International Journal of Anarchism

ifa-Solidaritet - folkebladet - © ISSN 0800-0220 no 1 (34) editor H. Fagerhus

Bulletin of the Anarchist International

Resolution from the International Anarchist Congress 2004

The 10th anniversary of the anarchist velvet revolution in Norway 1994-2004, and beyond.

A crude translation from English to Spanish or French etc. may be done at URL: http://www.freetranslation.com/ or http://www.worldlingo.com/wl/Translate

This is the report from the International Anarchist Congress, i.e. the 8th Anarchist Biennial, arranged by the Anarchist International on Internet.

Preface: The best political road ahead is probably in general towards real democracy, i.e. anarchy, and more of it. Say, in Norway the degree of real democracy has increased since the revolutionary change in 1994. After the velvet revolutionary change in 1994-95, that started with the No to EU-referendum 28.11.1994 which was followed by the end of the marxist social-democratical matriarchy and establishment of social-individualistical ANARCHY in Norway, the degree of anarchy in the Norwegian society was about 53% and it is now about 54%. That is the influence from the people seen all in all on the production and distribution system is now about 54%, and the influence from the tendencies towards authority are ca 100% - ca 54% = ca 46%. 28.11.2004 marks the occasion of ten years since the beginning of the anarchist velvet revolutionary change in Norway.

I. The prehistory and the anarchist velvet revolution in Norway 1994

II. the ten years with the social-individualistical anarchist economical-political system, and

III. the possible future of the Norwegian anarchist system,

- were the main points on the agenda at the International Anarchist Congress, i.e. the 8th Anarchist Biennial, arranged by the Anarchist International via the NAC, the Northern sections of AI/IFA & FICEDL 27-28.11.2004, coordinated by the Nordic IFA-secretariate in Oslo, on Internet. (Updated)


Click on the chapter numbers/letters to go directly to the item you wish. Click "back" on your web-browser menu to get back here








The modern history of Norway as an independent country, started with the breakaway revolution from the Union with Sweden, triggered by the 07.06.1905 declaration. This revolution was based on a referendum. Of 435 376 persons who had the right to vote, 85,4 % participated, and only 184 voted for the Union. A civil war was avoided because Norway was well armed, and the Swedish workers threatened with a revolutionary general strike, if the liberation was not accomplished.Several hundred years ago Norway was also an independent land. A long time ago a democratic tendency with municipal and regional tings, i.e. some kind of more or less direct democratic councils, where all free men or delegates met and decided regulations and regulatory means, made judging and sometimes even deciding ways to elect as well as sack a king, may be mentioned. Thus, an egalitarian as well as libertarian tendency and culture have a long historical tradition in Norway.

However in the meantime, before 1905, Norway was de facto a vassal state, ruled from Sweden, Denmark or Germany (Hansa). Henrik Wergeland (1808-45) was influenced by the somewhat social individualist libertarian tendencies of those days, writing a.o.t.: "Hør mig, Despot! Jeg være vil din Pestilents mens jeg er til! Om Nordamerikaneren: Gid rastløse Flid vi af Yankeen lærte! Men ei vil vi have en Dollar til Hjerte. Om Franskmanden. Vi ham taknemmelig maa hylde. Vor Frihed vi Revolutionen skylde." (Source: HENRIK WERGELAND - SAMLEDE SKRIFTER IV. AVHANDLINGER, OPPLYSNINGSSKRIFTER 7. BIND: 1844 - 1845, p.235, 255 and 256). Thus he declared to be a life long plague against tyranny, would not have a US $ as a heart, and had a sound freedom and revolution on the agenda, inspirited by the French people. He also had ideas similar to Pjotr Kropotkin and later Ragnar Frisch, that a combination of practical work, say gardening, and theoretical work, was an optimal basis for human development. By the way, Henrik Wergeland was a lawful person using a colorful language, and that he would act as a 'plague to authority' must of course not be interpreted literary, as a defence for biological weapons, spreading illnesses, or something like that.

In 1850 the 22 year old Henrik Ibsen (1828-1906) used the play "Catilina" (1850) to promote the anarchist ideal about fairness and freedom without violence, investigated in a societal context, universally and individually, probably inspirated by P. J. Proudhon, according to Max Nettlau and Erik M. Christensen. Works of Proudhon were published in the journal of the early workers' movement, "Thranittene", with Marcus Thrane in the forefront, a man that in 1851declared that P. J. Proudhon was vor tids uden tvivl største sjeni, the "with no doubt greatest genius of our time", although Thrane probably did not understood the genius too well, interpreted it a bit wrong, and partly rejected anarchism. The young Ibsen participated actively in this movement.When later asked why he wrote about Catilina (a nobleman and pretor), Ibsen replied that his, i.e. not the historical, Catilina, was an anarchist. The "Non-State-Theory" (Ikke-stats-teori) of Henrik Ibsen, called so by himself in one of his private letters, "min fortræffelige stats-teori - eller rettere ikke-stats-teori!" (quoted from Ibsens's letter to Georg Brandes 18.05.1871, after the fall of the Paris Commune), and revealed in several letters many of them later published in a book called "Breve" (1904), is also a contribution to libertarian ideas, in addition to anarchist elements in his plays and poems. It is also quite clear from the available documents known today, that Ibsen's "Non-State Theory" seen all in all was mainly libertarian individualistic, and not liberalistic, and thus Ibsen must be accounted for as a significant individualist anarchist, at least in a part of his grown up life, if not all. Although Henrik Ibsen did not explicitely called himself an anarchist publicly, his "Non-State-Theory" etc. clearly show he was within the libertarian tradition, i.e. as an individualist anarchist. The libertarian ideas of Henrik Ibsen was thus not close to the ideal form of anarchism, 90%-100% degree of anarchy, but to the right in the sector of individualist anarchism on the economic-political map.

In 1886 Arne Garborg was the first person in Norway who publicly expressed his anarchist point of view in the poem "Anarchist song", published in "Fedraheimen", i.e. "Our Fathers' Home", (according to Jack Wilson in 1968). Arne Garborg, Rasmus Steinsvik and Ivar Mortenson Egnund declared themselves as anarchists in 1887, according to "Fedraheimen", volum 1890, p. 50. "Fedraheimen" got the subtitle "Anarkist-Kommunistisk Organ", and thus became the first Norwegian publicly declared anarchist organ. The last issue of "Fedraheimen" was published in 1991. Mortenson Egnund in 1897-98 published "Fridom, tidsskrift for sjølstyre og sjølvhjelp" (Freedom, journal of autonomy and self-aid). In 1898 Arne Garborg wrote an article "Henrik Ibsen, tuktemeister og byggmeister" stating that Ibsen was an anarchist, and explaining what kind of anarchist he was. Ibsen did not raise objections to this. But he expressed it was wrong to interprete too much politics into his poems and plays, and rejected to be a member of the feminist movement. Thus, following Ibsen himself, we should probably concentrate mostly on his letters and other material, not the plays and poems, when investigating Ibsen's anarchism. Garborg's article about Henrik Ibsen was later printed in the "For Folkeoplysning - Tidsskrift for boksamlinger og folkeakademier", i.e. "For enlightenment of the people - Journal for public libraries and people-academies" - at Ibsen's 100 years anniversary in 1928, and thus made Ibsen's anarchism well known throughout the country at that time.

In 1891-92 a few Germans, i.e. Theodor Martner, Sigmund Simons and Wilhelm Zöllner, made anarchist propaganda in Christiania (Oslo) and established the anarchist-communistic group "Libertas"(Anarkistisk-Communistisk Gruppe "Libertas"). The Norwegians Christopher Hansteen, Axel Bech, Lorentz Nybø, Petter Nilsen, Rasmus Steinsvik, Sigwald Lian, and Ole O. Lian also joined this group. "Libertas" was the first publicly declared anarchist group in Norway. Hansteen was editor of the paper "Anarkisten". Hans Jæger and Henrik Ibsen may also be accounted for as anarchists, especially Ibsen, although in some of their works perhaps being more spokesmen for collectivism and individualism, respectively. Say, Max Nettlau mentions Ibsen for "strong individualism" and Folkebladet/IJ@'s brief history of Anarchism in Norway, 1. edition, mentions a clear marxist type dialectical tendency in some of Jæger's works, i.e. not anarchist and strongly authoritarian.

Hans Jæger's position as the strong leader of "Kristianiabohemen", a group with a policy that was not anarchist at all, - earlier - confirms his authoritarian tendency ("Fra Kristiania-Bohêmen" by Hans Jæger, 1985). Kristianiabohemen was an authoritarian socialist group, marxist on the economic-political map. The policy was strongly against the farmers and against the anarchist Henrik Ibsen. The group had about 20-30 members at its peak around 1885. Hans Jæger was not an anarchist at that time. He first read about anarchism in France in 1892, and later worked for the social-democratic marxist paper "Social-demokraten" from 1898. It was first later he became more of an anarchist, and issued "Anarkiets Bibel" in 1906.

Another referendum in 1905 was about the question of republic. 439 716 persons had the right to vote, 75,3 % participated, and 78,9 % voted for a powerless king, instead of , perhaps, a powerful president. Thus, the symbolic king of Norway was introduced by a referendum. "Libertas" made an active anarchist campaign both outside and within the new "sosialistiske ungdomslag", socialist youth federations, that started about 1900. In 1903 some of them associated to a national confederation. This youth confederation was however a weak organization, and splitted in three in 1909, according to Arbeidernes Leksikon, p. 900. Hansteen died in 1906 and Sigwald Lian in 1909, at that time businessmanager of the organ of the youth confederation. He contributed to the publishing of anarchist material until he died. The other members continued the work for anarchism and federalism and against centralism and marxism, and Axel Bech in 1925 wrote an article about Hansteen in "Alarm", the syndicalist paper. Also Hans Jæger and Swedish libertarian immigrants and refugees made anarchist information. Jæger's 489 pages work "Anarkiets Bibel" was as mentioned published in 1906, but the book had both anarchist, and strong marxist type dialectical tendencies, and thus it neither became a "bible" on anarchism nor for anarchists. Jæger died in 1910.

Ole O. Lian in 1903 became the chairman of "Norsk Centralforening for Boktrykkere", and later chairman of Landsorganisasjonen, LO, at that time called Arbeidernes Faglige Landsorganisasjon, (AFL, established 1899) the national confederation of the workers, i.e. in 1906-1925. LO was at that time strongly federalist syndicalistic influenced, based on labor federations with great autonomy, i.e. "fagforeningene.... hvis tradisjoner var sterkt syndikalisisk preget, med stor selvstendighet for de enkelte avdelinger", according to Arbeidernes Leksikon p. 907 (abridged edition by PAX , the publishing house of the Norwegian Socialist Left Party, SV, 1977). Lian tried to achieve a broad based workers movement and a moderate federalist approach, and to avoid centralist, marxist, tendencies as well as other authoritarian tendencies, say, he was against "ministersocialism". Lian's faction also used negotiations and diplomacy within the movement to achieve their aims. In this way his federalist faction, among other things, contributed to a) integrate the half syndicalist "Fagopposisjonen av 1911" in the Labor Party, with the ideologically somewhat diffuse, but quite revolutionary "dynamite man", "dynamitt i borehullene" - Martin Tranmæl, in front, in a relatively moderate federalist direction.

"Fagopposisjonen" had several tendencies, some stood close to syndicalism, others were followers of Kautsky, some were Leninists, and others ideologically diffuse or mixed, just representing a more radical new generation. First Lian's faction worked against Tranmæl's, but ca 1918, when Tranmæls faction was getting the majority in the Labor Party, Lian's used negotiations with "Fagopposisjonen" in co-operation with LO, to try to avoid the worst authoritarian tendencies and keep the movement together, and b) to get the Labor Party out of "Komintern", the 3rd International ruled from Moscow, as soon as possible after a majority of the party had decided to join this international in 1919. This aim was achieved when the Labor Party left "Komintern" in 1923, and the communists left the Labor Party and made their own party, NKP.

Martin T. in this context made the so called "Tranmælsvingen", a political swing from semi-libertarian, towards more authoritarian marxism closer to Leninism, and then somewhat back again, to be about 1/3 syndicalist and a collectivist. It is later revealed that Martin Tranmæl and Trygve Lie, later justice councillor in a Labor Party state council, were on the payroll of the Moscow Communists in 1920, receiving 10 000 and 7000 NOK respectively. It is possible this could have influenced Lie's decision to deport Leon Trotsky from Norway in 1936. "Interessant er det at Moskva begynte å pumpe penger inn i Norge allerede i 1920. Det året mottok Martin Tranmæl 10000 kroner - en anselig sum den gang. Trygve Lie mottok 7000 kroner. Man kan spekulere på om redselen for bli avslørt kan ha styrt Trygve Lie da han i 1936 i egenskap av norsk justisminister utviste Leo Trotskij fra Norge. Dette gjorde det lettere for Stalin å likvidere Trotskij i det fjerne Mexico. Det kostet mindre oppmerksomhet enn hva det ville gjort i Norge. Russerne glemte ikke slike bidrag som de ytet Lie i 1920." (Aft.p. 17.02.2002)

The socialdemocrats had formed their own faction of the Labor Party in 1919, their own paper "Arbeiderpolitikken" in 1920, and splitted out to form their own party, NSAP, 1921, after the majority of the Labor Party decided to follow the Leninist Moscow Thesis. Ole O. Lian also worked within the Labor Party (DNA/AP), which in the early 20th century was based on collective membership of the quite autonomous syndicates of LO, and he was member of the central board 1909-18 and 1920-25. But Lian was most active in the LO, that with him as chairman turned into a major social and political force in the Norwegian society. In 1919 AFL/LO affiliated to the reorganized Amsterdam International (IFC). He also contributed to keep the LO out of the Moscow lead "Red " trade union international in 1923, after a preliminary AFL/LO representation in 1921 participated at the Red Internationals 1st Congress. There was also a discussion within LO about affiliating to the syndicalist international IAA " den Internasjonale Arbeider-Assosiasjonen" (AIT-IWA), rooted back to the 1st International and refounded late in December 1922, with a program written by the anarchist Rudolf Rocker, but this proposal did not reach a majority.

In 1909 "Norges Ungsocialistiske Forbund" was founded, a mainly anarchist and syndicalist youth socialistic federation. The syndicalist and youth socialist faction was however not only anarchistic. NUF published the paper "Storm" (1909-1912). "Storm" changed name to "Direkte aktion" (1912-18), "organ for revolutionær fagbevægelse og ungsocialismen" with a youth socialist and revolutionary trade unionist tendency, and from 1914 with revolutionary trade unionist tendency covering both the semi-syndicalist "Fagopposisjon" and syndicalist tendencies. Two main writers of "D.A." were the Swedish syndicalist Albert Jensen and Martin Tranmæl. Albert Jensen, at that time editor of "D.A.", was arrested in the autumn 1914, and deported to Sweden, but he continued to write for the paper. Albert Jensen in 1917-18 became more and more hostile to the "Soviet"-revolution in Russia, while Tranmæl and "Fagopposisjon" at that time were supporting the Leninists, and it became impossible for the relatively narrow minded Tranmæl's faction to recognize "D.A" as their organ. Probably because of a contract that stated NUF's copyright to the title, "Fagopposisjonen" left the paper, and started their own organ "Solidaritet", in 1918, and "D.A." finished publishing.

By the way, on December 14, 1911, a team of six persons including Roald Amundsen, with 16 dogs, arrived as the first people at the South Pole (90°00'S). Amundsen's success was publicly announced on March 7, 1912, when he arrived at Hobart, Australia. This event made the small, poor and newly independent country Norway known world wide via international newsmedia headlines. Amundsen was inspired by Fridtjof Nansen's crossing of Greenland in 1888, and he used Nansen's boat "Fram" ["Forward"] to reach the Antarctic continent.

The syndicalists got their own organ in 1919, when the paper "Alarm" was established. In 1913 the paper "Revolt" started, first published by NUF's local federation in Trondheim and from 1915 moved to Kristiania (Oslo) as organ for the reorganized "Norges Ungsocialistiske Forbund" . NUF had at maximum 22 local federations, i.e "lag". In 1912-16 "lokale samorganisasjoner", local co-operate syndicalist organizations, were formed, some of them rooted back to "Norsk Stenhuggerforbund" of LO, and others established directly. They affiliated to the Swedish syndicalist confederation, SAC (Sveriges Arbetares Centralorganisation). 28.12.1916 "Norsk Syndikalistisk Federation", NSF, the Norwegian syndicalist federation, was established.

At first "Direkte Aktion" published the ideas of NSF. As mentioned, in 1919 the NSF's own organ "Alarm" was established. NSF was a revolutionary syndicalist organization, with syndicalists and anarchists, anarchosyndicalists included. The syndicalist faction was however not only anarchistic. The paper of NSF, "Alarm", quoted both Karl Marx and Peter Kropotkin on the front page. Thus, from time to time there was a considerable marxist tendency in NSF. The syndicalist guru of the NSF-paper "Alarm", Albert Jensen declared in an article: "... syndikalismen, ..., er den mest marxistiske av alle de socialistiske retninger." "...syndicalism... is the most marxist of all socialist political tendencies". In the older days however Albert Jensen, probably became an anarchist, i.e. developed a political-economical tendency of a significant degree of anarchy.

The history of anarchism in Norway should also be seen in connection to the general development of anarchism and its methodology, see System theory and economic-political map. Malfred Bergseth was in 1916 member of NSF og NUF. In 1923 NSF affiliated to IAA. NSF's 4th congress in 1924 declared "Anarkismen og syndikalismen er to bevegelser som står på samme ideologiske grund ... stillingen til anarkismen forsøkes gjort så intim som mulig...", i.e. syndicalism and anarchism are two movements on the same ideological basis, and the stand vis-à-vis anarchism should be as close as possible. Although the main anarchist theorist at that time, Peter Kropotkin, already in 1913, in the book "Modern science and anarchism", had rejected marxist economics, the labor theory of value and the value added theory, and the dialectical materialism, as clearly non-scientific, NSF continued propagating marxism as well as anarchism, but the majority was probably anarchosyndicalists and anarchists. Kropotkin's valid and total rejection of marxism should have been well known to NSF, because the mentioned book was published in Swedish as "Anarkism och modern vetenskap" in 1914, and many of the members of NSF had Swedish origin, and the Norwegian federation in general had a close connection to SAC.

Many anarchists and other people worked for the prohibition of distilled spirits. In 1919 it was a referendum on distilled spirits. 1 198 522 had the right to vote, and 61,6 % voted for prohibition. In 1926 it was a referendum on continued prohibition. 1 482 724 had the right to vote, but only 44,3 % voted yes. Thus, the prohibition was finished.

In 1923 "Norges Ungsocialistiske Forbund" was reorganized and renamed "Norges Social-anarkistiske Forbund", NSAF, and thus was the first federation named anarchist, in Norway. The Anarchist Federation published "Revolt", earlier the organ of NUF, and renamed "Fritt Samfund" in 1926. In 1924 "Føderalistisk Propagandaforbund", FP, was established and worked within LO to promote anarchist ideas. Members of the Anarchist Federation were active in FP and LO. Say, Malfred Bergseth, who was chairman in the district committe of Akershus & Hedemarken agitationdistrict of NSF in 1923, later joined FP and LO. Bergseth was chairman of FP and responsible for "Fritt Samfund", the organ of the Anarchist federation in 1926. He was both anarchist and syndicalist, and chairman in "Oslo Stein-, Jord- og Sementarbeideres forening" 1936-1938, businessmanager 1927-1930, agitator and controller 1929. He became also chairman in "Norsk Bygningsarbeiderforbund", in LO. Oscar L. Ottersen was another anarchist militant in 1926. He had been editor of "Direkte Aktion" the syndicalist paper published by NUF, in 1916-18, and member of the editing group earlier.

Ottersen later became vice chairman of the typographer's federation of LO. Waldemar Nielsen was also working in LO. Nils Heggland was editor of the Anarchist Federation's paper, "Fritt Samfund" in 1927-28, and active in FP. He was accountant in FP in 1926, secretary of the Anarchist Federation in 1924, and later active in the Defence Committe for Sacco and Vanzetti, together with Fine Olsen, an anarchist feminist. In 1935 Heggland was elected to chairman of the "Gullsmedarbeiderforbundet", of LO. Also Halvdan Jønsson and Vitalis Andersen declared themselves as anarchists and worked within the LO. Several people from the Anarchist Federation were members of NSF. The "Kvinnegruppa Samhold" with feminist activists as Jenny Tangen, Laura Bredesen, Ruth Blomberg, Louise Sahlin and Sofie Eriksen, may also be mentioned. They were both anarchists and syndicalists. In 1928 the last issue of the organ of the Anarchist Federation, "Fritt Samfund" was published.

The Anarchist Federation, NSAF, was a broad based organization with several tendencies of anarchism, i.e. collectivist, communist and individualist anarchism, social anarchism included, as well as anarchosyndicalists and feminists. A part of it continued as an anarchist and anarchosyndicalist faction within NSF, others continued in LO with anarchist and libertarian federalist ideas, and some worked on individual basis. The NSF took over the publications of the Anarchist Federation, so the anarchist information still continued, without delay. The Anarchist Federation was officially not closed down, but without an organ of their own, they were less visible in the public opinion. In the 1930s the radical socialist Ragnar Frisch, that later developed to a significant libertarian socialist, proposed a Kropotkinian type "Goods-Exchange-Centrals" planned socialist economy.

A main militant and libertarian writer in the 1930-40s was Arnold Hazeland, a former member of the central board of the Labor Party (1899-1904) and later two times nominated as candidate to the Storting, that became a communist anarchist. It was hard for him to breake with the Party he had worked for so many years, but the reason was the reactionary tendency towards state-totalitarian direction. He worked as a judge at the Norwegian supreme court, translated anarchist books and wrote articles. Among other things, several translations of Kropotkin's and Bakunin's works and Nestor Machno's book about the revolution in Ukraina 1917-18, with an interesting 34 pages introduction by Hazeland, published by "Fri Socialismes " Forlag, Oslo 1933, may be mentioned.

He also wrote news articles from anarchist point of view about the Spanish revolution and civil war 1936-39 in "Alarm". The NSF and the anarchists in general supported the CNT-FAI's militsia's armed struggle against the fascism in Spain, and they warned about the coming war in Norway several times, but talked for deaf ears. The mainly marxist Labor Party stuck to the "broken gun" pacifist policy, and thus made the country open for the nazi occupation in 1940. Also a marxistical faction of NSF had a pacifist tendency. The main stream anarchists point of view was however similar to Kropotkin and the "Manifesto of the 16", related to the 1st WW.

In 1927 DNA/AP and the Socialdemocrats formed "Det forenede norske arbeiderparti", the United Labor Party, which indicated a movement to the right, and this continued over the following years towards a traditional main streem marxian social democrat party, renamed Arbeiderpartiet, AP, that took control over the LO, and gradually, over time, the federalist, anarchist and syndicalist tendency in the national confederation of the workers were reduced. The United Labor Party became the largest party at the Stortings election in 1927, and PM Hornsrud formed the first Norwegian social democrat state council in 1928. This "ministersocialism" that Ole O. Lian in his time fought strongly against, however only lasted three weeks. In the next Stortings election, 1930, the labor parties got relatively few votes, and a light brown populist "Bondeparti", quite reactionary government, took the power.

Violent class struggle, especially a battle in 1931 called "Menstadslaget", between the workers and state-police & military forces initiated by Vidkun Quisling, was on the agenda. Several worker militants were arrested and later convicted to prison for a long time. The "hard 30s" with violence, poverty and economic depression were the realities of life. In the next Stortings election, 1933, the Labor Party, promoting a "krise program", was among the winners, and in 1935 formed the second socialdemocrat state council with Nygårdsvold up front. An impotent demand management, and the pacifist policy, made probably more damage than good to the Norwegian system seen all in all, and they mainly didn't manage to change the capitalist system to a socialist either, before the war.

The economy improved a bit, but that was not because of sound economical policy from the Labor Party, but mainly due to an export boost to the German war machinery, that the government rather should have boycotted. The marxian socialdemocrat government also joined the pacifist "non-intervention" policy vis-à-vis Spain during the civil war, and going to Spain to support the "Folkefront" (People's front), it's State Council, where the anarchists participated, and join their militsia or the other republican forces, was decided criminal, and punished. Several volunteers from Norway and the rest of Scandinavia, syndicalists and anarchists included, went ahead to fight in Spain, despite of this prohibition. The marxist dialectical Janusface of the socialdemocratic regime was shown when Labor Party's Martin Tranmæl joined the celebration of the Norwegian heros, when the lot of the surviving returned to Oslo 26th November 1938, and called them "det ypperste uttrykk for internasjonal solidaritet som er skapt i vår tid", i.e. "the greatest expression of international solidarity created in our time". In practice most of them were abandoned from work and fined.

So much for the Labor Party and their government's solidarity! Despite of all this socialdemocratic treason a couple of hundred foreign Peoples' Front veterans from the Spanish civil war participated at the battles around Narvik in the North of Norway in the second world war. That's solidarity! The movements, both of the anarchists and syndicalists, however slowly declined in members and activity, as well as new recruiting. In 1920 NSF had 47 local federations, in 1937 ca 20. The weekly syndicalist paper "Alarm" lost subscribers, and in the middle of the 1930s became a fortnightly paper. Financial problems were a main obstacle for publishing and other activities. The Anarchist Federation had asked NSF for money, but didn't get any, and NSF asked the Swedish SAC, and got money support several times. The international blows against the libertarian movement in general, say, the execution and justice murder on Sacco and Vanzetti in USA august 23rd 1927, despite large protests world wide, and the fascists' victory in Spain April 1st 1939, also contributed in a negative way, although not breaking the spirit of the anarchist militants.


The successful revolution of 1905 indicated more autonomy, i.e. less statism.

However, it took 89 years before the system, after nazism 1940-45 with German and Quisling NS rule, and later many years characterized by marxist state socialism, in 1994 became anarchist.

The Labor Party, AP, in 1945 mainly socialdemocrat, reformist and very state-socialist, with a close to stalinist internal organization, took power, with the patriarch "Landsfaderen" Einar Gerhardsen in front. The old revolutionary Martin Tranmæl's faction was "put in the closet", and LO was mostly directly run from the top by AP. A marxist statesocialist planned economy was introduced by AP taking over the Quisling regimes national socialist centralized state institutions, say, the Price-department/Price police, the nazi-economists with Odd Aukrust in front at the Central Bureau of Statistics, SSB, quickly turned into social democrats, the Finance-department (Treasury) turned into something like a stalinist "Gosplan" office, "five/four" years economical plans set at work, stateowned "corner stone" enterprises were introduced, as well as heavy regulations and rationing in most of the economy. People were poor, and many thousand lived in tents. A massive state-socialist propaganda was introduced, among other things via the state controlled and owned monopoly NRK public broadcasting. Einar Gerhardsen was worshipped quite similar to Stalin, and the inevitable major faults of the centrally planned economy were mostly put under the carpet.

The rich were still rich, several of them "brakke-baroner", i.e. war plutarchs, and although the official figures told about relative income equality, there were very little to share because of the low productivity state-planned economy, and an unofficial "under the table" quasimarket economy developed, and contributed to economical differences not accounted for in the official statistics. But all in all it was in general significant more income equality and solidarity than before the war, and a relatively socialist system in an international perspective. However the system was clearly marxist, and not libertarian socialism. A marxist secret service ochlarchy, with media manipulations and control, as well as a Labor Party "nomenklatura", "partibok-kameraderi", soon developed and radicals from communist and left socialists to syndicalists and anarchists were having a hard time.

There was a limited kind of press freedom, wide for the liberalistic and the socialdemocrate statist propaganda, and even the nazi-press were left in peace, but socialists, anarchists included, opposed to the establishment, had a hard time.The secret police and their local police associates had a hand on the media in general. Say, the Culture Syndicate was censored by police command over a liberal local newspaper in the later part of the 1960s, the editor of the paper, embarrased, as an excuse told an anarchist journalist, that afterwards was denied printing of material opposing the establishment. This was of course only a tip of the iceberg. Say, once a pacifist paper was raided by the secret police. The LO owned "Folkets Hus" was bugged by people associated to the secret police and the Labor Party. Such repression of the press and organizations continued for years and years, say, when the Anarchist Federation was established in 1977, the secretariate got letters from the post office with a message written upon it that it had been opened, and of course read, by the police. The commercial newspapers and journals contributed mostly to a liberalistic criticism, and was perhaps sometimes a danger to the significant marxist system, but rarely in a progressive way.

Some people that opposed the establishment were wrongly put in psychiatric hospitals, and ill treated; the "Juklerød"-case was only the top of the iceberg. Jews that survived holocaust and returned to Norway didn't get their possessions back, war veterans from Spain 1936-39 and the allied forces 1940-45 were ill treated, and ethnic and sexual minorities had a hard time. Thus, the system was clearly based on statism. The economy was growing a bit, first among other things, due to the American Marshall aid, later boosted by the general economic growth in the industrialised countries, but it should be quite clear for all but the worshippers of the "landsfaderen" marxist patriarch Einar Gerhardsen, that the centrally planned economy was an obstacle to optimal growth, and that the economy probably would have been much better if it had been more anarchistically managed. The RED & LIGHT-BROWN years under the marxist socialdemocrat regime, all in all were a large economical-political mistake, nothing to be proud of in the Norwegian history. Almost any other regime above 67% authoritarian deegre could have done better.

There were for short periods center-liberal governments, but they didn't manage to change the main tendency of the system, however contributed sometimes to an autonomy/right tendency. However the system seen all in all moved slowly upwards and to the right on the economical-political map, with several small jibes in different directions. The general tendency was that the state socialist planned economy over time was reduced.

In 1940 "Alarm" had been closed down by the nazis. The editor Carl O. Tangen was put in the prisoncamp "Grini" by the Quisling regime. In 1945 "Alarm" was refounded as "Solidarity", first as a monthly paper, then bi-monthly, and then irregular. Also NSF continued. A memorial note in "Solidarity" about Arnold Hazeland (1859-1945) who died in November 1945 at the age of 86, told he was promoting anarchist ideas to the last breath: "Han trodde fullt og fast at diktaturperioden og herosdyrkelsen i arbeiderbevegelsen bare er av forbigående art, og at folket om en tid vil våkne og begynne å tenke med hjernen igjen." The NSF declined further, however after 1945 it was a less marxist and more anarchist organization. A letter from the Swedish Anarchist Propaganda Federation, APF, the publisher of "Brand", and a note declaring strong connection to Kropotkin, were published soon after the war. The Italian anarchist Umberto Marzocchi was also interviewed in "Solidaritet.

In 1951 "Solidaritet" took a break, but the paper in 1957 was reorganized to "Syndikalistisk organ for Skandinavia, tilsluttet Internasjonal Arbeider-Assosiasjon", i.e. the Scandinavian syndicalist paper associated to IAA/AIT/IWA. This was a broad based organ for revolutionary socialists, syndicalists and anarchists in Scandinavia. SAC left the syndicalist international IAA/AIT/IWA in 1959/60, after years with disagreements. Although this was not unexpected, and a writer in "Solidaritet" expressed that the paper was "En tidning man måste slå vakt om", i.e. a paper to stand by and guard; it was a short lived guard, because the last issue of "Solidaritet" came the same year, i.e. "Solidaritet" stopped publishing in 1960. A handfull of syndicalists, anarchists and anarchosyndicalists continued the organizational work to 1965, but then NSF was practically finished. The marxist and liberalistic media at that time were very hostile against libertarian ideas, wrongly and at large using anarchy, anarchist and anarchism as words for chaos, lawlessness and terrorism, and neglecting real anarchism almost totally.

The radical socialist Ragnar Frisch, that in the 1930s proposed a Kropotkinian type "Goods-Exchange-Centrals" planned socialist economy, and in 1942 published a memo on the ecocirc accounting system, featuring -- organization =.the system's costs in addition to labor and capital cost, after the war (he was in jail about two years during the war, arrested by the nazis) started to develop into a significant libertarian socialist. He indicated publicly a "third alternative" social-individualist type anarchism in 1948 in the article "Why objectivity" in Arbeiderbladet. presenting a strong argumentation in favour of applying objectivity and logic in "the life and death fight for the third alternative: To drag the ordinary citizen into taking responsibilty, not only the chief of Secret Service, or the rich one, or the scholar, or the super intellectual. This alternative raises a gigantic problem, of preserving, rejuvenating and creating organs which can really reveal the welfare interests of different interests of the different interest groups and balance them carefully." In Frisch's work on "Economic Democracy", Bertrand Russell, another libertarian thinker within the third alternative tradition, is mentioned. Frisch is however not referring directly to Russell's "Roads to Freedom: Socialism, Anarchism, Syndicalism" (1918-19) and other books with a libertarian tendency in this work.

Ragnar Frisch evolves his libertarian third alternative; an economical and political system with the individual's freedom and moral and ethical dignity in the center, i.e. autonomy combined with a rational, planned socialism -- that is not utopian -- in several works; The unenlightened plutarchy, Integrity and democracy, What is democracy?, Economic democracy, The three stages, In the spirit of Henrik Wergeland, The upper class mentality is alive, Socially orientated or high finance orientated economic planning? Planned economy in the community, Hour of destiny, Gloomy May Day - or hope? etc. Most of Ragnar Frisch's works may be seen as a general framework related more or less to the third alternative of economical political systems, i.e. with neither economical plutarchy nor political statism, - and modelling and mapping of different political economical systems in general. Ragnar Frisch's collected works on political econonomy broadly defined are the work of a giant, accounting for several thousand pages, along the lines of Pjotr Kropotkin's methodology of libertarian research, i.e. similar to that of the modern natural sciences, see "Modern Science and Anarchism" (1903-13). Frisch's famous note from 1961 on EEC/EU as "Det uopplyste pengevelde", "The Unenlightened Plutarchy", and also discussing the third alternative, may especially be mentioned as an important article. Similar to Kropotkin, Frisch also recommended a combination of mental and physical work, for optimal human development.

Early in the 1960s Helge Kongshaug had tried to establish a syndicalist youth federation, but it didn't work out. In the latest part of the 1960s the Culture Syndicate was established. This syndicate developed to the interim group for the reorganizaton of the Anarchist Federation. Several short lived groups and federations with more or less libertarian policy were established. Folkebladet was founded in 1971. At first it had both anarchist and other political tendencies, however later, in 1997, it became the organ of the Anarchist Federation.(And it is still going strong, as International Journal of Anarchism, since 1984). The author and teacher Jens Bjørneboe (1920-1976) may be mentioned among the anarchists in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Bjørneboe is called the most important Norwegian poetical writer after Henrik Ibsen. Politically Bjørneboe was early influenced by liberalism and the syndicalist populism and the quasiscientific "anthroposophy" of Rudolf Steiner. Later he turned towards bohemian marxism. At the age of 46 years, he declared to be an anarchist. How long this lasted is an open question, but he was big in the media, and although a bit rabulistic contributed to put anarchism once more on the political agenda in Norway.

However, he never contributed to something really new in anarchist theory. But he reminded that there are degrees of anarchism and anarchy, and that anarchism is scientific, based on free matter of fact criticism, scepticism, in short the hypothetical deductive method, as stated by Kropotkin, - and not dogmatics and dialectics as marxism or quasiscientific new-age ideas as the "anthroposophy" of Rudolf Steiner, i.e. anarchism is not "anarchistology" or "anarchosophy" to use the terms of IIFOR. Thus, Bjørneboe probably rejected the marxism and anthroposophy that he earlier was believing in, when he understood that anarchism was scientific, as he stated in 1971, although still using such ideas metaphorically in his novels and plays. He also expressed that anarchism probably was going to be the most vital political tendency from now on.(See "Politi og Anarki/Police and Anarchy", PAX, Oslo 1972, p. 46, and "Bjørneboes Anarkisme/ Bjørnboe's Anarchism", fb/IJ@ no 1 1981, p. 1-2, quoting "Anarkismen som fremtid/Anarchism as Future" (1969) and "Anarkismen... i dag/Anarchism…Today?", earlier published by PAX).

The first short essay, "Anarchism as Future" (1969) gives a picture of Bjørneboe's conception of anarchism and acknowledges the influence of Kropotkin on his thinking. The second, longer essay entitled "Anarchism…Today?" (1971) develops the ideas of the earlier essay, particularly by setting anarchism in contrast to both capitalism and Marxist-Leninist communism. Although a part of it is outdated because he a bit naive misunderstood, and underestimated the real oclarchical and terroristical content of Maoism, the rest of the essay still stands as a progressive polemic. The followers of Rudolf Steiner have not surprisingly exaggerated his connection to the anthroposophy in his later days in a quite quasiscientific way, see say the chapter on "anarchism" in Inge S. Kristiansen's book Jens Bjørneboe og Antroposofien (Jens Bjørneboe and Anthroposophy). There are not so much clear cut anarchism in his poetical writings, the plays, novels and poems as many fans of Bjørneboe think, especially not before he declared himself an anarchist and later understood it was scientific. Even afterwards, Bjørneboe's anarchism is not always easy to identify in his stories, mainly due to chaotic fantasies or retrospective elements related to the liberal, populist and marxist days. His main writings on anarchism are quoted in the 12 pages report called "Bjørneboes anarkisme/Bjørneboe's Anarchism" published by Folkebladet/ANORG FORLAG (1981).

In 1972 it was a referendum about Norwegian membership to the EEC - EF . 2 645 349 had the right to vote, 79,2 % participated and 53,3 % voted no. A vast majority among the anarchists voted no.

The anarchist movement - the trendsetter in the fight for more socialism and autonomy, joined forces and founded the Anarchist Federation of Norway, - Anarkistføderasjonen i Norge - Anarkistenes Organisasjon, in September 1977. Among the early affiliates were Arnold Hazeland Jr., at that time a leader at the "Fri Rettshjelp" (free legal action support), also a lawyer as his grandfather, the prominent high court judge and probably the most famous anarchist in Norwau until 1945 Arnold Hazeland; a young relative of Christopher Hansteen, relatives of people related to Rasmus Steinsvik, old anarchosyndicalists, and others, i.e. industrial workers, farmers, teachers, cultural workers, lawyers, artists, journalists, students, all kinds of people. The Anarchist Federation formed a junction vis-à-vis the domestic megatrend to the right and upwards on the economical political map in the late nineteen eighties and early nineties, i.e. in the fight for more autonomy and freedom, but against plutarchist (capitalist) tendencies. A fight for less rank and income differences, more efficiency and fairness, and against political/administrative and economical bureaucracy broadly defined, in private and public sector, within the country and internationally.

In 1979 The Anarchist Federation affiliated to the Anarchist International, IFA, The Anarchist Black Cross, ABC; and the Community Action Network, CAN. In 1982 the first IFA Congress in the North was arranged in Oslo by AFIN, constituting the different other Northern IFA-sections, i.e. Swedish, Danish, Finnish, etc. and confirming the Internationals of the different anarchist currents within the framework of the general Anarchist International, i.e. eco-anarchist, anarcho-feminist, -syndicalist, individualist, collectivist, as well as the Internationals of commune/communist Anarchism and social individualist Anarchism, including socialist, federalist and mutualist anarchism; and the libertarian international of teetotallers. Also the International Anarchist Tribunal, IAT, with the Anarchist Arbitration Court, say, suggested by Pjotr Kropotkin already in 1910, the Anarchist Press Tribunal, and other branches was founded at this congress. Several congresses and actions were arranged during the years passing by. Early in the 1980s the Anarchist International University Federation - Anarkistisk Universitetslag, was officially established, and in 1985 the International Institute for Organization Research, IIFOR, the main research institute of the anarchist movement was founded.

The IIFOR, and the research-groups of the Northern IFA-sections in general, joined the FICEDL, the libertarian research network, officially in 1987, however anarchist researchers related to NAC-IFA had also participated on earlier arrangements of the FICEDL network. A. Hompland together with other anarchists started Folkebladet/IJ@ in 1971, and this journal became later the organ of the Anarchist Federation. Since 1984 H. Fagerhus has been the editor of IJ@/Folkebladet. In 1982/83 Folkebladet became the common and main organ of the NAC, the Northern Anarchist Confederation, and in 1984, including IFA-Solidaritet etc, was established as the International Journal of Anarchism. The currents of anarchism mentioned above were also confirmed as sections of the Anarchist International in the Anarchist Manifesto, the program of the Northern sections of IFA, ISBN 82-90468-09-1, see Folkebladet No 4 (1983) and IFA-Solidaritet No 8 (1983). When the Anarchist International world wide was confirmed at the International Anarchist Congresses in 1998 and 2000, these main sections of anarchism were expanded universally.

The researcher P. Johansen said in Dagens Næringsliv (Today's Industrial Life) 08.02.2002 in a retrospective interview that "den gangen hadde Norge en regulert økonomi og nærmest en ettpartistat", i.e. "at that time Norway had a regulated economy and close to a one-party state". The country had a marxian socialdemocratic type a bit socialistical system related to the economical political map; most of the time ruled and dominated strongly by the powerful Labor Party, Arbeiderpartiet (AP), from 1945/6 first clearly authoritarian, later slowly less authoritarian until 1993/4.



Introduction and summary. Anarchy in Norway, of low degree, but > 50%, is registered since 1994/95. The revolutionary change, i.e. when Norway entered the social-individualist sector of the anarchist quadrant of the economic-political map, is i) rooted back to a domestic megatrend to the right and upwards on the economical-political map, ii) the No to EU referendum 28.11.1994, and iii) more actions, that iv) gave the marxist matriarch Gro Harlem Brundtland and her authoritarian government an economic-political uppercut, which v) stopped the ruling and turned the system into relatively anarchist administration/management. The development of the libertarian/anarchist degree in Norway related to the velvet revolution and revolutionary change in 1994/95 is estimated to the following: 11-27.11.1994 = ca 49,4% (state); 28-29.11.1994 = ca 51% (anarchy); 01.03.1995 = ca 52%; 01.06.1995 = ca 53%; 01.10.1995 = ca 53%, a stabilized anarchy of low degree. The term "ca" means about. 28.11.1994 is celebrated as the Day of the Anarchist Revolution in Norway, by libertarians.

The history of the Anarchist Revolution. 28.11.1994 the marxist PM & Co's effort to break the domestic megatrend towards anarchy, by establishing supra-national bureaucracy, was crushed by the EU-referendum. 3 266 064 had the right to vote, 89,0 % participated and 52,2 % voted no. The supra-national Brussels-bureaucracy had to return, the Norwegian system made a revolutionary change, and passed the border to the anarchist quadrant on the EP map. Before the referendum the ruling system virtually and in many ways practically and mentally was "in" the European Union. The only that lacked was de facto the "keys" to the offices... The "NO!" turned the whole thing upside down... The marxist matriarch, called the "Yes to EU Queen" in the newsmedia, and ruling powerful according to this title, de facto abdicated as an arch, kept a low profile in the newsmedia, retired to significant soft central administration only, and left the system significant to anarchy rules - OK - in the following time. (There has not been a significant ruler/arch of Norway since then.)

Soon after the No-vote was known, the CNN and othe main international newsmedia reported that this was due to "Nationalistic" and "Non-internationalistic" [authoritarian, backwards] tendencies, based on disinformation from the Yes to EU government in Norway. However the Anarchist International Information Service AIIS - Anarkistenes Informasjonstjenest AIT - minutes after these newsreports faxed a message to main international newsmedia, including CNN, stating that Norway was libertarian, and [soon] anarchist. Soon after the CNN responded to the AIIS-faxes and changed the news, reporting about: "an almost perfect society", regarding the Norwegian economic-political system. Also other main international newsmedia changed their reports in a similar way. They however did not mention AIIS as a source, but they clearly responded by changing the news according to the facts from AIIS. More information about the international newsmedia's responses to AIIS-faxes, se below.

The Northern Anarchist Confederation - Anarkistenes organisasjon i Norden, expressed the following view:

At the EU referendum 28.11.1994, the Norwegian People turned their back against the main economic political course of the social democrat government. While the Norwegian EEC referendum in the early seventies gave a movement to the left on the economic political map, the megatrend of the late eighties and early nineties was a movement to the right and upwards. The EU referendum indicated a further jump in this direction, and thus the economic political system in Norway made a revolutionary change, and passed the border between the marxist social democrat sector and the anarchist sector of social individualism. This of course is a major social event in the economic political world history.

A long jump further rightwards may result in a social liberal system, and a reverse tendency may give a retardation to marxist social democracy, but this is not the case at the moment.Although the system by now is significantly anarchist, i.e. within the Quadrant of Anarchism on the economic political map, it is somewhat far from the anarchist ideal on the top of the map. Thus, it is plenty of room for improvement from anarchist perspective, and by no means time for a break in the fight against authoritarian tendencies. The revolution must be fought permanent, in the daily life, to sustain and develop further. However, as long as a) Norway stays out of EU, b) populist and nationalist tendencies are put at place, and c) the left and right tendencies outbalance each other reasonable as by now, Norway will probably stay anarchist, and be a lighthouse for EU and the rest of the world. Let's work together, on co-operative or individual basis, in media, political and economic organizations, to support the Anarchy of Norway and anarchist tendencies all over the world.

After the revolutionary change, the coordinates of the Norwegian social system are ca 55% socialism and ca 52% autonomy on the Economic-political map. Thus, the degree of anarchy is about 53%, and the system is significant anarchist. And thus, the bureaucratic tendency broadly defined, i.e. the tendencies towards economical and political/administrative hierarchy, - plutarchy (capitalism) and statism in different forms, oligarchy, polyarchy and ochlarchy included, - measured by the authoritarian degree, is about 47%. Although not the significant, i.e. the system is clearly more anarchist than authoritarian, it has a considerable bureaucratic tendency, an obstacle against maximal efficiency and fairness, as well as anarchist human rights & ethics and a further movement towards the anarchist ideal.

*) The stars indicate the position of the Norwegian economical-political system after the revolutionary change in 1994/95.
Read more about it at (click on:) IJA 1994-96

As mentioned, after the referendum the CNN (after a little help from the AIT/AIIS) reported: "an almost perfect society" etc, about the Norwegian economic-political system. And this was a good thing because a) the bad losers of the EU-referendum, say, the matriarch Gro Harlem Brundtland and Utenriksdepartementet, The Norwegian Foreign Department, sent out harmful authoritarian propaganda and disinformation, telling Norway was or would be a populist, nationalist, mercantilist, "nisselueland", with a bad economy, on TV etc. internationally, and thus b) the Norwegian exchange rate and prices of shares turned downwards, the interest rate went upwards, and Norway would probably be sent into an economical depression with large unemployment, if not c) Lou Dobbs at CNN and other international newsmedia had reported the truth - that the Norwegian economy was very sound, and the economical political system was sound, and indicated it would probably be more sound, and d) thus the exchange rate went upwards, the value of the shares rised again, and interest rate went down, and thus a hike in the interest rate and a depression with big unemployment were avoided.

Afterwards the Norwegian economy relatively has been one of the strongest in the world, but if Gro Harlem Brundtland and UD had managed to start a bad economical spiral downwards, as they were up to, the Norwegian economy would perhaps never recovered and be as good as it has been over the years passing by since 1994."Thanks to Lou, the editors of CNN and other international media supporting AIT and the new anarchist political economical system of Norway in the early days of the revolutionary change. Perhaps we all togheter "changed the world" slightly, slightly, slightly i.e. at least on behalf of Anarchism in Norway and the Norwegian people. It must be clear that the relevant press releases sent by telefax from AIT to CNN etc. before and soon after the EU-referendum, also of course accounted for the friendly replies from Lou Dobbs at CNN and the other international media on the air, via the influence on the economy, probably were worth billions to the Norwegian people a.o.t., in the following years", says A. Quist, the internationally well known anarchofeminist and co-writer of the Anarchofeminist Manifesto of 1982.

A brief summary of the most important information and press releases sent from the AIT/AIIS before and after the EU-referendum 1994-95, and the responding of the international newsmedia-giants, was published in IJ@/Fb No 4 (24) 1994, 1 (25) and 2 (25) 1995. NB! When reading the IJ@/Fb No 4 (24) 1994, 1 (25) and 2 (25) 1995, etc, the text should be interpreted according to the updated research front of anarchism today. Say a.o.t., the concept of the degree of anarchy has been more strictly defined, and is no longer used for systems outside the anarchist quadrant of the Economical-Political map, using instead the authoritarian degree (or the libertarian degree broadly defined, including semilibertarian degree = 100% - the authoritarian degree). The most basic mathematical ecocirc formulas related to the Economical-Political map have of course not been changed, but the words used per definition in this connection have been changed a bit to make it a bit more clear what is anarchist and what is not, i.e. semilibertarian and authoritarian. The situation during the anarchist revolutionary change was quite dramatic, especially in the days just around the referendum and the following months. All in all, the marxist matriarch Gro Harlem Brundtland and her authoritarian government got a real economic-political uppercut, that changed the system into anarchism of low degree.

IJ@/Fb No 4 (24) reported: EU-strategien ble i hovedsak lagt i 1988, og pressetaktikken på Anarkistbiennalen i Oslo 1994, det 3. kombinerte IFA-FICEDL kongress-seminaret den 2.11. Og alt har gått over forventning i forhold til planene. Det internasjonale pressekorpset som samlet seg i Oslo til folkeavstemningen, ble som ventet avspist med JA-propagandaen fra UD's Internasjonale Pressesenter på "Vestbanen" i Oslo. Pressen ante fort at propagandaen ikke stemte helt. UD's materiale samsvarte bl.a dårlig med det en kunne se med egne øyne. Pressen ønsket naturligvis noe mer troverdig - en kontrast til regjeringspropagandaen. Dermed var bordet duket for det anarkistiske alternativet, som kom med korrekt informasjon, i motsetning til Ja-regjeringens desinformasjon. Og så begynte ballen å rulle... Før folkeavstemningen i Sverige sendte vi [bl.a] en melding med overskriften "Sweden and Norway: Say no!".

Mange anarkister deltok også i den generelle NEI til EU folkebevegelsen, IJ@/Fb hadde argumentert aktivt mot EU i flere år, og man hadde kjørt frem disse argumentene i en rekke fora. Ragnar Frischs artikkel om "Det uopplyste pengevelde", med brodd mot EU, ble trykt opp igjen og sirkulerte i økonom-kretser, etc. Det var en kjempemobilisering frem til folkeavstemningen. I Sverige ble det jo ja-flertall, og i Norge nei. Den internasjonale pressen hadde imidlertid fått et helt feilaktig inntrykk av grunnen til nei-et i Norge, og dette avspeilte seg bl.a i de første nyhetssendingene på CNN, SKY og TV5. Det var da det var på tide å markere seg som et bedre alternativ til UD's Ja-propaganda. Vi sendte til hele det internasjonale nettet, men tar her bare med utgaven til CNN.To CNN: Please stop spreading disinformation about the Norwegian EU-referendum. There were no significant "Nationalistic" and "Non-internationalistic" arguments in the debate. The main argument goes like this (in academic terms): NORWAY SAYS "NO"!

1. Membership in The European Union represents probably a movement towards more [degree of] statism and capitalism, and thus towards less efficient production, less justice, and larger difference in rank and income, i.e. a movement away from anarchy [NB! this was a situation of an anarchist revolutionary change, the authoritarian tendencies of the marxian matriarchy was crushed, and the Anarchy of Norway was emerging, but was not yet quite stabile] in authoritarian direction. The feminist, environmental and intergenerational perspectives are also included in this analysis.

2. A vast majority among The Anarchists in Norway and Sweden think so, and voted NO at the referendums. 3. The Norwegian and Swedish People in general were advocated to do the same: Vote NO to membership in The European Union at the referendum! 4. In Sweden and Norway the majority of the people voted NO, but the bureaucracy and its ramifications voted yes at large. The larger and shrewder Swedish bureaucracy managed to defeat the people, but the Norwegian did not. Thus [after the anarchist revolutionary change] Norway confirmed its position as a land with relatively high degree of anarchy, and - together with Switzerland*) country - a lighthouse for the authoritarian European Union. Og det gikk ikke mange minuttene før CNN endret på reportasjene. Det ble snakket om "the almost perfect society" (= anarki) [Say, Lou Dobbs and other reporters at CNN were clearly responding to the AIT/AIIS press releases] etc, og alt pratet om nasjonalisme og nisselue ble søkk borte. Dessuten ble reportasjen utvidet betraktelig. Dette hadde også en positiv effekt på avisene i USA, og New York børsen. Kronekursen gikk opp og renten ned.

The fight for the velvet anarchist revolution was however not yet over - and it developed into a permanent revolution, it was necessary to crush repeated contrarevolutionary attacks, from the Yes to EU organizations and statist and/or capitalist tendencies in general. Say, soon after the referendum a contrarevolutionary attack from the Yes-ministers - and some private bureaucratical tendencies aiming at economical plutarchy - tried to stop foreign investment in Norway - and recommended large scale "outflagging/utflagging" for the Norwegian investors as well, and thus stab a dagger in the back of the new, emerging, anarchist system. The aim was probably to start an economical depression, and thus clear the ground for a new EU referendum and perhaps a Yes majority later on, based on a.o.t. the argument "What did we say before the referendum! The political economy in Norway will be bad, if the country doesn't become a member of the European Union". Anyway a call for a new referendum was mentioned in the newsmedia.Det ble snakket om krise i norsk næringsliv og om kapitalflukt fra Norge, samt investeringer i Sverige, og dette måtte naturligvis også motvirkes.

Dermed var det duket for en ny pressemelding [til CNN, SKY-NEWS, TV5, etc, men også til norsk presse], som også ble fulgt opp av den internasjonale pressen, og kronekursen gikk ytterligere opp og renten ned. Dermed var sannheten om Norges relativt gode økonomi festet i den internasjonale opinionen så langt: Investment in production v.s. bureaucracy: An interesting social experiment takes place in Scandinavia. Two countries, Norway and Sweden, with approximately the same type economic-political system... initially, have chosen different connection to Europe. Sweden has joined The European Union, and Norway has not. A comparative analysis so far shows the following: Sweden will invest approximately 2 billions US $ next year in net contigent to the EU-bureacracy, i.e. "for a seat in Brussel", while Norway will save about 1 billion $, which may be used for productive investments. The Swedish are discussing who's going to pay the bill. Perhaps somebody will try to put it indirectly on foreign investment etc. in Sweden, rather than pay it themselves? This payment, i.e. via more taxes, is a.o.t. just what happened later on. Investigations of the development in unemployment, median and average income, bureaucracy and system cost, and other economical indicators, indicate a relative success for the Anarchy of Norway compared to the EU-bureaucratic Sweden, also seen apart from the net benefits from the oil-industry.

The bureaucratic authoritarian rule of the marxian matriarch had kept the Norwegian political-economical system both inefficient and unfair, based on statism: "Gro Harlem Brundtland har på sin side hatt makta, og hun har visst å bruke den... historien om en politiker-gruppes kamp mot folket... Ei lekse i maktbruk." slo Nationen fast 29.11.1994, i.e. meaning something like Gro Harlem Brundtland had very much had the power and used it in a rather machiavellian way. And this was most likely a very correct observation. The anarchist revolution changed the Norwegian economical political system towards somewhat less authoritarian tendencies, the system moving also bit to the right, passing the border from the marxian social-democrat to the anarchist quadrant on the economical-political map. The grip of the statism of the marxist matriarch loosened, the degree of statism was reduced a few percent in the following time, following the megatrend towards more autonomy. The marxist matriarch stopped being a matriarch, i.e ruler, in real terms, retiring to a passive administrative role.

The message to the foreign and domestic investors were: At the moment it seems like Norway is the most interesting for domestic and foreign investment. Better to invest in a stabil anarchy compared to a growing bureaucratic chaos. Ja-siden la jo ikke inn årene av den grunn, og hver gang det har toppet seg, har vi stått på... og vi har gode relasjoner til f.eks CNN og SKY-NEWS, som et pålitelig alternativt pressebyrå... And both foreign and domestic realinvestments in Norway continued in a reasonable way, compared to Sweden and the European Union in general.

15.12.1994 the contrarevolutionary tendencies against the new established Anarchy, the bad losers call for a new referendum and trying to sabotage the people's clear No majority -- were halted somewhat for a while when the editor Kåre Valebrokk of the industrial-paper Dagens Næringsliv, in a one page commercial in Aftenposten, the largest non-tabloid Norwegian newspaper, a) with a picture of the internationally well known Norwegian anarchist and play-writer Henrik Ibsen declaring his famous word of wisdom "Bedst var det, kan hænde, det gik, som det gik...", and b) himself adding a.o.t. "Hva var det vi mistet, hva var det vi fikk... Det er nye tider nå.", indicating it was after all best that the result at the referendum was No to the European Union, and not Yes, and that an anarchist economical-political system was established. The AIT/AIIS press release titled "Kåre vs Gro", published 23.12.2002 reported a.o.t. about this, and also

a) that the PM Gro Harlem Brundtland had no credibility after telling lies for open TV-screen about the LO's (workers' union) statement against the EU in the main EU-debate program at the NRK-TV, the Norwegian public broadcasting, just before the referendum, Brundtland saying wrongly the LO was for the European Union, and that

b) it was generally not a good thing for a prime minister to loose self control and telling lies in public, at critical situations, - as she did, however not only this time, but several times mentioned in the newsmedia.

The fight against contrarevolutionary tendencies had to continue, and still goes on.... The debates, reflecting the peoples perspective via the public room, about the European Union and Norwegian politics for the 21st century in general, arranged by Folkebladet - at www.anarchy.no, clearly show that the fight against authoritarian and non-anarchist tendencies is still very much on the agenda in Norway.

22.05.1995 dokumenterte Dagens Næringsliv over en dobbeltside "hvordan ja-sidens dommedagsprofetier er gjort til skamme": "Alt har gått bedre i norsk økonomi siden Norge sa nei til EU 28. november i fjor. Renten har falt, veksten har økt, budsjettunderskuddet er forduftet og investeringene skyter i været". DN reported about major improvements in the economy 22.05.1995.

The connection between AIT/AIIS and CNN in those years (1994-95) was officially confirmed in a letter from a CNN/Turner official indicating a.o.t. the information from AIT/AIIS was interesting and intelligent. As this is perhaps a political document of some interest we will describe it a bit more. The envelope has the Turner logo and the sender organization's name is "Turner Broadcasting International Limited", addressed to S. Olsen, Anarkistenes Informasjonstjeneste, c/o F.B. P.B. 4777 Sofienberg N - 0506 Oslo, Norway. The letter, dated 7 March 1995, says a.o.t. the following: "Dear S. Olsen, Thank you very much for comments on the network's programming. We appreciate your feedback... We [however] do not have the capacity to reply to each of your faxes in turn. They are very informative but also quite substantial!... Thank you for your cooperation. With best whises, Dale Langley - Press Officer. CNN INTERNATIONAL," i.e. at the CNN's London office, UK. "Well, 'plenty all right - too much no good' as one of the AI councillors often says, - anyway the AIIS/AI spread the telefaxes on different offices of CNN and other newsmedia to be more cooperative. The main point is that CNN and other newsmedia responded to several of the AIIS/AI faxes in their news.

As mentioned, soon after the No-vote was known, the CNN and othe main international newsmedia reported that this was due to "Nationalistic" and "Non-internationalistic" [authoritarian, backwards] tendencies, based on disinformation from the Yes to EU government in Norway. However the Anarchist International Information Service AIIS - Anarkistenes Informasjonstjenest AIT - minutes after these newsreports faxed a message to main international newsmedia, including CNN, stating that Norway was libertarian, and [soon] anarchist. Soon after the CNN responded to the AIIS-faxes and changed the news, reporting about: "an almost perfect society", regarding the Norwegian economic-political system. Also other main international newsmedia changed their reports in a similar way. They however did not mention AIIS as a source, but they clearly responded by changing the news according to the facts from AIIS. In the next weeks and months the AIIS sent several faxes clearing up disinformation from the Yes-to EU government, which international newsmedia, including CNN, responded to in a similar way. The letter from CNN confirms that the CNN responded in this way to some, but not all, of the faxes from AIIS.

Our aim of those days a) was not necessarely that CNN, SKY-NEWS, French TV5, EURONEWS, etc., and the large internationally distributed newspapers, say, New York Times, Washington Post, etc, should reply and respond to all of the information we sent, but to have some influence in anarchist direction if possible, b) we sent much about the anarchist economical political system in Norway, anarchism and other -isms, and libertarian policy in general, so the giant international newsmedia could have an alternative to the governments' and tendencies towards authoritarian and authorities' -- propaganda, and a lot of information in the libertarian field of research, - for the newsmediagiants to choose from in a freedomly way. And our, the AIT/AIIS's, influence via the international media must of course not be exaggerated at all, however when we had a new, good and sound argument in libertarian direction perhaps it had a slight influence indirectly or directly, now and then, on what was sent on the air, i.e. the CNN network's programming and other newsmedia's. But the usual "manufacturing of consent" according to Noam Chomsky's research, where the media are acting more as the 4th power of the State, in societal perspective, than a free press, was in those days, as well as today, clearly the main tendency.

There is however possibly a slight development towards more free newsmedia reporting in a libertarian way, say less Brown Card convicts of the International Anarchist Tribunal, over time from 1994 and until now. But this is probably due to a libertarian megatrend, and perhaps not much related to the work of AIT/AIIS" says S. Olsen, spokesperson of AIT/AIIS, reflecting over the past work of the anarchist newsagency, at the time when the now rather outdated telefax-machines of the AIT/AIIS network were used a lot, and of the replies from the giant international newsmedia: "I guess David had much more luck against the giant Goliath -- and the militants using the Trojan horse in the old days also --, than we had vis-à-vis the international and domestic newsmedia, but now and then the AIT/AIIS 'underdog' anarchist news agency probably managed to hit the many headed giant international media-troll so it made a slight change of behavior in libertarian direction, i.e. the troll hit the authorities or went against authoritarian tendencies, or (very rare) supported anarchism more directly, especially internationally.

But seen all in all, a) the influence of AIT/AIIS news and comments related to the EU-referendum in 1994-95 via the international newsmedia, was probably the most important and direct, b) the influence in general, outside what is reported about case a) in IJ@/Fb No 4 (24) 1994, 1 (25) and 2 (25) 1995, must not be exaggerated, and was probably usually quite marginal if any at all, - however c) a useful network was established and d) AIT/AIIS got a reputation about beeing a serious anarchist newsagency and source for libertarian information, that still holds good today.

Today, in the days of Internet and e-mails, we have reports about several anarchist journalists in different newsmedia, and the www.anarchy.no and IJ@ etc. get a lot of interesting feedback in general. Anarchy is on the air as never before according to reports, i.e. in a positive way, but anarchism has still not achieved much influence on the media in general, i.e. say, about proportional to having 25% of the area on the economical political map. This may perhaps to some extent be due to problems with the double meaning of the word rule in anglophone languages, meaning both A. "regel = relatively fixed ways to settle things in an orderly way, i.e. regulations and regulatory means" and B. "herske/archein" in Norwegian/Greek, from hersker/archos, i.e. be and/or act as an arch, authoritarian, bestiality.

This problem represents an anglophone Orwellian "1984" "newspeak and doublethinking" tendency, as only the meaning B. of the word rule is relevant in anarchist context. AIIS/AIT has however plans of continuing the information work, domestic and internationally, now as the official newsagency of the Anarchist International, and hope for good co-operation with the domestic and international news-mediagiants, both generally and in especially important cases. An aim is over time to increase the percentage 'marketshare' in the meaning of the amount of covering about anarchy and anarchism defined in a libertarian, i.e. realistic - not authoritarian, way, in the media."

The development of the libertarian/anarchist degree in Norway related to the velvet revolution and revolutionary change in 1994/95 is estimated to the following: 11-27.11.1994 = ca 49,4% (state) ; 28-29.11.1994 = ca 51% (anarchy) ; 01.03.1995 = ca 52% ; 01.06.1995 = ca 53% ; 01.10.1995 = ca 53%, a stabilized anarchy of low degree. The system made a " ) " shaped move from about [= ca] 49,4% libertarian degree and located close to the middlepoint of the map within the marxist quadrant 11-27.11.1994, toward the star on the map in the middle of 1995, with ca 53% degree of anarchism.

The libertarian music of the FABS, the Federalist Anarchist Beat Society, was a major source of inspiration for the Anarchist Federation of Norway, AFIN, and the Anarchist International Information Service, AIIS, during the velvet revolutionary change, and in general, now and before. FABS was mentioned in FB/IJA 2(24) 1994...

The center of gravity in Norwegian politics has been littte over the middle of the economic-political map since 1994/95.


28.11.1995 marked one year of anarchy in Norway. The coordinates of the system have not changed significantly. Thus, the anarchist revolution is permanent, and the fight against authoritarian elements is working well.


The marxist landsmodern PM Gro Harlem Brundtland, i.e. matriarch of the Labor Party (Arbeiderpartiet - AP), had been the big looser of the EU-referendum.

In october 1996 the PM Gro Harlem Brundtland was replaced by Thorbjørn Jagland, from the same party, AP.

In november 1996 the planning councillor for the PM Jagland's "House of Norway", Terje Rød-Larsen, a former UN-architect of the PLO-state, met his "Watergate" because of a corrupt tendency, the Fideco case, and resigned (27.11.1996), and a possible stronger marxist bureaucratic power tendency at the council of the central administration, was avoided.

Together with the national confederation of the workers (Landsorganisasjonen, LO), Jagland introduced workers' councils, to make the system more democratic. However the lot of them were marxist co-operate councils, initiated from the top of the Labor Party and LO, and they didn't last long, see more information at the Norwegian Anarchist Council . The most of this council movement collapsed after the commune elections in 1999, however the anarchist council was still going strong in 2002.


According to the constitution, a king is the government of Norway, but he is a symbolic king without real power, and thus not a government or monarch in real terms. However a council, choosen among the people, formally by the king, may a) sometimes be powerful and act as a government, say, if selected from a majority party at the Storting, and b) sometimes not be powerful, and thus act more like a managerial, administrative organ of confederal type. That is the council may be more horizontally than vertically organized and thus not be government, or the opposite, and thus be government.

Other important institutions of the Norwegian 53% anarchist system, however not without bureaucratic tendencies (47% authoritarian), are, say: The national confederation of the workers (Landsorganisasjonen, LO), of the industry ( Næringslivets Hovedorganisasjon, NHO) and the communes (Kommunenes Sentralforbund, KS), the large co-operative movement and the allemannsrett, the media and the Storting, a mixed kind of senate and house of representatives, or the Swiss Confederation's Bundesrat and Nationalrat, i.e. a parliament or congress with Lagting and Odelsting. A close connection to the Anarchy of the oceans, through a large merchant fleet, may also be mentioned.

The elections to the Storting are every fourth year. The Storting has 165 mandater, mainly from 19 fylkescommunes.
The mandater, i.e. persons, who are elected to the Storting are fixed geographically in the following way:

8 from Østfold (18),
15 from Oslo (1),
12 from Akershus (22),
8 from Hedmark (22),
7 from Oppland (26),
7 from Buskerud (21),
7 from Vestfold (15),
6 from Telemark (18),
4 from Aust-Agder (15),
5 from Vest-Agder (15),
10 from Rogaland (26),
15 from Hordaland, Bergen included (34);
5 from Sogn og Fjordane (26),
10 from Møre og Romsdal (38),
10 from Sør-Trøndelag, Trondheim included (25);
6 from Nord-Trøndelag (24),
12 from Nordland (45),
6 from Troms (25), and
4 from Finnmark (19).

The remaining 8 persons are utjevningsmandater, elected to achieve a greater degree of proportionality. To achieve utjevningsmandater a party must have at least 4% of the total number of votes (sperregrensen). Thus, the amount of delegates to the Storting from the relevant different geographical areas as listed above, i.e. of the fylkescommunes (a kind of geographically large cantons, but with much less autonomy than the cantons in the Swiss Confederation), is fixed figures, given in advance of the elections, - and thus is not dependent on the election results in the different the areas/fylkescommunes ( with exception of the 8 utjevningsmandater). Thus the system of delegation to the Norwegian central/federal/confederal council, the Storting, is based on the fylkescommunes in a fixed way, rather than the population and the election results, in itself a slight commune anarchist tendency supporting geographical decentralization of the influence on the central/federal/confederal administration. This also implicates that, say, a Same living in Finnmark has much greater influence per vote on the Storting, than a bureaucrat living in Oslo.

The figures in brackets are the number of local communes, municipalities, within each fylkes-commune. The total number of local communes were 435 in year 2000. All of the communes are organized in the National Confederation of the Communes - Kommunenes Sentralforbund, dealing with common matters, and also is the employers' federation for people working for the communes.

In 1996, 1 426 837 persons were organized in the confederations of the workers' and in 1999, 1 485 065. The largest of the workers' confederations is Landsorganisasjonen, with 811 423 members in 1996, and 828 431 in 1999.

After the anarchist revolution of 1994, the Storting de facto mainly has been performing like a confederal council with delegates, not authoritarian representatives, from the 19 fylkescommunes, and with practically no parliamentarism.

Generally speaking, the system is not significantly authoritarian. The council at the central administration, sometimes referred to as the people's council, the king's council, the state council (STACO) or Council of State, and even the constitutionally wrong term "government", dependent on the situation, is for the time being not a government, in the meaning of vertically organized. The term "state" is here the public sector for general purposes throughout the country, and does not mean "state" as vertically organized, i.e. based on statism, say, as the present PLO-state of Arafat. The Norwegian constitution is referring to the "king's council, elected among the people" and "the State Council, i.e. Council of State", and principally no government except the powerless symbolic king, a person with de facto less power than the almost powerless Swiss president.

Another branch of the anarchist system is Norges Anarkistråd (NA), the Norwegian Anarchist Council (NACO) , founded medio December 1996.

The co-operative movement in Norway counts altogether more than 1,4 million memberships. Compared to the total number of housholds, 1,8 million, this is an impressing figure. The importance of  the co-operative model, both in terms of memberships and economic activity and results, is most clearly shown in agriculture, fishing, housing and in the consumer sector. In addition, there are a lot of small co-operative societies producing goods or services for income purposes or for the benefit of the infrastructure of local communities – i.e. mainly associations for the marketing of handicrafts or hunting and fishing rights, as well as  local water supply societies, irrigation societies and drainage societies. The ANARCOOP bookshop distributing the IJA and other material, is an example of the small co-operatives. Thus, social individualist anarchist mutualism is a widespread activity in Norway.


In December 1996 the Nobel Peace Prize went to East-Timor, a repressed country which in a long time has been on the agenda of anarchists, say, Noam Chomsky, the Northern Anarchist Confederation (NAC), and others. The Nobel Prizes are a series of annual awards provided for by a large fund, in the will of Alfred B. Nobel, the inventor of the dynamite. While the academic Nobel Prizes are Swedish, the political and antimilitarist Peace Prize is decided by a committee selected by the Norwegian Storting. This committee is quite autonomous. Some foreigners think the prize is decided by the state council, but that is not true. The first peace prize was given to Jean Henry Dunant, from the Swiss Confederation, in 1901. The German Carl Von Ossietzky, who won the prize in 1935, and the American Martin Luther King Jr. in 1964, may also be mentioned.


May Day 1996 a giant rat statue with bugging device headphones on the ears had been placed by an anarchist a.o. direct action group, at Youngstorget, Oslo, i.e. at the headquarters of LO, AP the Labor party and the populist FrP... Medio December a reorganization of the secret services kick-started with one councillor of Jagland's cabinet, Grete Faremo, and Hans Olav Østgaard, the chief of the secret police, POT, resigning from their jobs.

The next day a Norwegian Red Cross hospital in Tchechenia was attacked by terrorists, probably muslim hierarchists armed with weapons similar to the Russian "Speznas" special forces. Six persons were killed, among them two Norwegians. Friday 20.12.1996 the Norwegian Anarchist Council (NACO) and the WSC-IFA expressed the deepest condolences with the relatives of the victims, and a humanitarian protest against violence, war and madness.

A political process of historical dimensions was going on in Norway 1996/97. Stortinget and the people were discussing the Lund commission's report about the secret services doings, criminal or not, over a half century. Also the Anarchist Federation was mentioned as an object for investigation by the Secret Policy, in the Lund report, and as indicated above - this was hardly news to the anarchists... However, the Lund report represented only a tip of the iceberg, i.e. tendencies of secret services ochlarchy (mob rule), from authoritarian groups and political parties.

Ultimo December 1996 the Norwegian Anarchist Council wished the Storting & Co luck with the "reorganization of the secret services, i.e. more in the service of the people, the anarchists included, and not the bureaucracy!" Stortingets kontrollutvalg for de hemmelige tjenestene, i.e. the control commission for the secret services, was an organ for the reorganization. This commission's coordinator Per N. Hagen of the Centerparty, from Tynset, a town with an anarchist museum, had an important task.

January 1997 the Anarchist Council added: "The secret services should do what they are supposed to do, and not everything else! It would be interesting for the people to see not only their own files, but the files of the secret services agents, to control their activities, i.e. in the long run! The tendencies of Orwell's "1984" police state, with a mix of authoritarian groups & political parties and the secret services, rooted back from the days of the marxist system, must be stopped in an orderly way!"


The AIT new year report about Norway 1996/97 was optimistic, and also realistic.

In October 1997, Jagland's council at the central administration, was replaced by a "no-government" , i.e. no to EU, with Senterpartiet, Kristelig Folkeparti and Venstre, and Kjell Magne Bondevik as PM. The NACO and the WSC-IFA wished a happy new year 1998, and reminded of the Libertarian Association of Teetotallers direct action. After a couple of years, a less marxist Labor Party state council, co-operating more towards the middle - replaced the "no to EU" council. The system has moved a little to the right, but not very significant. Thus, the society is still about 53% anarchist.



In August 2001 Norway was once again in the headlines of the international newsmedia. Monday 03.09.2001 more than 400 mainly Afghan asylum seekers were on their way to Papua New Guinea on an Australian troop carrier after the Australian Government stuck to its authoritarian refusal to let them into the country. The group spent eight days stranded on the Norwegian freighter Tampa before being transferred to the HMAS Manoora. The refugees were transported towards New Zealand and Nauru, where their asylum claims should be assessed. The Norwegian Anarchist Council criticized the plan for dealing with the asylum seekers, saying it was not acceptable under international law. It said the best solution would have been to allow them ashore immediately, on Christmas Island, rather than make them endure more time at sea. More information about this event at The Tampa case .


The Stortings election Monday 12th of September had a moderate interest in the Northern and international media.

The Anarchist Federation of Norway - Anarkistføderasjonen i Norge, did not participate in the election, but pointed to the distance between the present society at ca 53% degree of anarchy, and the 100% anarchist ideal, i.e. defined by 100% socialism and autonomy, minimal economical and political/administrative rank differences, maximal efficiency and fairness, and the other anarchist principles, i.e. the IFA-principles, the Oslo convention and anarchist human rights, etc. They used the anarchist economical - political map to strategic positioning.

Another organization, Folkebevegelsen for valgboikott av RV, Fr.p og andre autoritære with some anarchists and other people, founded in 1997 - also had a campaign. They advocated boycott of RV, the Maoist and Trotskyite election alliance, Fr.P - the populist right party, and other authoritarians, at the election. The situation was discussed in International Journal of Anarchism no 2 (31): Before the Stortings election in Norway 2001 .

The election was a political earthquake. The big looser was AP. It had not done such a bad election since 1924. This only confirmed that the days of the marxist social democratic system definitively were over, and that the social individualist anarchist system was still going strong. The Labor Party has lost the grip on the concept of social equalization including freedom, i.e. less rank and income differences broadly defined. AP lacks a vision of the anarchist ideal, and the road ahead; i.e. although moved a little to the right, still advocating marxist social democracy, statism and even tendencies of state capitalism. The participation in the election was about 72%, i.e. 5% less than in 1997. This indicates an increasingly dissatisfaction with the present system, and the need for even more anarchist management of the society.

The mandates were:

Left - Venstre............................................... (2,-4),
Center - Senterpartiet.................................(10,-1),
Coast - Kystpartiet.......................................(1,+0),
Socialist Left - Sosialistisk Venstreparti (23,+14),
Christian people - Kristelig Folkeparti ......(22,-3),
Right - Høyre............................................(38,+15),
Labor - Arbeiderpartiet.............................(43,-22),
RV - Rød Valgallianse ..................................(0.-0),
Fr.P - Fremskrittspartiet ............................(26,+1),

for the parties placed on the progressive vs reactionary axis, i.e. from the top to the bottom of the economical-political map. The +,- figures are changes of mandates since the previous election in 1997. Except for the most authoritarian parties - RV and Fr.p, all the parties are in reality close to the middle of the economical political map, although ideologically and verbally very different. The no to EU mandates were increased, and is by now 95. 60 of the 165 mandates were women.

The situation with no dominating big party at the Storting was something new, and the Norwegian Anarchist Council expressed: This is a case of more practical horizontal organization at the Storting, and it calls for even more co-operation without coercion. Authoritarian tendencies towards chaos, ochlarchy (mob rule) and the right to the strongest, economically and/or political/administrative, must be rejected. The fight for even more socialism and autonomy, social equalization including freedom, i.e. less income and rank differences, must continue.

The spokesman Lars Sponheim of Venstre, the Left party, confirmed the anarchist analysis of the rankings among the parties along the progressive vs reactionary axis on the economical-political map, by declaring Venstre er det mest radikale partiet i norsk politikk, i.e the Left is the most radical party in Norwegian politics; see Dagbladet Tuesday 25.09.2001.

After a temporary brake in the negotiations, Venstre, Kr.F. and Høyre decided to form a samarbeidsstatsråd, co-operate state council, with Kjell Magne Bondevik as PM, i.e. a progressive-right council at the central administration. While Venstre is the most progressive party in Norway, Kr.F. has "one foot in the left side and one foot in the right side" (VG Wednesday 03.10.2001), and both are No to EU, the less progressive Høyre is typically to the right and Yes to EU. Thus, they will have to co-operate quite well if they want to stay in office, and it is difficult to see exactly what the policy will be. Whether this council will contribute to a progressive tendency in society, or just a further movement to the right, is an open question. It may achive a majority in the Storting by co-operating with the Socialist Left, with Labor or the populist Fr.p. Friday 19.10.2001 the state council (STACO) was taken over by the co-operate comrades. The situation was analysed in International Journal of Anarchism no 3 (31): After the Stortings election in Norway 2001 - NACO fights the co-operate comrades .


11.09.2001 The IAT wrote to the international newsmedia: The International Anarchist Tribunal (IAT) has investigated the terrorism in New York and Washington 11.09.2001... We denounce these authoritarian doings.  If anyone would like to discuss this matter with the international anarchist movement, please write an e-mail to ifa@anarchy.no. Then it was a conference and discussion internationally among anarchists and others about terrorism in this case, and generally. The International Anarchist Tribunal had also something to say about the Taleban and al-Qaeda network: Read all about it in International Journal of Anarchism 4 (31). The Northern Anarchist Confederation - Anarkistenes organisasjon i Norden - the WSC-IFA and the Norwegian Anarchist Council (NACO), expressed the deepest condolences with the relatives of the victims and the American people.


12.10.2001 the Nobel Institute in Oslo declares that the secretary general Kofi Annan and the UN will get this years Peace Prize. This year is the 100th anniversary of the Nobel Peace Prize. NACO congratulates Kofi Annan and the UN.

OSLO, 03.12.2001: Some of the world's leading proponents for peace in the 20th century have gathered to formulate how to make the world a safer place in the 21st. More than 30 Nobel Peace Prize laureates are in Oslo for a three-day symposium marking the 100th anniversary of the prize. "We will discuss international terrorism but we will really focus on even deeper issues," a spokesman of the Norwegian Nobel Institute, told Reuters. "We will be analysing what went wrong in the 20th century but more importantly we will be looking at how we can do better in the 21st century."

Among those taking part are South Korean President Kim Dae-jung, former Polish President Lech Walesa, Tibetan leader the Dalai Lama, ex-South African President F.W. de Klerk, Northern Irish politicians John Hume and David Trimble and Jewish author Elie Wiesel. But the meeting, which opened on Monday , is taking place in the shadow of heightened violence in the Middle East and Afghanistan. As a result, Palestinian President Yasser Arafat and Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, the 1994 winners with assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin - are unlikely to attend, reports the CNN. However Peres has said he will come anyway. Among the attenders was also East Timorese freedom fighter and acting Foreign Minister José Ramos-Horta.

The symposium is part of celebrations leading up to the award of the centenary Nobel Peace Prize to the United Nations and Secretary-General Kofi Annan in Oslo on December 10. The laureates, meeting in a hotel on the fringes of the Norwegian capital, will aim to look at ways to avert totalitarianism, bolster democracy and human rights and promote arms control. They are likely to make an appeal for the release of Burmese opposition democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been held under house arrest in Burma since before she won the 1991 prize. The spokesman said that the focus of the peace prize had changed since the first award with a stronger focus on human rights. "We want to have a better organised world, we want to strengthen human rights, we want to alleviate human suffering, we want to have more arms control and disarmament," he said. In the coming century "we may want to look at new elements, the connection between the environment and peace, maybe even the connection between news reporting and peace, but basically we will be addressing the same issues.".

This may perhaps be a useful supplement to the ongoing Conference on Terrorism, arranged by the Anarchist International and NAC. NACO expressed: "We wish the delegates at the Nobel symposium and the international newsmedia welcome, a) to the Anarchy of Norway, and b) to study the summary of the International Conference on Terrorism 2001 and the History of the Anarchy of Norway." The Nobel Symposium's main subject was "conflicts of the 20th century and the solutions for the 21st century": Session 1: War and peace in the 20th century: the over-all balance – how can we do better? Session 2: Totalitarianism and ideological conflict – help spread democracy and human rights. Session 3: Ethnic conflict, racism and hatred – end discrimination and protect minority rights, and Session 4: Economic exploitation and inequalities – fight famine, promote sustainable development. Lots were said, but not so much new, compared to the anarchist conference. The prize winners disagreed over Afghanistan. Except for Eli Wiesel and José Ramos-Horta, the prize winners demonstrated quite little insight in the problem. The press reports were minimal in general.

However CNN-TV had a live coverage from the symposium, but the CNN-Internet reported nothing from the discussions, but mentions the Nobel Peace Prize winners have paid tribute to democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and urged the Myanmar government to release the fellow laureate. At the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony on Saturday 08.12.2001, 24 laureates wrote a letter to Myanmar's ruling junta appealing for the release of Suu Kyi and hundreds of "political prisoners". NACO supports this resolution. The awarded since the beginning are listed at The Nobel Peace Prize Winners 1901- 2001 . Shimon Peres didn't show up. Perhaps Peres got cold feets because he was put on trial by the IAT, for falsely putting the blame of the terrorism on anarchists. The IAT worked faster than expected, and the verdict was that Peres got the Brown Card 10. 12. 2001, (see IJ@ nr 4(31). Kofi Annan got his prize, and in the evening there was a dinner at Grand Hotel with representants of the upper classes. Dagsavisen 11.12.2001 writes 8 000-10 000 persons were expected to a peace support demonstration for Kofi Annan, but only ca 1000 participated. Perhaps most of the people don't want be associated with the mainly marxist "peace movement" initiated by among others Johan Galtung, also called the "mad peace professor" with reference to VG 10.12.2001 "Galt, galere, Galtung" and AFIN 10.11.2001 "Hvor "Gal" -"Tung" kan denne professoren bli?" ("gal" = crazy, mad), together with PDS, the followers of the DDR-Stalinists. 06.05.2002 - Pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi is freed after 19 months of house arrest, Associated Press report the Myanmar government is saying.


The extent of Thor Heyerdahl's international fame became clear in the first hours after his death as expressions of grief and tributes appeared in news columns around the globe. Germany's Der Spiegel Online called Heyerdahl "one of the greatest explorers of the 20th century" while the BBC's web site announced that "Heyerdahl will be forever remembered as the Kon-Tiki man". Heyerdahl's daring expeditions as well as his often controversial archaeological theories are covered in detail in the international news. Although his ideas often conflicted with accepted knowledge, the BBC observed that "his pioneering spirit and continuing quest for understanding endeared him to millions". News wire Reuters also spotlighted Heyerdahl's often testy relationship with academia, which viewed him as a kind of Indian Jones, an impressive and flamboyant free spirit without sufficient evidence for his claims.

Reuters remembers Heyerdahl's comeback to his detractors as well: "If you are a scientist you don't go on a balsa raft. If you are a scientist you sit and quote each other." The South China Morning Post described Heyerdahl as the "man who did what everyone thought impossible". Heyerdahl was a Norwegian icon, and arguably her most famous citizen for the past half century. He was also noted for his environmental protests about the polluting of the oceans. Heyerdahl's last book packed as controversial a punch as his youthful work, arguing that the Viking god Odin could have been modeled on a king in southern Russia who lived about 2,000 years ago. Heyerdahl remained impressively active until his final days, lecturing and working on his latest theories even after a major cancer operation last year. Asked for advice on how to stay youthful, he said: "Never retire." Norway's PM of the state council, Kjell Magne Bondevik, has promised a state funeral for Heyerdahl. On Friday Thor Heyerdahl's daughter-in-law Grethe Heyerdahl told the Norwegian news agency NTB that the ceremony would take place in Oslo. His urn will be placed at his beloved home in Colla Micheri in northern Italy.

11.10.2002: Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter has won the Nobel Peace Prize for 2002, the chairman of the Nobel Committee in Oslo has announced. The AIE congratulates the old peace-worker, remembering a.o.t. the Camp-David agreement:

Congratulations with the Nobel Peace Prize Jimmy Carter.

Former American president Jimmy Carter's international peacework is now rewarded with the Nobel Peace Prize, and this is probably well deserved. It is however said that the chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize Committe, Gunnar Berge, also wanted to kick the new American president Gerge W. Bush a bit on the leg, by this choice, probably to try to turn the Americans towards a policy more within the framework of the general anti-terrorist coalition. BBC's summary of Jimmy Carter's speech at the Nobel Prize event in Oslo today, 10.12.2002, also indicates this. In another report BBC mentions "State & Chaos" policy, and this should in general be avoided by all States as much as possible, especially by the United States of America as a part of the anti-terroristcoalition. We welcome the Americans back as a central part of the anti-terroristcoalition on rather equal footing as others. The world seemingly has no superpower in the meaning of arch-State anymore, and that is probably a good thing. Let's all work together on equal footing to do away with as much as possible of the terrorist-problem, i.e. all against Saddam Hussein, al-Qaeda and other terrorists.

Nobel Peace Prize 2003 - Congratulations from the anarchists.

Iranian activist Shirin Ebadi has won the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize for her focus on human rights, especially on the struggle to improve the status of women and children. Ebadi, one of Iran's first female judges before being forced to stand down after the Islamic revolution, said she hoped the award could bring change in her country. She is the first Iranian to receive the honor since it was first awarded in 1901 and the 11th woman. The reaction in Norway's Muslim community was joyous after the news that Shirin Ebadi had received the Nobel Peace Prize for 2003. The spokesperson for the Anarchafeminst International expressed congratulations and expected the award would have largely positive repercussions. On behalf of the Anarchy of Norway and the Anarchist International in general, the Anarchist International Embassy sent a note with congratulations at the Nobel Prize event in Oslo 10.12.2003.

Nobel Peace Prize 2004 - Congratulations from the anarchists

Kenyan environmental activist wins Peace Prize. The Norwegian committee charged with awarding the Nobel Peace Prize surprised almost everyone Friday, bypassing the favorites to honor a Kenyan environmental activist. Wangari Maathai is the first African woman to win the Peace Prize, and was clearly elated. The spokesperson for the Anarchafeminst International expressed congratulations and expected the award would have largely positive repercussions.


22.11.2001: Oil prices rose Thursday in London after Norway agreed to cut oil production by 100,000 to 200,000 barrels a day in response to pressure from OPEC, which is attempting to stem a steep slide in world prices. The reduction will take effect Jan. 1, provided that members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries fulfill their previous pledges to cut production and other nonmembers do their part as well, said Norwegian oil and energy state councillor Einar Steensnæs. The cut would be made from estimated production of 3.2 million barrels a day from Norway's offshore oil fields next year, Steensnæs said. Brent crude futures for January delivery rose $1.18 to $19.91 a barrel Thursday, $3 over Monday's two-year lows.

OPEC agreed last week to slash 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd) from its oil export quotas from Jan. 1 - its fourth cut in a year - only if rival exporters Russia, Mexico, Norway and Oman chipped in with a 500,000 bpd reduction. OPEC Secretary-General Ali Rodriguez said he was confident of achieving a deal with non-OPEC exporters to cut global oil supply."I am confident of an agreement," Rodriguez said, adding that the 11-member cartel would await an official response from other producers before triggering another wave of OPEC cuts.

If a deal goes ahead, OPEC's Rodriguez expected prices to reach the lower end of OPEC's preferred $22-$28 per barrel band, from $17.44 on Wednesday. While Steensnæs would not name a specific target for what Norway thinks the oil price should be, he said OPEC's price band target "is not sensible at the moment." So far, Mexico has promised a cut of 100,000 barrels on the condition that OPEC comply with its promise Jan. 1, and Oman could help out with 25,000 barrels. Russia, which recently passed Norway to become the world's second-largest oil exporter, has only committed itself to a symbolic cut of 30,000 barrels, a small portion of its total production of 7 million barrels a day.

"It is very important that Russia follow up efficiently," Norway's Steensnæs told reporters, adding that he would be in contact with officials in that country by Friday. The vice president of Russia's largest oil company, LUKOIL, said Thursday the government was likely to cut oil output to support the market. "We think the government will take a decision to cut output in volumes enough to stabilize the market," Leonid Fedun was quoted by Interfax news agency. LUKOIL and other producers would meet the government Friday for further talks about possible cuts in output or exports of crude. Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the head of Russia's second-largest oil company, YUKOS, said he believed a decision to suit both OPEC and independent producers could be found.

NACO supports the oil and energy councillor in this case. Although affluence is neither a sufficient, nor a necessary condition for anarchism, it is clearly more easy to keep up the Anarchy of Norway, and develop it further, with a relatively high oilprice than without: "Post Scarcity Anarchism".

06.12.2001: The Russians and Mexicans have decided to cut export by 150 000 and 100 000 bpd. respectively, and thus the aim to cut ca 2 000 000 bpd. may perhaps be within reach. The oil price hiked to 20 US $ p.b. 17.12.2001: The Norwegian state council decided to cut oil production 150 000 bpd from 01.01.2002. 04.01.2002: The other countries and Norway have cut production significantly, and the oil price hiked to ca 21 US $ p.b. The trouble in the Mid East in April-May 2002 contributed to hike the oil-price to more than 25 US $ p.b. Medio December 2002 OPEC decided to use regulatory means to keep the crude oil price at 25 US $ p.b. according to DW-TV and other international newsmedia. 27.10.2003 the Nort Sea Brent crude oil spot price was at 29 US $ p.b. according to OILNERGY


Some time has passed on since the Norwegian People turned their back against the main economic political course of the social democrat government, at the 1994 EU referendum. The megatrend of the late eighties and early nineties was a movement to the right and upwards on the Economical Political Map. The EU referendum indicated a further jump in this direction, and thus the economic political system in Norway made a revolutionary change, and passed the border between the marxist social democrat sector and the anarchist sector of social individualism. This of course is a major social event in the economic political world history.

A long jump further rightwards may result in a social liberal system, and a reverse tendency may give a retardation to marxist social democracy, but this is not the case at the moment. The system has moved a little to the right, but not very significant. The first half year of 2002 confirms this tendency.

Thus, so far the Norwegian economic-political system has not changed significantly in the distance from the top of the economic-political map. And thus, the Anarchy of Norway is still going strong.

Although the system is significantly anarchist, i.e. within the Quadrant of Anarchism on the economic political map, it is somewhat far from the anarchist ideal on the top of the map. "So this is heaven: Norway", the LA-TIMES in USA reports about Norway, November 2001, but this is however a bit exaggerated; see http://www.anarchy.no/report1.html , where the article is quoted, with comments from IIFOR added. Another American article on the situation in Norway, quoted from NY-TIMES January 2002, also with comments from IIFOR, is also included.

In June 2002 a libertarian direct action against the World Bank's reactionary policy and the ABCDE-meeting, in Oslo, once more confirmed that anarchy is significant on in Norway, see http://www.anarchy.no/abcde.html . An investigation later in 2002 indicated a slight movement to the right on the economical-political map and about 54% degree of anarchy, compared to the situation in 1994-95 with about 53% anarchism. Norwegian firms are more and more horizontally organized, according to Nordhaug and Gooderham at NHH (Dagsavisen 15 & 16.10.2004).

So called heaven or not, 54% anarchism is far from the 100% anarchist ideal. Thus, it is plenty of room for improvement from anarchist perspective, and by no means time for a break in the fight against authoritarian tendencies. The revolution must be fought permanent, in the daily life, to sustain and develop further. However, as long as a) Norway stays out of EU, b) populist and nationalist tendencies are put at place, and c) the left and right tendencies outbalance each other reasonable as by now, Norway will probably stay anarchist, and be a lighthouse for EU and the rest of the world.

28.11.2004, the degree of anarchy is still about 54%, and the Norwegian system will probably stay anarchist also in the following years. [Source: FB-IJ@ 4(24), 1-4(25), 1-3(26), AIT - AIIS].

Back to homepage