Introduction
Politics in Norway is similar to that of other European nations, such as Denmark and Sweden, its neighbors. Norway has the Labour Party, the Conservatives, the Progress Party, the Centre Party, the Socialist Left, the Liberal Party, the Christian Democrats, the Green Party, the Red Party, and other political parties (Russmann et al., 2019). The Progress Party is Norway’s third-largest and most prominent political party. However, this position is unstable and varies with each general election, which is conducted every four years. This paper analyses the Progress Party’s activities, influence, power, popularity, and success in past general elections.
Formation of the Party
The Progress Party is one of Norway’s oldest political parties, which has consistently fought for liberal values. Its formation can be traced back to 1973 in Oslo, where Anders Lange and 1,345 other individuals convened to form the movement Anders Lange’s Party (Filipovi, 2020). At the time of its formation, Norway had issues with how taxes were administered to the general population. The founding members believed that the people were being heavily taxed, there was little privatization, high immigration into the country, and an increased welfare state (Kosiara, 2019). As such, they sought to resolve these issues and restore power to the people. After its formation, the party changed its name to the Norwegian Progress Party in 1977, following the death of Lange, which it still uses.
The Party’s Program and Mission
The party is a libertarian party that fights for “freedom for the individual, prosperity, lower taxes, and a limited government that empowers its people.” They also believe that their program is established on Western and Norwegian traditions, Norway’s constitution, and cultural heritage grounded in Christian philosophy (Filipovi, 2020). Their policies are based on decentralized political power, the people’s government, and the choice of elected authorities, and are used as components of the constitutional provision to enact binding referendums. The party’s 2017-2021 Principles Program states that the party’s core foundation is liberalism (Filipovi, 2020). Similarly, as outlined in the 2017-2021 Principles Program, their mission is to ensure that the government remains on the path of sharp reduction of taxes for its citizens, public intervention, and fees.
However, the party distances itself from any discrimination and marginalization of individuals based on their ethnic origin, religion, or gender. It focuses on its primary agenda of protecting the marginalized and the entire population of Norway, as outlined in Norway’s constitution (Hagelund, 2020). The party emphasizes changes to Norway’s criminal justice system, stricter immigration rules, tax cuts, care for the elderly, quality healthcare, infrastructure upgrades, and improved treatment of criminals.
Family is the basic unit of society, as outlined in the party’s Principles Program. They regard the family as fundamental and essential in any free society. The family has a mandate and responsibility to raise responsible and patriotic children by passing down the community’s culture and traditions (Filipovi, 2020).
The party believes that every child has the right to know their biological parents, care, and visitation from the parents. Consequently, they had to oppose the legalization of same-sex marriage as they argued that it would affect the typical and traditional functioning of the family, which in the long term might affect children. They also advocate for effective class management, discipline, improved working conditions for teachers, a better learning environment for students, and order at every level of learning institutions.
The party’s economic program aims to reduce the authority and mandate of the public sector and the state. It believes the role of government should be limited to providing its members with a floor under which they may survive. Instead of the government handling most things, private companies, nonprofits, and people should be responsible for them (Filipovi, 2020). They believe in an increased market economy backed by reduced income tax and other taxes.
Regarding migration, the party insists on completely assimilating people who come to live in Norway permanently. They describe this as a responsible and strict immigration policy in their Principles Program (Nikel et al., 2021). The party does not believe in asylum and further states that each continent should have asylum centers, citing evidence from Asia and Africa. They advocate for the deportation of refugees back to their countries if possible. Regarding Norway’s police system, they are content with the fact that it is modern, well-equipped, efficient, and well-trained.
Similar to their immigration policy, their defense policy is equally strict, as they state that the country must remain adamant in its position to deter aggressive approaches made on Norway’s territory. According to the party, the government must be able to meet unforeseen and new threats with equal force, specifically threats linked to hybrid warfare and cybersecurity (Filipovi, 2020). There must be increased dedication and new mandates to provide resources for the country’s intelligence services in relation to the issue of hybrid warfare. The party views it as a significant threat to the country’s supreme authority and the security of its citizens. The party believes that Norway’s armed forces should have a strong enough presence in the country’s northern areas to serve as a deterrence.
The party supports Norway’s participation in NATO and is entirely against the European Union. This is because, in many ways, NATO differs from the European Union in its pursuit of foreign policy (Filipovi, 2020). This is evidenced by how the EU seeks diplomatic and economic means to address security problems, whereas NATO prioritizes military means. In this sense, the party aligns itself with NATO’s approach to safeguarding global stability.
For some reason, the policies of the European Union do not align well with those of the Progress Party. The party’s program supports the country’s participation in joint exercises and forces training by different members of NATO. The party acknowledges the influence and authority that NATO has in shaping Norway’s defense policy and security, particularly through NATO’s active involvement in the northern regions of Norway, where political tensions persist (Filipovi, 2020). In this regard, it consistently expresses its relationship with NATO and remains its most assertive supporter within Norway’s borders.
The Party’s Current Powers, Success, and Performance in Recent Elections
Over the years, the party has undergone a significant transformation from an anti-taxation movement to become Norway’s third-largest political party. Examining the brief history of the Progress Party and its electoral success, the party first entered parliament in 1973, when Anders Lange was elected (Filipovi, 2020). In this election, the party came in sixth with four members of parliament, where they were in opposition. In the 1977 election, the party did not manage to secure any parliamentary seats until 1981, when it won four positions. The party gained momentum in the 1989 election, where it performed well, becoming the third-largest party in terms of the number of representatives in the Norwegian parliament, with 22 seats out of the possible 165. In the subsequent years, the party served as a member of the opposition.
The dawn of the 1990s came with great success and expansion for the party. The party emerged as a major force to be reckoned with in terms of policies on the welfare state and immigration. However, the following general election in 1993 saw a decline in the number of supporters, which was reflected in the number of votes the party received that year (Kosiara, 2019). This can be attributed mainly to the internal dispute that disrupted the party’s core fundamental fight on gas, taxation, and immigration. The next general election prompted the Party to return to its core purpose as a right-wing party and fight the government’s heavy surcharge on income tax and immigration (Kosiara, 2019). These tactics were effective, as they were able to garner almost an equal number of votes to those they had lost in the 1993 elections.
The 2000 opinion poll favored the Progress Party, as they garnered 35% of the support. Consequently, they managed to secure third place in the 2001 election, having fallen from their second-place position in the 1997 elections (Filipovi, 2020). While this might have been seen as a blow to the party’s influence, parliamentary-wise, it was not. The party had gained an extra position, rising from 25 to 26 parliamentary seats. The 2005 general election saw another success for the Norwegian political party, which secured 38 seats, representing a 22.1% increase from the 2001 results (Filipovi, 2020).
The Progress Party became that year’s second-largest and most influential party. This was a far more significant achievement, as the Progress Party secured parliamentary seats from all over Norway, unlike in past elections. This only meant one thing: more power. The party was in a position to command the government and make demands.
There was a slight increase in the number of votes won by the party in the 2009 general elections, registering 22.9% of the total votes cast from 22.1% recorded in the 2005 general elections (Filipovi, 2020). However, in the 2013 parliamentary election, the party experienced a decrease in votes, registering 16.3% (Filipovi, 2020). Nevertheless, they formed a coalition with the Conservative Party and the Christian Party, which, to them, was an achievement. Even though they could have suffered a massive blow in the 2017 elections, they salvaged 15.2% of the votes cast, which was considered a significant achievement, as polls had predicted an enormous decline in the number of their supporters (Filipovi, 2020). Still, even with the fall, they were able to form another coalition government with the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party.
For the elections held in September 2021, 169 members are holding official positions as members of the Norwegian parliament. The Labour Party holds the most parliamentary seats, with 48 members, followed by the Conservative Party, which has 36 members (Kosiara, 2019). The Center Party comes in third, and the Progress Party follows with close numbers of 28 and 21, respectively (Filipovi, 2020). This positions the Progress Party as the fourth most influential and powerful party on the Norwegian political map until the next general elections, scheduled for 2025. Although it is considered the fourth-largest political party in parliament, this represents a decline from its third position since 2013 (Filipovi, 2020). The party now belongs to the opposing side as they fight for radical changes in the country’s immigration and taxation policies.
The Progress Party as Part of the Government
The elections, conducted in 2013, were the first time the Progress Party entered the government since its formation (Bjerkem, 2016). Then, they were part of Norway’s coalition government until 2020, and they left the coalition. The party’s first coalition was between the Conservative Party, the Christian Democrats, and the Liberty Party. The second coalition was formed in the general election held in 2017, when the Conservative Party renewed its coalition with the Liberty Party and the Progress Party. Siv Jensen led all of the coalitions in which the Progress Party participated.
The most recent election in Norway was the September 2021 election. This election signaled the end of the eight-year tenure of Erna Solberg, leader of the center-right government political party, and the end of the four-year coalition of the Progress Party with the provisional government (Bjerkem, 2016). This period saw the formation of a coalition government between the Conservatives and the Norwegian Progress Party. The same Liberal Party entered the same coalition after the Progress Party had entered, followed by the Christian Democrats. The joining of the Christian Democrats into the alliance disrupted policies between the Christian Democrats and the Liberals, forcing the Progress Party to leave the coalition in 2020 ahead of the general election of September 2021.
The Party’s Performance in Upcoming Elections
The Progress Party was Norway’s sole well-known and influential populist party until early 2020. The steady decline of the Progress Party can be traced back to 2009 in the Norwegian elections, where the party historically achieved 22.9% of the votes (Filipovi, 2020). While the loss was not readily apparent then, it became striking in the 2013 and 2017 elections, when they only garnered 16.3% and 15.2% of the vote, respectively (Filipovi, 2020). It was a different story in January as the party struggled, and polling agencies placed it at 11.4%.
There is little chance for the party to perform well in the coming Norwegian general election after their stiff stand regarding how the pandemic should have been handled. Fear loomed around the party when they demanded stricter measures to control migrants, the borders, and migrant labor (Cools et al., 2021). The party feared that allowing free movement in and out of Norway might result in “import infection,” a condition where the country registers new infections due to immigrants. Similarly, the party has shown no allegiance and support for COVID-19 and anti-vaxxer deniers, considering that these are issues that far-right parties are in full support of (Filipovi, 2020). The pandemic has not put the Progress Party into the limelight as much as they would have wanted, nor have they taken control of the situation to warrant extra support from the voters.
There are also allegations that the party is silently collaborating and compromising on some issues with the government, even though they have cut ties with it after moving out of the coalition. The party’s attitude on climate change has moderated, indicating support for some of the government’s climate plans. It has also been accused of cooperating with the government on immigration policy, despite their opposition to the government’s more liberal stance. These criticisms and accusations have led to a massive drop in performance with relatively low confidence ratings. The party reportedly struggles to regain the voters’ confidence, even with the support of other opposition parties and the government (Bjerkem, 2016).
Many of the party’s core supporters feel that the party is giving in to some of the mainstream’s demands. These observations can be linked to why the party left the far-right wing of the coalition (Filipovi, 2020). A poll conducted in 2020 showed that the party had only 8.4% support from the voters, which was almost half the number they had in the previous year.
The party will likely do worse than it did in the coming elections as it has been involved in court cases and personal and internal political conflicts, which have tarnished its reputation regarding political integrity (Filipovi, 2020). In January 2021, the issue of Bertheussen gained attention as she was charged with posing a threat to democracy, as defined by the court. The results of the opinion polls further complicated the situation, which revealed that the Centre Party had surpassed the Progress Party in popularity. This shift in public opinion was primarily attributed to the Centre Party’s ability to attract members of the precariat, who were previously aligned with the Progress Party. However, this shift was not challenging, as the Centre Party had to confront internal disagreements caused by its Oslo branch leader, Ugland Jacobsen. Jacobsen’s departure from the party resulted in a loss of support from some of the Progress Party’s loyal followers, thereby intensifying the emotional and political stakes involved.
Progress Party’s future poor performance can also be linked to the fact that there is a new force to reckon with in Norway’s political scene. Center Party is aggressively winning the heart of many voters by coming up with progressive ideologies which, to some extent, are similar to those of the Progress Party (Filipovi, 2020). Center Party is a nationalist, anti-European Union, and populist political party. Without focusing on immigration, voters can choose a political party other than the Progress Party with almost the same benefits. The Center Party also fights for the freedom of small businesses, public sector workers, and farmers, mostly in rural and partly urban areas in Oslo and other parts of Norway (Stein et al., 2020). The rural areas have been marginalized in Norway for many years, which can be seen in the discrepancy between the north and south of Norway regarding property value.
Personalist Nature of Leadership
In the context of personalist regimes, certain qualities are expected of leaders. In particular, all power and decision-making must be consolidated in the hands of a single individual. In the case of Norway’s Progress Party, the evidence suggests that the party operates under a personalist model, with all decisions made by a single individual at any given time. Former party leader Siv Jensen’s public statement that “I took the FRP into government, now I’m taking the FRP out again. I do it because it’s the only right thing to do,” provides a clear indication of how decisions are made within the party (Krekling et al., 2020).
This statement implies that the party’s decisions are made entirely by a single individual who is then held accountable by party members. Over the years, the leadership structure has also been heavily centralized, with the party leader making appointments and having the mandate to make dismissals without consultation. Further still, elections within it are merely ceremonial and not substantive, with party members having no credible say in the selected direction. Its internal structure is also hierarchical, with a firm reliance on loyalty to the leader, with dissent and criticism heavily punished. These indicate that it is under a personalist model, with a single individual making all decisions and leading the party for extended periods.
Successful Transition of Power and Leadership within the Party
From its formation until now, the party has formally had six leaders. Chronologically, Anders Lange was the party’s first formal leader. He stayed in the office for about one and a half years before being succeeded by Eivend Eckbo (Bjerkem, 2016). Eivind Eckbo did not last in power as he only spent 220 days in office and was later replaced by Arve Lonnum, a politician and a professor of medicine in Norway.
Arve Lonnum took almost three years in the office before Carl L. Hagen replaced him in 1978. Carl Hagen can be considered the longest-serving leader of the party, as he served for 28 years from 1978 to 2006, when Siv Jensen succeeded him. Before 2006, the party had never been led by a woman, making Siv Jensen its first female leader that year (Bjerkem, 2016). Siv Jensen held the office for 15 years until May 2021, when she was replaced by the incumbent, Sylvi Listhaug, the second female leader to have such a position.
The first transition of top leadership power did not happen automatically. It cannot be referred to as smooth, as it happened after an internal dispute and consequently after the death of Lange, who was by then the party’s leader. This prompted Arve Lonnum to officially take the position.
The following transition of power for Arve and Hargen was relatively smooth, as Carl L. Hargen was elected into office by a majority of votes. Carl Hagen’s tenure lasted almost a decade before stepping down for Siv Jensen in 2006. The transition of power between Sylvi Listhaug and Jensen can be considered a smooth transition. In February 2021, Jensen stepped down for her successor, Listhaug, as the party leader.
Anti-EU or Anti-Immigrant Party Stance
The party is still anti-EU, evidenced by its continuous support for NATO. Essentially, the EU does not have Norway as one of its members, which to some extent has forced the Norwegian Progress Party not to collaborate with other European far-right-wing parties (Wiggen, 2021). It is worth noting that the party prefers Norway’s activities with NATO to the European Union.
The party’s leader in 2013 declared in public that it was unreasonable to compare the Norwegian Progress Party with the likes of the True Finns, Danish People’s Party, and Sweden Democrats, all of which are right-wing European political parties (Kitschelt, 2018). Additionally, it is worth noting that the party was one of the few political parties in Norway that were officially and publicly against Norway’s seeking membership in the European Union in 2016.
It is also anti-immigrant and strongly openly showcases its stance on the issue. The party has always been on the front line of fighting immigrants through its strict agenda on refugee and immigration policies since the early 1980s (Wiggin, 2021). In many of the past and recent political activities of the party, the party has entrenched anti-immigration and anti-Muslim ideologies and policies in some state institutions. For example, when the party was in power, the Human Rights Service institution received much funding from the government.
The Human Rights Service is widely known to be among the few institutions in Norway that push the “Eurabia” agenda. “Eurabia” is a modern theory that claims that the European Union nations and the Muslim states have teamed up to make the larger Europe Islamic (Wiggin, 2021). At one point, the director of Human Rights Services campaigned over the contrast between Islam and Nazism.
Some of their activities have been aimed directly at the Muslim community in Norway. For example, the Progress Party brought a bill in the parliament to ban students and teachers from wearing the burqa and niqab to school in 2003 (The Local, 2018). In 2018, the bill was passed, and the Progress Party was delighted with the move. The bill was brought forward to apply to students, staff, and teachers in daycare.
However, representatives from Red, Green, and the Socialist voted against the bill, but it still passed with a majority in two rounds. In a similar but different case, most people in Norway held the Progress Party responsible for the bomb attack allegedly carried out by one of its former members and branch leaders in Oslo (Abbas, 2011). The attack was aimed at the Muslim community, where Breivik killed 93 people.
The Progress Party as a Part of the Mainstream
There is a process by which a party is labeled mainstream at a particular time and point in the political scene. This means that parties cannot emerge from anywhere with the maker intact but must be widely interpreted, labeled, and construed by the larger community of actors in the political scene for such a label to stick (Brown et al., 2021). Mainstreamers can be equated with some logical moderation; to classify a political party as mainstream shows that a political party’s electoral appeal is based on a moderate and recognizable ideological platform rather than on the political party’s leaders’ personality traits.
The Progress Party gathered momentum in the early 2000s through the 2010s. The party has gained its position on Norway’s political map as Norway’s farthest right formal political party (Filipovi, 2020). Throughout the years, the party has been regarded as a libertarian and traditional liberal party.
There are claims that the party gradually conforms to the mainstream, despite having never been part of the mainstream. This can be pointed out as one of the reasons why the Progress Party pulled out of the coalition after the continuous loss of supporters. During the coalition, when only two parties were involved, the Conservatives and the Progress Party, the Progress Party compromised much to be included (Wiggen, 2021). The coalition was unbearable as policies from the other political parties, which later joined the coalition, collided with the already established policies of the initial members of the coalition.
Even after leaving the coalition, they still recognized Erna Solberg as the prime minister. Consequently, the party expressed its desire to continue supporting the prime minister and had no desire to replace Solberg even in the future (Wiggen, 2021). It is also noteworthy that the party never pressured Solberg’s government with a list of demands like they used to. After the collapse of the government, the party declared that it did not feel bound to the Granavolden declaration (Krekling et al., 2020). Similarly, the prime minister showered the party with praises of good collaborators, which enabled her government to work efficiently in addressing the needs of the people.
The Progress Party’s inclination towards the mainstream can be seen in the comment by the prime minister when the party departed the government (Krekling et al., 2020). The prime minister mentioned that she hoped the party’s cooperation could be extended into a constructive and close collaboration. Only through that path can the Progress Party demand more policies to help the people of Norway today and in the future (Krekling et al., 2020). Both the prime minister and the leader of the Progress Party came to a consensus that the government should be governed according to the Granavolden platform.
Conclusion
To conclude, the paper has analyzed the Progress Party’s formation, the most recent activities, and how it is connected to the mainstream. Over the years, the Progress Party has evolved from an anti-tax and migration movement to the third-largest political party in the far-right wing of the Norwegian government. However, it is time for the party to reconsider some of its retrogressive policies, structures, and governance strategies and align them with current democracy and leadership factors. Such a dramatic shift is critical for its survival, as its prominence in Norway is fast depreciating. Therefore, if such alterations are not made, it is unlikely to survive the current political wave that rewards collectivism and appreciates human rights.
References
Abbas, M. (2011). Analysis: Norway massacre exposes incendiary immigration issues. Reuters. Web.
Bjerkem, J. (2016). The Norwegian Progress Party: An established populist party. European View, 15(2), 233–243. Web.
Brown, K., Mondon, A., & Winter, A. (2021). The far right, the mainstream and mainstreaming: Towards a heuristic framework. Journal of Political Ideologies, 1-18. Web.
Cools, S., Finseraas, H., & Rogeberg, O. (2021). Local immigration and support for anti‐immigration parties: A meta‐analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 65(4), 988–1006. Web.
Filipovi, A. (2020). The impact of right-wing populist parties upon a national policy regarding the Russian Federation: The case of the Progress Party (Norway) and the Danish People’s Party. International Relations, (3), 18–53. Web.
Hagelund, A. (2020). After the refugee crisis: Public discourse and policy change in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Comparative Migration Studies, 8(1), 1-17. Web.
Kitschelt, H. (2018). Party systems and radical right-wing parties. Oxford Handbooks Online. Web.
Kosiara, K. (2019). Change and Stability. How the party leaderships of the Danish Progress Party and Danish People’s Party are organized. Polish Political Science Review, 7(1), 61-79. Web.
Krekling, D. V., Helljesen, V., Fossen, C. H., Ansari, I., Skille, Ø. B., & Vigsnæs, M. K. (2020). The FRP is out of government. NRK. Web.
Nikel, D., Vitaly, Hameed, A., Anonymous, Karlsen, M., E, P., & Alejandro. (2021). Norway tightens requirements for permanent residence. Life in Norway. Web.
Russmann, U., Svensson, J., & Larsson, A. O. (2019). Political parties and their pictures: Visual communication on Instagram in Swedish and Norwegian election campaigns. Visual Political Communication, 119-144. Web.
Stein, J., Buck, M., & Bjørnå, H. (2021). The centre–periphery dimension and trust in politicians: The case of Norway. Territory, Politics, Governance, 9(1), 37-55. Web.
The Local. (2018). Norway bans burqa and niqab in schools. The Local Norway. Web.
Wiggen, M. (2021). As Norway’s far right declines in popularity, a new populist force rises. openDemocracy. Web.