Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 15:04, 28 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Progress Party (Norway) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months

	Progress Party (Norway) has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 7, 2010 Good article nominee Not listed September 28, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
	Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 8, 2023, and April 8, 2024.
Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics: Political parties / Libertarianism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Libertarianism (assessed as Mid-importance). Norway This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Conservatism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Far-right descriptor

In Special:Diff/1173915485, language has been reintroduced to the article explaining that the Progress Party has also been described as far-right. I agree with this content addition, since the neutral point of view policy requires the article to cover "fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic", and there was no valid policy-based argument for excluding the far-right descriptor from the article.

I've removed the text describing the Progress Party as "most moderate" in Misplaced Pages's voice in Special:Diff/1176484626/1178021777, since that language is contradicted by the reliable sources that describe the Progress Party as far-right. — Newslinger talk 03:59, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps a footnote like on the political position (similar to Swiss People's Party's page) could be added in the future? Perhaps it could be added now too if you feel it could be with the appropriate sources you've found. ZlatanSweden10 (talk) 17:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

I agree with the addition and I've attached the same inline citation to the footnote. — Newslinger talk 19:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Why clog up the Infobox (which already has too much listed in the adjacent Ideology field)? The mention of the party’s description as far-right by some sources is already mentioned in the lede and “Ideology and political position” section.— Autospark (talk) 11:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Now that the "Political position" field reads "Right-wing to far-right", I've removed the footnote to simplify the infobox. "Right-wing to far-right" does appear to be the most common way to indicate in the infobox when a political party is described as both right-wing and far-right; see Brothers of Italy, Freedom Party of Austria, and Greek Solution for a few examples. — Newslinger talk 18:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

That’s a recent trend, sticking footnotes in Infoboxes when the same information can and should be communicated in the article lede and relevant subsections, and one I think needs to be reversed.— Autospark (talk) 23:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

At least in this article, it seems like footnotes were used as a half-step or equivocation when there were sufficient reliable sources to support a descriptor, but enough editors opposed that descriptor despite the presence of these sources. It doesn't look like we have that issue right now. — Newslinger talk 05:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

It's not about rejecting a "descriptor" or not, it's about whether to place it in the Infobox. Infoboxes should be kept as minimal as possible. The far-right descriptor is a perfectly valid one in this case, based on reliable sources – the issue is whether it should be in the Infobox as well as the article body.-- Autospark (talk) 11:50, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

The party is not and have never been far right. The far-right party in Norway is the Norwegian Democrats, who split from Frp because their memberships were suspended. Frp is a market-liberal right wing party. I don't care about journalist labels, but here is an article from a professor of politics in Norway who writes about Frp being a typical right-wing party, and he even disputes the populist-label.

https://www.idunn.no/doi/10.18261/issn.1504-3053-2017-03-02 Laddmeister (talk) 19:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

The article already mentions that the Progress Party's right-wing populism has been disputed. The academic sources in Special:Permalink/1226422304 § cite note-far-right-16 amply and reliably substantiate that the party "has been described by academics as far-right". The party being right-wing does not contradict it also being far-right, since the far-right is a subset of the right-wing. Since the linked paper is paywalled, are you able to provide relevant quotes for verification? — Newslinger talk 08:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes. As I commented in another post on this issue:

Source: Professor in political science with the University of Oslo: Anders Todal Jenssen.

"The Progress Party has undergone a change of heart. Today's FRP has lost several of the characteristics of far-right populism and should be perceived as a market-liberal right-wing party"

Laddmeister (talk) 09:53, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

As I said in the other section, the summary of the linked paper uses the term right-wing populism (høyrepopulismens), not "far-right populism". Are you relying solely on the six-sentence summary that is available for free, or do you have access to the actual paywalled paper? — Newslinger talk 10:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I have the article. Here is some qotes from the article:

START OF QUOTES:

"FRP has undergone a change of heart. Today's FRP has lost several of the characteristics of right-wing populism and should be perceived as a market-liberal right-wing party.

...

FRP has always distanced itself from right-wing populist parties with which it has not wanted to be compared. Several researchers have also problematized the FRP's position in the right-wing populist party family. Frps and Høyre's (centre-right conservatives) voters have become more similar both with regard to social characteristics and attitudes.

...

He (Cas Mudde) defines populism as an "ideology which perceives society as divided into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups, 'the real people' versus 'the corrupt elite', and which argues that politics should be an expression of the general will, the will of the people »

...

The family of right-wing populist parties has always been heterogeneous, and the Progress Party has often been portrayed as a moderate variant within the category. The question in this article is whether the FRP has undergone a metamorphosis from right-wing populism to market liberalism, that the FRP has left the family of right-wing populist parties and should rather be considered a right-wing party.

...

The party's position in economic policy throughout the 1990s can be described as an original mixture of market liberalism and ambitious welfare goals.

...

If we go back to Jager and Walgrave's (2007: 334) three characteristics of right-wing populism: the description of the people as homogeneous, elite criticism and exclusion of outgroups, with the FRP only the last characteristic remains. Thus, it is obvious that today's FRP can hardly be called right-wing populist."

END OF QUOTES

Professor Anders Jenssen is clearly adressing the claim that FRP is a populist party. They certainly have their roots in populism, but shouldnt be adressed as such anymore. He doesnt directly adress the far-right claim, since the claim that FRP is a far-right party has long been discarded in norwegian political academics. If you look at the sources in the wiki-page here it's foreign political academics who claims that FRP is a far-right party. Anders Jenssen clearly portaits FRP as a moderate party on the right. They both accept the rules of liberal democracy and embrace civil liberties.

So what does Misplaced Pages tell us about far-right politics?

"Far-right politics, or right-wing extremism, is a spectrum of political thought that tends to be radically conservative, ultra-nationalist, and authoritarian, often also including nativist tendencies. The name derives from the left–right political spectrum, with the "far right" considered further from center than the standard political right.

Historically, "far-right politics" has been used to describe the experiences of fascism, Nazism, and Falangism. Contemporary definitions now include neo-fascism, neo-Nazism, the Third Position, the alt-right, racial supremacism and other ideologies or organizations that feature aspects of authoritarian, ultra-nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, theocratic, racist, homophobic, transphobic, or reactionary views.

Far-right politics have led to oppression, political violence, forced assimilation, ethnic cleansing, and genocide against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority or their perceived threat to the native ethnic group, nation, state, national religion, dominant culture, or conservative social institutions."

It's very clear that this illiberalism and anti-democratic label does not fit the Frp. They're right wing, but they're clearly not far-right. Laddmeister (talk) 10:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for providing the quotes and translation. That paper can certainly be cited to bolster the claim that the Progress Party's right-wing populist description has been disputed. However, the paper does not dispute that the Progress Party "has been described by academics as far-right", which is supported by multiple academic sources in Special:Permalink/1226422304 § cite note-far-right-16. The extent of the Progress Party's populism is orthogonal to the Progress Party's position on the left–right political spectrum. — Newslinger talk 10:35, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Have you looked at the sources in the wiki-article that supports the claim that FRP is a far-right party? One source is Mette Wiggen on the page "Open Democracy". Open Democracy isnt an academic paper, it's a left-wing activism organization ran by several Labour affiliates. Which is fine, but it's not an academic source. Mette Wiggen is an academic in Leeds, but she's also a left wing activist. Which is fine, but it clearly clouds her writings with some anti-right wing bias. Portaiting parties as far-right and far-left is a well known tactic to smear political opponents. The Red Party is Norway are suffering from the same, where people who oppose them call them far-left, while they mostly are considered as a left-wing socialist party. Mette Wiggen has for example a facebook-picture of herself with the label "fucking socialist", which was a socialist-left response in Norway to the leader of Frp who called left wingers "fucking socialists". Clear bias there. https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=2208154385931612&set=a.102836696463402&locale=nb_NO

She's also advocating for BDS on her page. Frp is a pro-israel party.

In the article quoted she doesnt explain why Frp is a far-right party. She just labels them as that. Thats a very dubious source for such a claim.

Next source: Bridge, a georgetown university initiative. Another activist group disguising themselves as academics. No name on the source, but Bridge calls themselves "The Bridge Initiative is a multi-year research project on Islamophobia". Like Wiggen, they dont explain what makes Frp far-right. They just claim that it is. Dubious source. They even use Jacobin as a source. A political socialist activist online newspaper.

The other sources are either locked, very dated or/and written by non-norwegian academics on far-right generally, not on Frp specifically. Unless a norwegian political science academic can support the claim that Frp is a far-right party, which they wont, I would dare say that there is no reason why such a slur should be posted on the wiki-page. Again, I've pointed to the reasons why Frp doesnt fit in the far-right. They're not anti-democracy, not anti-civil rights. And they're described as moderate right wing by professor Jenssen. Laddmeister (talk) 10:56, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I've read all of the cited sources. Twist (2019), Niklasson (2018), and Ivarsflaten (2022) are academic sources that are all newer than the Jenssen (2017) paper you quoted. The other cited academic sources include van Spanje (2011), Lazaridis (2015), and Madeley (1990), which cover a wide time span. The nationality of an author is irrelevant to the reliability of their works, but I'll still point out that Herdis Hølleland (Niklasson's co-author) and Elisabeth Ivarsflaten are Norwegian academics. The term far-right is a standard political descriptor that represents a place on the left–right political spectrum, not a slur. Your personal opinion on the party cannot be taken into consideration, per the policy against original research. — Newslinger talk 12:42, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I just read the chapter ny Ivarsflaten cited in 2022. She writes here the following:

"The Norwegian party system has more than four parties, but we have chosen to focus on the two main traditional parties of the right and left (Høyre and Arbeiderpartiet) and the two main challenger parties on the far right and the far left (Fremskrittspartiet and Sosialistisk Venstreparti). We do so to maintain a parsimonious analysis and facilitate comparisons to other European multiparty systems."

The Sosialistisk Venstreparty has never, as far as I know, been accused of being far-left. Because they are not. They are in this comparative analysis using the term "left and right" for the centre-left and centre-right parties, and "far left and far right" for the wing parties. That does not mean that they are indeed far-right or far-left, but they are simplifying this in this context. They even point that out in order to maintain a parsimonious analysis.

They continue:

"The far right in Norway, the Progress Party, is generally considered in the comparative literature to be less exclusionary than many of its counterpart elsewere in Scandinavia and Europe."

They continue to point out that Progress Party has an sceptical attitude towards muslim immigrants, similar to far-right parties in Europe.

In this context it's important to understand what comparative politics is. It's about creating labels in order to group parties and differentiate them from each other. The author is a professor in compartative politics. This does not mean that Frp is far-right or that SV is far-left. It's just a method they use here to differentiate the traditional right (Consrervative) from Progress Party. Just like they differentiate traditional left (Labour) from the socialist left party.

I have not have time to check the other sources yet. Will do later. Laddmeister (talk) 14:00, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Here is a newsarticle where Ivarshagen are asked to define the Progress party. She calls it a populist right-wing party (not far right). She says:

"Here the party has played a double game on several occasions, which is common for right-wing populist parties. On the one hand, the FRP appears in the party program with moderate views. On the other side, there will be outcomes that are more far-reaching, such as the so-called sustainability report on immigration, she says."

Juvikås, who is a well used source on the progress party on wikipedia says:

"Yes, they are right-wing populists. But compared to other such parties in Europe, they are a moderate edition and have stronger elements of liberal-conservative currents, says Jupskås." Laddmeister (talk) 14:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Another article where Ivarshagen calls Frp a moderate right wing party, not far right:

"Elisabeth Ivarsflaten, associate professor at the Department of Comparative Politics at the University of Bergen, researches, among other things, the immigration dimension in elections and party formations, but calls it by a different name:

- I see the debate about immigration as part of the debate about globalization and internationalisation, says Ivarsflaten, who primarily researches the development of party systems at a European level.

According to her, internationalization is one of several major developments since the 1960s, which have helped to form the new layer of parties that have come into being after the "old" dividing line model.

- Internationalization has given rise to conflicts about identity, about citizenship and about self-government versus national cooperation, says Ivarsflaten.

In some countries this comes in the form of ethnic self-rule parties, such as in Spanish regions, Wales and Scotland, or as ethnic parties without self-rule claims, such as the Turkish party in Hungary. In other countries, it comes as anti-Islamist parties, such as Geert Wilders' party in the Netherlands, or it manifests itself in national conservative parties, such as the Danish People's Party and the EU-sceptic Samlingspartiet in Finland.

- The Progress Party in Norway is a moderate version of what is called a nativist approach to citizenship, that those born in a country have the first right to benefits, says Ivarsflaten."

https://www.dagensperspektiv.no/nyheter/norge-mangler-rene-innvandringsfiendlige-parter/665370 Laddmeister (talk) 14:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages's policy against synthesis states: "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source. Similarly, do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source." It is against this policy to suggest that, because an academic publication is comparing different political parties, the publication somehow does not consider a party far-right even when it explicitly uses the term far-right to describe the party multiple times in a section called "The Limits of the Far Right" that covers "the nature of the ideological appeal of the far right in Europe".

Here is additional context from Ivarsflaten (2022) showing that the book is unequivocally describing the Progress Party as a far-right party:

That said, there is considerable ideological heterogeneity in what is usually considered the far-right party family in Europe. Some of these parties have grown out of regional independence movements (Lega Nord in Italy; Vlaams Belang, formerly Vlaams Blok, in Belgium); others were initially tax protest movements (the Norwegian Progress Party; the Danish Progress Party, now the Danish People’s Party); some were originally agrarian or rural-interest parties (the Swiss People’s Party; the True Finns); yet others started out as EU-protest movements (the UK Independence Party and Alternative für Deutschland); some nativist parties historically had more direct links to extreme right milieus (the French National Front, the Austrian Freedom Party, and the Sweden Democrats); and a considerable number of them are now increasingly dedicated to preventing what they see as the existential threat of Islam (most prominently, the Dutch Freedom Party).

The far right in Norway, the Progress Party, is generally considered in the comparative literature to be less exclusionary than many of its counterparts elsewhere in Scandinavia and in continental Europe. Detailed case-study analyses have argued that the Norwegian Progress Party contains several factions and that this is an important reason why the party vacillates between more and less exclusionary policies. Notably, this party—unlike some other far-right parties—has activists who are mainly concerned with areas of politics other than immigration and minorities. Still, minority and immigration policies are very important for the party. The Norwegian Election Studies show that voters strongly and consistently associate the Progress Party with exclusionary policies toward immigration and immigrants. In that way, the Progress Party is similar to other far-right parties that have been considered electorally successful.

The following are all of the 14 parties Ivarsflaten (2022) described as far-right in the first quoted paragraph and their listed political positions on their Misplaced Pages articles:

Because the far right is a subset of the right wing, Ivarsflaten describing the Progress Party as a right-wing populist party in a news article does not contradict her describing the party as a far-right party in an academic publication. (By the way, that news article is not linked in your comments.) And again, because a party's degree of populism is independent of that party's position on the left–right political spectrum, the extent to which the Progress Party is populist has no bearing on whether it is far-right. Likewise, the Dagens Perspektiv news article says that Ivarsflaten considers the Progress Party moderately nativist; she does not comment on the Progress Party's political position on the left–right political spectrum. — Newslinger talk 22:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC) Edited 06:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree with User:Autospark: stuffing infoboxes with ideologies, positions and sources is not a good idea as the infobox serves as a summary of the article, whose sections can gather all the useful, sourced and consensual infos on the party. Also, I think that the "far-right" label is too frequently used: as for "far-left", it should be used only for fringe or authoritarian parties—the Progress Party is neither of them and, yes, it is arguably one of the most moderate parties of its kind. --Checco (talk) 14:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. Laddmeister (talk) 19:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Right-wing parties is both an umbrella for different versions of right-wing politics and a specific position between far-right and centre-right. It depends on the context.

One of the most renowned european scolars on populism, extremism and far-right politics, Cas Mudde (who himself is a leftist), has written a book about radical right parties in Europe. He claims that Frp is a neoliberal populist party, and not a radical far-right party.

"Most usual suspects that are excluded from the populist radical right party family belong to the larger and more diffuse category of populist parties. Two subgroups are most relevant in this respect: social populists and neoliberal populists. The latter category is most closely related to the populist radical right; together they form the loose category of right-wing populism. The core ideology of neoliberal populism, as defined in the previous chapter, is the combination of primarily economic liberalism and populism. A good if somewhat extreme example of a neoliberal populist party is the Norwegian Fremskrittspartiet (FRP), whose status has always been debated within the field."

"The party began as an antitax party, morphed into a neoliberal party in the 1980s, and then embraced an opportunistic populism in the 1990s (e.g. Lorenz 2003).9 Notwithstanding the protean nature of the FRP, it is quite clear that nativism does not constitute part of its core ideology.10 Despite its occasional highly xenophobic campaigns, or its more recent defense of welfare chauvinism, the FRP is best classified as a neoliberal populist party."

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/populist-radical-right-parties-in-europe/244D86C50E6D1DC44C86C4D1D313F16D

https://bora.uib.no/bora-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2771277/CFW---Master-Thesis---Final-draft.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Laddmeister (talk) 13:31, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Cas Mudde's The Populist Radical Right: A Reader (2016) is a 660-page analysis of European populist radical-right political parties, and is (to my knowledge) Mudde's most comprehensive work covering this specific area of politics to date. The analysis concludes that the Norwegian Progress Party (abbreviated as "FRPn") is an "extreme right" party (emphasis added):

Conclusion

In this paper we have tried to identify and define more clearly the category of the extreme right party. In so doing we have stated three criteria: spatial, historic-ideological and attitudinal-systemic. The first has been employed as a preliminary screening, in order to identify parties on the extreme right of the left-right continuum. The second criterion applies to the shared ideology inside the ERP family. Having adopted the reference to fascism as the distinctive element, we noted that only a minority of parties located on the extreme right retain a fascist heritage. The third criterion, the presence of antisystem attitudes, enables us to identify those non-fascist parties that belong to the ERP class and not to the conservative one. All of the parties located at far right which show a fascist heritage and/or which manifest antisystem attitude are included in the class of the extreme right. This class is composed by two types, according to the existence of fascist imprint: the old right wing parties (MSI, EPEN, NPD, NF, BNP, FNs, PDC, NPD/BRB/EHI, CP86) and the new right-wing parties (FN, AN/Vigilantes, FPO, FNb, PFN, Vlb, Rep, FRPn, FRP, AP, CD). While some difficulties emerge about the inclusion of a party in one type or the other (in particular CP86 and AP) we are quite confident in the inclusion of FRPn, FRP, FPO and AP in the extreme right class. To the best of our knowledge, their political discourse tends to undermine the legitimacy of the democratic system by discrediting the parliamentary decision-making process, party government and the representative procedure; finally, through their strong xenophobic stances, they undermine one of the keystones of democracy, equality of men.

Mudde's earlier work, Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe (2007) – your first link – is nine years older than Mudde (2016) and does not examine the Progress Party's position on the left–right political spectrum in as much detail as Mudde (2016).Your second link, Wergeland (2021), is a masters thesis. Per WP:SCHOLARSHIP, "Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence." Wergeland (2021) does not appear to have been cited by other academic publications, so it is not a reliable source for this Misplaced Pages article. — Newslinger talk 10:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC) Edited to correct chapter name, correct authorship, and add page number to citation. 08:15, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

The second link (master thesis) was posted by a mistake. It is not relevant to this discussion. Laddmeister (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

After obtaining a better-formatted version of Mudde (2016), I have to make some corrections. Cas Mudde is listed as the sole editor of The Populist Radical Right: A Reader, but the above quote is from the chapter "The silent counter-revolution: Hypotheses on the emergence of extreme right-wing parties in Europe", which was authored by Piero Ignazi. I've edited my quotation to correct this and add a page number.

The second chapter of Mudde (2016), "Party ideology" (by Elisabeth Carter and edited by Mudde), describes the Norwegian Progress Party (abbreviated as "FRPn") as "right-wing extremist". Carter states that FRPn is "some­what less extreme than that of other right-­wing extrem­ist parties", but references another publication by Ignazi to state that FRPn is still in the "extreme right" because FRPn "under­mined the system’s legit­im­acy". Carter places FRPn after the mid-1980s in the category "Neo-­liberal xeno­phobic parties (radic­ally xeno­phobic; cultur­ist; demand reform of exist­ing system: more demo­cracy, less state)", and places FRPn before the mid-1980s in the category "Neo-­liberal popu­list parties (not xeno­phobic; not racist; demand reform of exist­ing system: more demo­cracy, less state)".

Based on all of the relevant academic assessments cited and presented so far, I believe there is sufficient evidence to describe the Progress Party as "Right-wing to far-right", but insufficient evidence to describe the Progress Party as solely far-right. — Newslinger talk 09:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Errors on the page

I cannot edit this page since some user has marked me for edit-warring, even if the edits are both sourced and correct. I cant do anything about that. But. If someone who are not marked for edit-warring can fix some errors, please do.

1. Ketil Solvik-Olsen is not the deputy leader. Terje Søviknes and Hans Andreas Limi are deputy leaders. I've tried correcting this but a certain user keeps reverting it.
2. National conservatism is claimed as the main ideology in the infobox. The party ideology is not national conservatism, and the sources posted does not claim that it is. The sources say that the party leader say "there is also room for people belonging to national conservatism" in the party. Which makes national conservatism a faction, not the party ideology. I've tried correcting this, but a certain user keeps reverting it.
3. Right-wing populism is also claimed in the infobox. This should be marked as disputed. I've pointed and posted to the source for this, by prof. Anders Jenssen. But a certain user keeps reverting this.
4. Anti-immigration. The party is not anti-immigration. They're for a stricter policy on immigration and wants the government to take more control on immigration than what is being done today. Thats not the same. This is an incorrect slur, not backed by credible sources. Like most other errors on this page.

Laddmeister (talk) 11:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

The term anti-immigration refers to support for restricting immigration; the term is not a slur, just as anti-abortion and anti-nuclear are also not slurs. The cited reliable sources explicitly describe the Progress Party as anti-immigration. Some sources go even further; as I quoted in the above section, Mudde (2016) describes the Progress Party as one of the European populist "extreme right" parties with "strong xenophobic stances". — Newslinger talk 10:23, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Labour, Centre-Party and Conservative party are also for restricting immigration. Strange why they havent gotten the same label. They all advocate for restricting asylum seekers access to Norway.

https://www.bt.no/btmeninger/debatt/i/860QLd/en-liberal-innvandringspolitikk-i-norge-er-ikke-det-beste-for-verdens-flyktningerhttps://www.minerva.no/asylpolitikk-civita-elisabeth-tangen/en-innvandringsstans-vil-trenge-seg-frem-til-slutt/438726https://www.arbeiderpartiet.no/politikken/flyktning-og-asylpolitikk/https://www.regjeringen.no/no/tema/innvandring-og-integrering/id918/https://www.dagen.no/nyheter/hoyre-og-frp-onsker-en-strengere-flyktningpolitikk-krf-sterkt-uenig/https://www.nettavisen.no/norsk-debatt/norsk-innvandringspolitikk-skal-vare-streng/o/5-95-1369345 Laddmeister (talk) 13:01, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Is anti-immigration a significant component of these parties' political ideologies? If reliable sources (particularly academic sources) explicitly describe it that way, then a discussion about the inclusion of the anti-immigration descriptor may be warranted on the talk pages of the respective Misplaced Pages articles about these parties. — Newslinger talk 07:33, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

No, it's not. But their policy isnt much different from Frp. But I see your point. Laddmeister (talk) 12:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Classical liberal or libertarian

This article cites Jens Rydgren in the book Class Politics and the Radical Right as a source for the party to be labeled as libertarian. I just read the article, and libertarianism isnt mentioned. It's mentioned that the party is classical-liberal, has neo-liberal policies and also support public welfare services. Whoever put this quote in can't have read the book chapter they're citing.

I'm suggesting the citation is moved from libertarian to classical-liberalism. One of the main differences between classical liberalism and libertarianism is the view on public services and welfare. Frp supports welfare and public funded education, health services etc. The sources claiming the party is libertarian/right-libertarian label should be examined more closely. Laddmeister (talk) 14:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Next source examined is the book "Pluralistic Struggles in Gender, Sexuality and Coloniality by severeal swedish authors. They're writing about trans rights in scandinavia. Progress Party is barely mentioned, and referenced to as a "populist right-wing libertarian party". But the ideology and policies of the progress party is not discussed. It's mentioned because a cabinet minister of the progress party said was mentioned after talking about the LGBTQ community. Libertarianism and policies are not mentioned. This can not be used as a source for calling the party libertarian or right-wing libertarian. Laddmeister (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I have so far been unable to verify the text written by Witfelt, but I have ordered the book from the university library. If someone have access to the text it would be nice if they could verify if Witfelt actually describes the party as libertarian, and explains why the party fits such a label. Unless this, the text refering to right-libertarianism should be removed from the article. Laddmeister (talk) 15:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

The page is a lot better than it used to be

I just want to comment that this page is a lot better now than what it used to be. We all know that trolls on wikipedia are editing pages on subjects they feel strongly about, and especially subjects they feel strongly hostility towards. This page has been no exception to this. But as it stands now, it's not perfect by far, but it's at least a lot less manipulated by political activists who try to portrait those they disagree with as "far right nazis". Laddmeister (talk) 12:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages good articles
• Social sciences and society good articles
• GA-Class politics articles
• Low-importance politics articles
• GA-Class political party articles
• Mid-importance political party articles
• Political parties task force articles
• GA-Class Libertarianism articles
• Mid-importance Libertarianism articles
• WikiProject Libertarianism articles
• WikiProject Politics articles
• GA-Class Norway articles
• Unknown-importance Norway articles
• WikiProject Norway articles
• GA-Class Conservatism articles
• Mid-importance Conservatism articles
• WikiProject Conservatism articles