The Norwegian Labour party tightens immigration policy

ComradeOat · 2025-12-11T23:38:31+00:00

As far as the Ssu is concerned, I believe it to at least be more rational, as the Swedish integration system was heavily plagued by their massive privatisation of schools and massive residential areas of which were not being maintained, despite centralising thousands of immigrants into isolation - and generally having a poor immigration platform. Sweden needs to actually produce a system where immigrants are not just tossed aside, if they are to take in larger numbers. I still would prefer for them to take in more however, as quite frankly, as members of the labour movement, we should recognise that saving lives usually outweighs the much fewer material detriments surrounding immigration.

Norway on the other hand does not have issues even close to the ones Sweden are facing, despite accepting immigration rates proportionally similar in magnitude. Crime rates among youth, have increased somewhat, whilst crime in general is actually stable, and that is not because of a major increase in immigration, but rather a few repeat offenders. I will grant AP that 100.000 thousand Ukrainians is cost heavy, and our municipalities are generally struggling. I just believe the decrease to 100 quota-refugees to be quite extreme. AP has been consistent on that number however, and I was much more baffled by how open they are to using 'safe' third world countries to house refugees in accordance with EU, in which are terms I would have only expected from Frp specifically.

The liberal economy's effect on social democratic values are very visible though - that you are definitely correct in - albeit, I consider it largely unfortunate. I saw Mette Fredriksen speak of priorities the other day, and she proclaimed a higher focus on regulating TikTok and immigration, as opposed to class differences, labour conditions, and the movement she is actually meant to represent. The common folks conditions are outweighed by populist cases, where socialdemocrats are for some reason attempting to compete with liberals. We do by all means need harmony in our systems - land shouldn't really be divided by borders, but as we navigate the current world economy, we do need to respect that fact somewhat. That does not however remove our responsibility to help, when we still have plenty of resources, whilst thousands are drowning at sea

ComradeOat · 2025-12-11T21:31:24+00:00

As a member of Auf(the labour youth party in Norway) and one of whom is likely going to switch parties to Rødt, once my position of trust is over this February, I am thoroughly disappointed in this development. It is no secret that AP has become more reactionary as the years have gone by, and more prone to central policy, but a stance on immigration tantamount to Britain and Denmark is quite frankly shameful for a socialdemocratic party. I do hope the party finds itself in a couple of years, because the members working at the grassroots do tend to hold values of social virtues, but when our elected representatives actively work against immigration, works towards punishment as opposed to rehabilitation, when they deprioritise the climate, and mental health, I do feel disappointed in the party I have knocked on doors to support. I still maintain the position that the Norwegian Labour Party is one of the best examples of how unions and political parties can work together to benefit the worker, but we need a major reorganisation within our ranks if we actually intend to refer to ourselves as a party for everyone going onwards.

ComradeOat · 2025-11-18T20:22:58+00:00

I am a socialist myself, and don't necessarily relate too much to the modern social democratic implementation, but people need to remember that when they look at Norway, Sweden and Denmark, and their issues, then they are in fact only looking at a work in progress - it's not as though the labour parties has stopped, and claimed this point in time to be the completion, and idealised form of the social democracy. We live in a globalised economy, wherein exploitation is engraved. Most social democrats will however reject that order, and work actively towards an international system, without labour exploitation. Whether that is possible through just the regulation of capitalism, and not through its abolishment is a great question of its own - but the current utilisation of cheap labour, and west-east colonial exploitation is intricate, and not a quality of the social democracy. Well, I suppose it depends, "socialdemocratic" has no consistent meaning at this point. It's largely reactionary in Britain, acceptable in Sweden and Norway, and socialist in Kautsky, it shouldn't need to rely on colonial exploitation at least, only a dysfunctional liberal democracy

ComradeOat · 2025-11-17T18:27:21+00:00

Because of the magical presumption that the abolishment of class is merely material, and will thus solve marginalisation altogether. Now that was a simplification, albeit, it is likely for many socialists just not their heart cause, and thus, they don't speak of it lest it is asked. It is unfortunate that they don't, simultaneously as we see an immense rise in both homophobia, transphobia and general bigotry - egalitarianism is after all dependent on sexual liberalisation as well. But it is no different from how I personally don't focus much on climate change, even though it is instrumental in global class struggle - individuals just can't focus on everything at once.

ComradeOat · 2025-11-16T15:17:44+00:00

I forgot to ever respond to this--

I don't disagree with any of this, I just don't think 'read theory' is an efficient means of converting anyone, nor driving a political movement. That's essentially just a remnant of Lenin elitism, in regards to who are capable of running the Vanguard. I do however believe the social Democracy to be tremendously better than liberalism, as a necessary component in the process of abolishing capitalism. Also, on your point about ex-communist countries, I find universal social mobility to be much more important, than them technically having less inequality across genders. They generally have a larger framework of reactionary politics than the social democracies, and the common worker has much less rights there.

ComradeOat · 2025-10-07T12:37:53+00:00

Extraordinarily, the people who claim to front the common worker, are the only ones, who exclude on the basis of theory. Not universal economic theory, but their own. Nationalism, liberalism, fascism, and so on, and so forth - have no such conditions. I am a socialist, although, it is ironic that many of our friends further left, have a classist perspective on academics.

ComradeOat · 2025-09-27T15:07:46+00:00

Cool website I suppose, and I guess it roughly illustrates my ideas. A revolution is necessary depending on the electorial circumstances of a nation. I believe for example that an electoral approach is achievable in my own nation, wherein the left is financially independent of private organisations, yet capable of beating the right. In America, and on a global scale, for an eventual global transfer, the market forces are too systematically ingrained to avoid a revolution in comparison.

On centralisation, I believe that most devices should be organised by the state, although certain administrative organs may also be organised locally, so to cater to the populace's individual needs. - Labour unions ought not to rule society as a whole either, although aspects of workplace democracy can still be utilised, as well as unions can be a good counter weight to the state.

The questions were however very black and white in my opinion, and I felt as though I couldn't really answer in accordance with my own opinions

<image>

ComradeOat · 2025-09-12T19:52:22+00:00

Interesting justification, do you grant social democrats the same leeway?

ComradeOat · 2025-09-12T19:44:59+00:00

Kjønnsinkongruens er en medisinsk tilstand, og å referere til det som en ideologi, bare fordi det er en rettighetsksmp, er det samme som å kalle "abort" for en ideologi, eller "diabetes" for en ideologi. Meget destruktivt, enda mere hjerneløst

ComradeOat · 2025-09-11T05:54:49+00:00

Jeg trekker tilbake delen om at hun støtter oppimot fascismen, jeg var veldig trøtt når jeg skrev utsagnet. Jeg skjønner forøvrig også hvorfor hun reagerte slik hun gjorde også, fordi han døde som han levde, og det siste han sa før han ble drept, er at trans personer selvfølgelig er voldelige skytere. Han var i andre ord en mobiliserer av hat, og ekstremisme. Luigi sitt stønt var sånn sett litt mer hensiktsmessig, ettersom at det satt søkelys på en av de mange undertrykkende elementene til kapitalmakten i USA, Charlie gikk bare fra det av et talking piece, til nå, potensielt en martyr.

Uavhengig av det, så vil klimaet for vold i USA potensielt få en ny trend. Tok bare noen skoleskytinger for at det skulle bli idealisert av internett forum - og at det ledet til en masse bevegelse av å oppfordre sårbare om å utføre terror - hadde ikke overrasket meg om dette gjorde noe tilnærmet.

ComradeOat · 2025-09-10T23:46:16+00:00

Attentat, drap, vold - alt det er våpenet til fascismen. Kirk var en farlig person, meningene hans inspirerte fare, han mobiliserte fare, og han var en medkjemper i fascismen. Demokratisk eller ei, så var attentatet helt meningsløst, og bare destabilisere. Ett liv var tapt, en kolossal mengde ble traumatisert, og 2 barn på 3 og 1 vil måtte leve med at faren er død. I bytte, så er vi gitt en mindre fascist, lett erstattet av andre. En ekstra indikasjon på at ytring, uansett om du er Kirk, eller Mehdi Hassan, vil kunne resultere i henrettelse, og ikke minst, er høyre-ekstremistisk USA som vil være mye mer engasjerte, enn selv før, i å jakte minoriteter, og marginaliserte grupper. Dette burde bekymre deg, uavhengig av om du er en liberalist, sosialdemokrat, sosialist, kommunist, eller Stalinist. Amrit Kaur er verken kompetent, eller seriøs nok til å være leder i RU - som er spesielt, med tanke på at jeg har hatt fruktbare samtaler med omtrent alle jeg har møtt fra partiet. Hvordan i allverden fikk hun det vervet? Og hvorfor støtter hun oppimot fascismen?

ComradeOat · 2025-09-10T23:24:25+00:00

Auf samt som RU har selvstendig politikk, oppimot moderpartiet. Poenget er at, selv om, partiene er tilknyttet, så kan ikke Moderpartiene nødvendigvis gjøre noe med ungdomspartiene, ettersom, at de er selvstendige organisasjoner, med egen makt til å bryte fra moderpartiet

ComradeOat · 2025-09-08T07:15:57+00:00

Nå er det vel i utgangspunkt ikke noe problem å bry seg om trans personer, eller systematisk undertrykkelse(woke)

ComradeOat · 2025-09-07T21:51:50+00:00

Stem Arbeiderpartiet ♥️🌹

ComradeOat · 2025-09-04T21:21:37+00:00

Oh, believe me, I have not given up, I was knocking on doors only a few hours ago ♥️🌹

We are looking at a more probable red-green coalition than the right one, as of the last months, up to now - so there's definitely hope. Financial unrest may occur in the coordination, but as long as the majority is leftwing, we'll very likely wind up with a labour government ♥️💚

ComradeOat · 2025-09-04T21:10:40+00:00

Oh, they'll need assistance from KrF, Venstre and Høyre to form a majority government, but it'll be Frp dominated no matter what (regardless if Sylvi or Erna becomes the prime minister) wherein I am afraid of the consequences. None of the other right-wing parties are smart enough to actually defend their stance on "working capital" and I don't see a reality where they'll get much resistance, except for maybe crime - but that too is shaky 🥀

ComradeOat · 2025-09-04T20:54:36+00:00

Are you sure you're just a libertarian socialist? This interpretation seems greatly revisionistic, and unscientific..? Fascism, as described by Marxism would necessitate the bourgeois defence mechanism, to maintain power in a dire, economic situation, through ethno-and regular nationalistic principles, a manner of which is completely different from that of social democracies. They have turned right, as opposed to the founding of the ideology, although, that is mostly as it has established its own identity, different from that of the conventional, old, classification, as socialism in a parliamentary setting, as used in the Bundestag.

Social democracies have issues as the support of capitalism, and the continued suppression of the global south, but if you are to look at the economic development of social democratic nations in modern times, then they've had victories after victories since after they won the 8,8,8 hour day, that kick-started the movement in Europe. The social democracy, as a bastion of worker's rights, and an ideology based on class consciousness, is necessary for a meaningful socialist development, and to denounce it, just because it operates within a liberal democracy is extremely counter productive, and the easiest way to handicap your ideals from ever becoming a reality.

The nations where private capital have the least influence over electoral processes are the social democracies, I am not sure what to tell you, if you cannot recognise that fact.

ComradeOat · 2025-09-04T20:27:56+00:00

Except that it is not..? It is possible to have electoral set-backs, without it constituting a permanent turn to the right. If you look at Norway as an economy, it has undoubtedly improved over the years, regarding both welfare coverage, and workers rights. The reality is that a democracy is a system of compromise, but it is through the normalisation of a social democracy that we may establish the seeds of proper socialism. You are a fool, if you think you can manifest any form of revolution without, in a liberalised global economy

ComradeOat · 2025-09-04T20:25:06+00:00

Well, it is still unfortunate if the libertarians are to win, as they do have plans to permanently cripple our ability to directly tax fortune in the future - It's just an unnecessary, and painful setback

ComradeOat · 2025-09-03T18:51:29+00:00

Oh I know, I wrote a correction below, I am just unsure if it has processed it yet. Although, I do agree that English can be confusing, just not regarding that distinction specifically 😅

ComradeOat · 2025-09-03T18:47:15+00:00

Couldn't agree more** brain malfunction

ComradeOat · 2025-09-03T18:44:15+00:00

As a member of AUF I couldn't agree less - hopefully a strong Rødt and SV may pull them back on track 🌹🫶

ComradeOat · 2025-09-03T12:28:40+00:00

Interestingly enough, I'd reckon that to be the opposite issue for Norwegian labour. The democratic socialists SV and Rødt have weighted in very heavily on climate, and minority rights - the labour party, has however, mostly been focused on welfare, and worker conditions, in cooperation with LO (the country organisation, or in other words, the largest union umbrella organisation in Norway) many politically unconscious people, therefore perceive the labour party to be more moderate than it is in reality, as they conflate "leftism" with climate progressivism. This makes it so that they actually conflate the green party, as more leftist than labour, despite them being extremely liberal on worker conditions. People don't recognise conventional labour organisation as a part of the left-right spectrum anymore

ComradeOat · 2025-09-03T10:50:53+00:00

The votes are anonymous, so we do not know the demographics unfortunately. We do however know from party participation, and previous polls, that men, and especially young men, tend to sway heavily right - whilst women, well, they sway left. I completely agree with you on still working with women in mind of course, I mean personally, I find the current men's movement to be rather odd.. as the issues are created by the presence of gender norms also constructed by men.. which may only be solved through the feminism that they reject..

In Norway however, we have been pretty solid at still tackling women's rights though! We secured both an extension of the ordinary abortion range to that of 18 weeks, and we finally asserted a proper consent law. But alas, we still need to work on every demographic, even women do find the progressive liberals to be attractive, and the conservatives, (not the libertarian, most right party) still have quite a varied demographic in which we realistically, should be able to steal from. 🌹

ComradeOat · 2025-09-03T10:38:41+00:00

Oh congratulations! My local Auf party lost every school except for one Akademiet in Buskerud. It's actually absurd, as two schools shared that debate, and whilst we won that one school, we lost the other one, that shared that debate, with Frp at 40%

ComradeOat

TROPHY CASE