Continuous “Safety”?  Labour Succeeds in Norway’s 2025 Elections Amidst Polarization

Norway ranks among the world’s most stable democracies—a high-trust society with robust welfare institutions and a consensus-driven political culture. Yet like elsewhere, Norway is not immune to rising populism and the polarizing debate climate and exclusionary rhetoric that accompanies it. The parliamentary election of September 2025 put this tension into relief.

Let’s first look at the results for the right-wing bloc: The Progress Party (Fremskrittspartiet, FrP)—long the face of anti-immigration politics in Norway—entered the campaign with renewed confidence under the steady leadership of Sylvi Listhaug, bolstered by the active presence of youth-wing leader Simen Velle. Meanwhile, the Christian Democrats (Kristelig Folkeparti, KrF) doubled down on “conservative values”—a strategy that only barely lifted them above the parliamentary threshold of 4 percent—while the main center-right party, Høyre (the Conservative Party or, more literally, the Right), continued to grapple with questions about its direction. Overall, the results reflected a fragmented conservative bloc: while FrP managed to mobilize its base effectively, the Liberal Party (Venstre) performed exceptionally poorly, as many of its more centrist voters appeared wary of Listhaug’s strong polling and chose to distance themselves from a potential right-wing surge.

Yet when the votes were counted, it was Labour (Arbeiderpartiet, Ap) and its rhetoric of “safety,” coupled with support from its red/green allies, that secured a narrow but decisive victory. This victory spared the country a government of the right-wing bloc, dominated as it currently is by a right-wing populist party that many see as contributing to polarization.

The Conservative Collapse: Fear of a Listhaug Premiership

Why? A key reason was that many moderate conservatives balked at the prospect of Sylvi Listhaug becoming prime minister if the right-wing bloc won. For these voters, the danger of legitimizing FrP’s polarizing agenda outweighed loyalty to the right. The collapse of Høyre cannot be explained merely by poor campaigning or voter fatigue; it was rooted in a deeper fear of the consequences of handing power to an emboldened Progress Party.

Another possible factor was the party’s strong emphasis on abolishing the wealth tax. While this position resonated with some affluent voters, it was unlikely to represent a central concern for the majority of the party’s electoral base. The Conservative Party supported a full repeal of the tax for individuals with assets exceeding 1.76 million kroner, provided those assets were in shares or operating capital—a measure expected to benefit the very wealthy primarily. In terms of voter movement, those prioritizing stable economic management tended to shift toward the Labour Party, whereas Labour’s more vocal critics on the right aligned with Sylvi Listhaug and the Progress Party.

Due to its poor election results, the Conservatives face internal tension. Where should they go from here? Should they lean into their liberal, business-friendly wing or drift toward competing with the now much stronger FrP, which appeals to more authoritarian populist voters? This unresolved tension was one of the defining undercurrents of the 2025 election.

The Long Arc of the Progress Party

The Progress Party began in the 1970s as a tax revolt party, railing against bureaucracy and big government. Under Carl I. Hagen (from 1978), it evolved into a populist force that fused economic liberalism with anti-immigration rhetoric, but it was at the 2009 election, under the leadership of Siv Jensen, that it eventually surpassed 20 percent of the vote.

Government participation followed. From 2013 to 2020, FrP joined coalitions led by Høyre. Those stints in power demanded moderation—or at least the suppression of the party’s sharpest edges. Yet this balancing act was never easy. In 2018, then-Minister Sylvi Listhaug sparked national outrage after posting on Facebook that “the Labour Party believes terrorists’ rights are more important than the nation’s security.” The post was widely condemned as deeply offensive and insensitive, given the Labour Party’s history: its youth camp was the target of the July 22, 2011 terror attack, in which 69 people were killed. The episode laid bare both FrP’s confrontational, populist style and the limits of what mainstream Norwegian politics would tolerate.

Nevertheless, over the years, FrP politicians such as Siv Jensen, Christian Tybring-Gjedde, and Kent Andersen employed tropes like “Islamization by stealth,” warning of cultural conquest disguised as immigration. Even after the trauma of the 2011 attacks, which briefly muted exclusionary and polarizing rhetoric, FrP soon reverted to its established narrative frames—emphasizing cultural threat, societal insecurity, and perceived value conflict as central elements of its political identity.

Our research found that FrP’s rhetoric shifted when in government: too much moderation risked alienating core voters, but excessive radicalism jeopardized cooperation with Høyre. The party therefore adopted what Anders Jupskås defined as a “one foot in, one foot out” strategy—in government but still posturing as an outsider.

In the 2025 election campaign, Listhaug dropped the mask of moderation, embracing a confrontational style that excites her base but frightens potential partners. In this year’s campaign, the FrP focused particularly on youth crime, proposing to lower the age of criminal responsibility (currently 15 years) and to raise the maximum prison sentence to 50 years. In addition, the party advocated for a complete abolition of the wealth tax, while the three other parties in the conservative bloc—H, KrF, and V—proposed only removing the tax on working capital.

In the 2025 election campaign, the leader of the Progress Party, Sylvi Listhaug, dropped the mask of moderation, embracing a confrontational style that excites her base but frightens potential partners.

Furthermore, highly successful TikTok outreach by youth division leader Simen Velle also contributed to record support for the FrP, particularly among young male voters who resonate with the party’s anti-immigration, anti-gender, and anti-elite messages. But it also scared off centrist conservatives, contributing to Høyre’s collapse insofar as these centrists feared a coalition between Høyre and the Progress Party and so placed their votes elsewhere.

Core and Contested Issues in Norway’s 2025 Election Campaign

A survey of early voters undertaken by Aftenposten found that social differences in society was the most important issue for the electorate. This represents a shift from previous elections, where climate, immigration, and health dominated. As Johannes Bergh of the Institute for Social Research observed, the result signals a re-emergence of the traditional left–right divide, centered on inequality and redistribution, reflecting how Labour and its allies succeeded in foregrounding distributive justice as a central political concern.

With that said, the politics of immigration were not completely absent. Although immigration policy was not a central theme during the election campaign, voters remained aware of FrP’s consistently strict position on the issue. In recent years, reports have revealed cases of children being paid by an international criminal network to carry out violent attacks, including the use of grenades. Many of those involved were extremely young, often only 12 or 13 years old, and thus below the age of criminal responsibility. The Progress Party was quick to draw on these incidents to advance its calls for stricter immigration controls and for lowering the age of criminal responsibility, framing the situation as evidence of broader failures in integration and internal security. The party’s rhetoric on immigration control and tougher, law-and-order policies has resonated particularly with younger men—a demographic in which FrP has seen a remarkable rise in support.

The Progress Party’s identity remains anchored in immigration. Even when other issues dominate, the party finds ways to link them back to migration.

FrP’s identity remains anchored in immigration. Even when other issues dominate, the party finds ways to link them back to migration—whether crime, housing shortages, or pressure on welfare systems. While the FrP remains the most restrictive of the parliamentary parties on immigration policy, there is still a noticeable gap between its rhetoric and that of far-right extra-parliamentary groups. The latter parties frame immigration as a project orchestrated by a globalist elite—one that uses supranational institutions and demographic engineering to undermine national identity. While FrP couches much of its anti-immigration message in welfare, national interest, national security, and cultural cohesion, these smaller actors are more willing to invoke conspiratorial frames (globalism, elite collusion, demographic replacement).

While the FrP does not share KrF’s restrictive stance on abortion or Pride flags, it also expresses concern regarding gender equality policies, particularly opposing quota-based measures. Furthermore, FrP’s youth leader, Simen Velle, faced criticism for comments suggesting that young women bear responsibility for young men’s challenges in the dating market and for portraying gender equality as an elitist project. Although he later apologized for the statement, he also argued that “all gender equality policies have been about lifting women, and it has come at the expense of us men.”

Since the 2021 election campaign, the FrP has positioned itself against what it calls “identity politics,” which it characterizes as expressions of “woke overreach” and “insult hysteria.”

Election results: Labour Prevails with Support from Allied Parties

Furthermore, the Green Party (Miljøpartiet De Grønne, MDG) for the first time crossed the parliamentary threshold, securing full representation in parliament—a symbolic milestone for Norway’s environmental movement. Their success can, in part, be attributed to their strategic campaign message, which boiled down to the following: if we earn enough votes to pass the threshold, we can help secure the continuation of a Labour-led government and prevent Sylvi Listhaug from becoming prime minister. This appeal to “vote green to keep the right out” resonated strongly with progressive and climate-conscious voters. In sharp contrast, the Progress Party FrP remains largely dismissive of climate policy—often positioning itself as an opponent of what it derides as “green taxes” and environmental regulation.

In the end, voter turnout was exceptionally high, underscoring both the stakes of the election and the public’s deep engagement with Norway’s political future.

Consequences and Future Directions

The September election reflected both continuity and change. The Labour Party maintained its position but faces challenges in advancing its policies given the diversity among its red–green allies. On certain issues, however, Labour may also find common ground with parties on the conservative side, particularly Høyre and Venstre, the latter being Norway’s most liberal party. Høyre experienced a low result and now faces a strategic choice: whether to resist a right-wing populist drift and rebuild its profile as a liberal-conservative party, or to move closer to the FrP—at the risk of becoming the junior partner in a potential future coalition, an option Høyre’s leader, Erna Solberg, has dismissed as unviable.

The Progress Party achieved a record turnout, consolidating its support among younger male voters and, for the second time, emerging as the largest party within the right-wing bloc (The last instance was in 2009 under Siv Jensen’s leadership, though the gap with Høyre’s result was far narrower then.) The party has thus firmly established itself as a political force that can no longer be ignored. Meanwhile, the Christian Democrats narrowly cleared the parliamentary threshold with 4.2 percent of the vote, while Venstre fell below it at 3.7 percent—a sharp setback from the 4.6 percent it received in the previous election and the first time in many years the party has failed to secure full parliamentary representation.

The election leaves several open questions related to the normalization of reactionary rhetoric, conservatism’s crisis, Labour’s dilemmas, and the parallels and differences with other European states.

The election leaves several open questions related to the normalization of reactionary rhetoric, conservatism’s crisis, Labour’s dilemmas, and the parallels and differences with other European states. On the first question, FrP’s record result and KrF’s cultural conservatism show that exclusionary rhetoric on immigration, reactionary gender discourses (especially the trad wives debate), and law and order criminality discourses now shape mainstream debates, even in a country known for its egalitarian policy. On the second question, Høyre’s collapse is a wake-up call. The party must decide whether to reassert a liberal-conservative identity or drift ever closer to FrP’s orbit—at the risk of blurring the boundaries that once defined its distinct political profile. On the third question, the Labour Party and its allies won this round, but sustaining it will require addressing the social dislocations and disaffection that underlie traditionalist or reactionary appeal—especially among disaffected young men—without capitulating to exclusionary narratives. On the final question, the Norwegian example fits a wider European pattern: right-wing populist parties do not need to govern to matter. By pulling discourse rightward and destabilizing mainstream alliances, they shape political trajectories across the continent. Their influence grows when mainstream parties borrow their language or adopt their framing. What is distinctive here is the backlash effect: the threat of Listhaug as PM suppressed moderate turnout and arguably handed the center-left a second chance. That dynamic might be less available in countries with weaker liberal traditions.

Bending without Breaking?

The 2025 election was more than a contest of ballots; it was a referendum on how far Norway’s center can bend without breaking. Labour’s government held on with support from its diverse allies, while Høyre’s collapse and the Progress Party’s record surge might suggest that Høyre must redefine its strategy if it is to reemerge as the leading force within the conservative bloc.

The 2025 election was more than a contest of ballots; it was a referendum on how far Norway’s center can bend without breaking.

As former FrP leader Carl I. Hagen has noted, if the Labour government were to fail and step down, the FrP would be the strongest party to take over. For many moderate voters and politicians, this prospect is a cause for concern, as it could steer Norway in a new direction—toward a more authoritarian criminal policy, a stricter immigration regime (already among Europe’s toughest ones), and the rollback of several climate policy measures. It could also contribute to a more polarized political discourse. The 2025 election thus demonstrates that challenges to liberal-democratic norms such as equality, diversity, and inclusion matter not only for determining who governs, but also for how politics is conducted—what can be said, and whose voices are heard.

For observers of global democracy, the lesson is clear: polarizing forces matter not only when they seize power but also when they reshape the terms of debate. In Norway, September 2025 offered a real-time snapshot of that struggle—and a reminder that no society, however stable, is beyond its reach.

---

Katrine Fangen is Professor of Sociology at the Department of Sociology and Human Geography, University of Oslo, and thematic leader for Gender and Extremism and Ideology and Identity at the Centre for Research on Extremism (C-REX). Her research focuses on nationalism, right-wing populism, illiberalism, and political participation in Europe, with particular attention to the social dynamics behind exclusionary movements. She has conducted extensive ethnographic research on youth activism, the far right, and national identity, and currently conducts research on transnational anti-immigrant mobilization and the rise of illiberal politics.

Image made using “Sylvi Listhaug (163 KIL-6820) (cropped2),” by Offshore Norge licensed under CC Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic; “Jonas Gahr Støre 2025 (cropped),” by Number 10 licensed under UK Open Government Licence v3.0; “Erna Solberg, EPP Congress 2025 Valencia Day 1 (54484743746, cropped),” by European People’s Party licensed under CC Attribution 2.0 Generic; “Stortingsvalget 2025,” by Gust Justice licensed under CC Attribution 4.0 International; “Stortingsvalget 2025 – stemmeurne på Kuben (2),” by Ssu licensed under CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.