better question, right?
When I was in Oslo, it was full of Kurds (probably asylum) and Pakistanis (don’t know what they were doing there).
Let’s hope Norwegians, like Danes, have looked to their neighbour Sweden’s huge problem with Muslim immigrants constantly rioting and decided that they must act now or lose control of their country forever. The neo-Marxist EU and their political leadership in EU countries can no longer, owing to the internet, fool their citizens into believing that everything in the EU multicultural garden is rosy. Now on the Internet people can see with their own eyes that the neo-Marxist multicultural fantasy is increasingly becoming a nightmare that only gets worse and the problem is the same in every country that has introduced multiculturalism. The brainwashing no longer works. The Euro elections on June 4 should see big increases in the nationalist representation from many countries in the EU parliament including the UK and this should be the start of the downfall and ultimate collapse of the EU. It helps too that the Czech president Vaclav Klaus, (the current EU President in a rotating presidency) having lived most of his life under Communism, is a confirmed sceptic of the present EU like most Czechs and is constantly reminding the neo-Marxists of the EU that he does not want to see an increasing EU Federal Superstate but for the nation-states to maintain their sovereignty and own parliaments. Vaclav Klaus is a breath of fresh air and what a change from the stale pro-EU yes-men we are used to in the UK.
“The countries immigrants are coming from are often 2 to 3 times bigger. Why should these tiny European countries, about the size of US States take in the world’s surplas population? This is a good thing to mention when discussing this issue.
Rampant population growth threatens our economy and quality of life. Immigration, both legal and illegal, are fueling this growth.
I’m not talking just about the obvious problems that we see in the news - growing dependence on foreign oil, carbon emissions, soaring commodity prices, environmental degradation, etc. I’m talking about the effect upon rising unemployment and poverty in America.
I should introduce myself. I am the author of a book titled “Five Short Blasts: A New Economic Theory Exposes The Fatal Flaw in Globalization and Its Consequences for America.” To make a long story short, my theory is that, as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption of products begins to decline out of the need to conserve space. People who live in crowded conditions simply don’t have enough space to use and store many products. This declining per capita consumption, in the face of rising productivity (per capita output, which always rises), inevitably yields rising unemployment and poverty.
This theory has huge implications for U.S. policy toward population management, especially immigration policy. Our policies of encouraging high rates of immigration are rooted in the belief of economists that population growth is a good thing, fueling economic growth. Through most of human history, the interests of the common good and business (corporations) were both well-served by continuing population growth. For the common good, we needed more workers to man our factories, producing the goods needed for a high standard of living. This population growth translated into sales volume growth for corporations. Both were happy.
But, once an optimum population density is breached, their interests diverge. It is in the best interest of the common good to stabilize the population, avoiding an erosion of our quality of life through high unemployment and poverty. However, it is still in the interest of corporations to fuel population growth because, even though per capita consumption goes into decline, total consumption still increases. We now find ourselves in the position of having corporations and economists influencing public policy in a direction that is not in the best interest of the common good.
The U.N. ranks the U.S. with eight third world countries - India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Bangladesh, Uganda, Ethiopia and China - as accounting for fully half of the world’s population growth by 2050. It’s absolutely imperative that our population be stabilized, and that’s impossible without dramatically reining in immigration, both legal and illegal.
If you’re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, I invite you to visit my web site at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com where you can read the preface, join in my blog discussion and, of course, purchase the book if you like. (It’s also available at Amazon.com.)
Please forgive the somewhat spammish nature of the previous paragraph. I just don’t know how else to inject this new perspective into the immigration debate without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.
Pete Murphy
“my theory is that, as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption of products begins to decline out of the need to conserve space. People who live in crowded conditions simply don’t have enough space to use and store many products.”
Absolutely! I live in a big city apartment and one of the first considerations whenever I buy something is how COMPACT is it? I put off buying a computer for a long time, because I didn’t have anywhere to put one of those big dust-catchers; finally I settled for a mini laptop. I don’t want any more stuff because I don’t have any more space for anything! And this isn’t the worst it can be. I have read that the crowding in Tokyo or Hong Kong would make New York City look like the wide open Texas prairie. (I’ll bet even Texas is getting crowded!) There comes a limit to how much “stuff” you can accumulate. After that, it becomes a burden. Ive often wondered why manufacturers don’t design their products to be more space-efficient and to store compactly. As this world gets more and more crowded, this is going to become an important consideration everywhere.
Ive often wondered why manufacturers don’t design their products to be more space-efficient and to store compactly. As this world gets more and more crowded, this is going to become an important consideration everywhere.
And who really needs a television, a radio, a phone in every room?
