If you appreciate this essay by Fjordman, please consider making a donation to him, using the button at the bottom of this post.
Apropos of the essay below, Fjordman was recently awarded the Anti-Nobel Prize by Vlad Tepes.
Nobody stopped Adolf Hitler in the 1930s. Will somebody stop Fjordman today?
On June 14, 2013, it was announced that the well-funded free speech organization Fritt Ord would give a grant to support my upcoming and still unfinished book about the Breivik case, Witness to Madness. This triggered an explosive debate in Norway which continued not just for weeks but for months afterwards, even reaching the government level.
My most positive impression came from those individuals who probably genuinely disagree with and dislike my viewpoint, but who nevertheless supported the decision and freedom of speech as a matter of principle. There are fortunately still quite a few of those left in Norway, Scandinavia and the wider Western world, which is encouraging.
They included the veteran publisher William Nygaard and the Professor of the History of Ideas Trond Berg Eriksen. The columnist Shabana Rehman Gaarder supported Fritt Ord’s decision. So did the activist Sara Azmeh Rasmussen, although she suggested that I am a “troll.”
There was no shortage of people who failed this test, though. The author Anne Holt was furious, while the author and journalist Vidar Kvalshaug described my writings as “muck” and wrote Twitter messages about my supposed “personal responsibility” for the terror attacks.
One of the nastiest reactions came from Snorre Valen, an MP from the Socialist Left Party (SV). He wrote an essay for the public broadcaster NRK, stating that the “Fascist” Peder Jensen will “write a book about the terrorism that he himself inspired.” He further wrote that “Fritt Ord’s support to Fjordman is an insult to all those who were killed and injured. It is an insult to all the relatives and to all those who lost somebody on July 22, 2011.”
I employ my freedom of speech to say controversial things. As such, it’s only fair that my level of tolerance for what others throw back at me should be high. It is of course ridiculous that I’m being referred to as a Fascist, but I will reluctantly accept this as being within the boundaries of our libel laws. I also accept being compared to Darth Vader, Lex Luthor or Sauron, but I prefer not to be compared to Gollum because he’s got such bad teeth.
Yet there are limits. There is little doubt that Mr. Valen, who wrote this essay as an MP for the ruling party SV, believes that I share some culpability for terror attacks and the mass murder, an accusation which is not only obscene but borders on the libelous. I have been a staunch anti-terrorist for years. The same can unfortunately not be said about Valen’s own political party, which has for years expressed sympathies for Palestinian Jihadist terrorists.
The dissident writer Hans Rustad commented that the mass media have made me into a form of abominable snowman or all-purpose bogeyman. Rustad believes that the rhetoric employed by Valen, among others, in the country’s largest media outlet was akin to branding somebody an outlaw, which in previous ages put them beyond the boundaries of normal legal protection.
Rustad’s claim is probably exaggerated, but it is troubling that a Member of Parliament representing the ruling elites decides to attack a law-abiding citizen with no criminal record. It’s a sign of an unhealthy social climate.
Valen ignored the fact that Breivik himself stated during the trial that he wanted to initiate a “witch-hunt” on non-violent activists on the political Right. That Valen and other members of the media and the political elites are actively helping to fulfill the mass murder’s expressed wishes by vilifying critics of mass immigration doesn’t seem to bother them much.
Valen further claimed that my texts do not have any empirical support. That’s a remarkable claim, given that riots that I’ve been warning against for years had occurred in Swedish immigrant ghettos only weeks earlier, in May 2013.
His own party SV claims to be preoccupied with the safety of women and children. If that is the case, shouldn’t they be more concerned by the fact that many women now feel that it is unsafe to walk the streets in several Norwegian cities, and that Norwegian children are regularly harassed by immigrant gangs in their own country? There is a lot of talk about white “right-wing extremists,” but isn’t it extreme to engage in a policy of wide open borders and thus displace the native population of an entire continent, namely Europe?
Snorre Valen blasted non-violent anti-Islamists, but at the same time supported his own government’s decision to engage in “dialogue” with the Taliban. The Taliban is one of the world’s most violent and brutal Islamic movements that regularly carries out political murders and terror attacks and that kills Norwegian and other NATO soldiers.
When Snorre Valen stated these things and tied me intimately to Breivik’s mass murder, he was a high-profile Member of Parliament, acting as a deputy chair of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence. He was also a member of the Central Committee of the Socialist Left Party (SV), which at that time formed a part of the ruling coalition government of Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and had been in power for nearly a decade.
Many left-wing activists love to see themselves as brave dissidents, “speaking the truth to power.” Yet this man represented power, and he used it to attack a peaceful writer whose political views he dislikes, defining him as beyond the pale. Coincidentally, his party was struggling in the opinion polls just before the national parliamentary elections in 2013.
Snorre Valen thus needed publicity for himself and his party to retain his lucrative personal position as a Member of Parliament. The same man has used his status as MP to nominate Wikileaks and the leakers Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden for the Nobel Peace Prize.
By August 1, 2013, the chairman of Norway’s Nobel Prize committee “attacked the Norwegian press for allowing the extremist blogger Peder ‘Fjordman’ Jensen to air his anti-Islamic views.” Thorbjørn Jagland, a former Prime Minister and now the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, warned against letting the ideology allegedly held by the mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik to enter the mainstream:
“If you read what Fjordman has published online, you can easily see that he is coming from the same mindset. The only difference is that while Fjordman writes, Breivik acted. But there is not much difference between giving Fjordman the support to publish his opinions and giving the killer himself a public microphone.”
One has to wonder what planet Mr. Jagland is on. As Per Edgar Kokkvold, the respected Secretary General of the Norwegian Press Association, said, the debate regarding the grant to my upcoming book had been going on in the Norwegian press throughout the summer of 2013, with many participants both for and against it.
In an essay in the daily Dagsavisen, Thorbjørn Jagland expressed concern that if people like me were able to express their views, murderers might be next. “Someone has to say stop before we find ourselves on a slippery slope where Fjordman’s voice becomes more and more normal,” he wrote, praising Hans Fredrik Dahl, a historian of Norway’s Nazi occupation, for doing this.
A few days earlier, the debate editor at Dagsavisen, the Socialist writer Stian Bromark, published an essay claiming that the four major right-wing extremists Norway has produced are Anders Behring Breivik, Varg Vikernes, Vidkun Quisling and myself. He worried that this might be bad for business and for Norway’s image abroad as a “peace nation.”
The other three mentioned by Bromark are all convicted criminals, the first two being murderers. At the time of writing, I have no criminal record whatsoever. Yet that apparently matters little to this left-wing newspaper. Unsurprisingly, Stian Bromark has for years mocked individuals warning against rising Islamic infiltration of Europe.
The essay by Professor Emeritus Hans Fredrik Dahl that was praised by Thorbjørn Jagland was published in national newspaper Dagbladet in connection with the two-year anniversary for Breivik’s deadly attacks. Professor Dahl is a noted newspaper columnist in addition to being a member of the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters.
In his July 2013 column, Dahl directly compared me to Adolf Hitler and indicated that just as Hitler and the Nazis should have been stopped in the 1930s, people like me need to be stopped today, before things escalate and go out of control.
Hans Fredrik Dahl has worked as a professional historian for decades and should know a thing or two about the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. Yet he compared me to the Nazi leader Adolf Hitler seemingly without having read much of my writings. That’s remarkably sloppy and dishonest behavior by an esteemed professor and alleged researcher. He apparently based his judgment mainly on highly negative presentations of my supposedly “bizarre” writings and viewpoints made by others.
One could further point out that even if I had been just as evil as Adolf Hitler, unlike him I’m not the top political leader of a major industrial and military power or the head of a big war machine. I merely write essays. Coincidentally, Professor Hans Fredrik Dahl himself in the late 1990s defended the British writer David Irving, who had previously gone quite far in claiming that the Nazi genocide of Jews and others never happened or has been exaggerated.
Nobody stopped Adolf Hitler in the 1930s. Will somebody stop Fjordman today?
DONATE TO FJORDMAN:
For a complete archive of Fjordman’s writings, see the multi-index listing in the Fjordman Files.