EUROPE / NORWAY Norway and Europe THE victory of the "no" vote in the Danish referendum on European Union on June 2 gave a strong and swift impetus to the resistance to the European Community and its single market in all the Nordic countries. It showed the people in Finland, Sweden and Norway that mass mobilizations can stop the apparently unstoppable plans of the power holders - at least in the short term. EINAR BRAATHEN AND GUNNAR GUDDAL MICHELSEN*
B ETWEEN January and the end of June this year, support in Norway for EC membership had dropped from 48% of the population to 36% and opposition had climbed from 41 to 51% (MMI, Dagbladet, June 6). In this article we will try to illuminate why resistance to the EC is stronger in Norway than anywhere else in Europe. Then we wish to show that resistance to the EC in Norway in the 1990s moves in a clearcut progressive and left-oriented direction, and that the EC represents a social rather than a national question and as such a core class struggle issue. Thirdly we consider some possible consequences for Norway and challenges for revolutionary internationalists.
At the time of the 1972 referendum, there was a 46.5% vote for EC membership and 53.5% against. Taking into account the large proportion of the Norwegian people who have not made up their minds, the majority opposing the EC is even stronger now than in 1972. In order to explain this, we have to understand the history of Norway. The political scientist, Stein Rokkan, has emphasized two cleavages which give the political landscape in Norway its special character.! The first is centre/periphery, the second is social class. remains the case that the potential remains for turning the situation around. The start of the 1990s have seen the manifest failure of the liberal policies of Thatcher and Bérégovoy, which have left unemployment untouched.
The ETUC should now centre its discussions on a few central principles which could provide the backbone for a new European union charter. These would include:
• A reduction in the working week harmonized throughout Europe; this is the sole real solution to unemployment;
• Europe is a zone of high wages and social protection; it cannot base its econo-
These cleavages played an important role in the EC debate twenty years ago and still do today. The Norwegian periphery has always represented a strong opposition to the power centre. Norway was subject to Denmark from the 14th century to 1814, and thereafter to Sweden until 1905. During the time of the union, Norway had no nobility but was ruled by senior civil servants. In opposition to the rule of the latter, counter-cultures based on an alliance between farmers and radicals in the towns came into existence during the 19th century. The counter-cultures consisted of the following elements: periphery against centre, a rural counter-language ("Nynorsk") against the urban Danish linguistic standard, Christian fundamentalists against secularizers in the cities, prohibi* Members of the Workers Power Group (AMG) in Bergen. AMG is a small group formed in 1981 by ex-members of the left reformist party SV. It has cooperated with the Fourth International and its Swedish section on several occasions, but without formal connection to the FI. For more information, write to AMG, Box 6577, Rodelokka, 0501 Oslo. Henrikke Fosshaug helped with the translating and editing of the article. 1. Stein Rokkan: "Norway: Numerical Democracy and corporate pluralism" in R. A. Dahl: Political oppositions in Western democracies, Yale University Press, 1968. mic success on social regression and the growth of inequality;
• There should be a minimum wage throughout Europe to counteract the effects of neo-liberal flexibility; the European labour market must function according to harmonized norms which reverse the present tendencies to making jobs less secure,
• A real harmonization of the European economic and social space would mean planning aimed particularly at reducing regional inequalities. *
25 1. Michel Albert and Jean Boissonat, Crise, Krach, Boom, Le Seuil, 1988.
July 20, 1992
NORWAY tionists (opposed to alcohol), against permissive liberals and conservatives.
The opposition alliance organized in the first political party in Norway, "Venstre" (Liberals), won a decisive victory in 1884. On the alcohol question the working class was partly in alliance with the farmers. This alliance was mostly clearly shown in the prohibition referenda of 1919 and 1926.
Strong labour movement
Historically, Norway has had a relatively weak bourgeoisie compared to Sweden. On the other hand, the working class has from the start of this century organized a strong Social Democratic trade union (LO) and Labour Party (DNA); The DNA was affiliated to the Communist International, the only Social Democratic mass party in such a position, from 1918 to 1923. Since the 1930s there was an alliance between the workers movement, the farmers and intellectuals in the towns based on anticapitalist and national-democratic ideology.
After World War II, the leadership of the DNA has becoming increasingly close to the bourgeoisie and the senior civil servants. This has produced conflicts between the leadership of the DNA and the traditional alliance on which it is based, particularly when the EC question is on the agenda.
During the EC struggle in 1972, the counter cultural forces gave the farmers' movement the dominant position within
The far left in Norway UNLIKE in most other European countries, the radical anti- imperialist movements of youth and students in the 1960s were dominated by Maoists. The only revolutionary organizations to have survived the 1980s are the RV and the AKP. RV (Red Electoral Alliance) was formed in 1973 by the AKP (Workers Communist Party). Both organizations represented the Maoist variant of Stalinism until the Tiananmen massacre of 1989 when the party at once broke all its ties with the Chinese Communist Party. General frustration and wide-ranging rethinking followed. The AKP, which until 1980 had about 1,000 activists and in addition about 2,000 sympathizers in youth, student and women's organizations, has withered and has today 300 members at most.
An opposition inside the AKP formed its own leadership in 1989 and this spring broke away in order to develop RV, an electoral front with about 50 representatives in municipal and regional councils, into an independent and democratic party free from Stalinist ideas and practices. This project for the RV has now been accepted by the AKP itself and the majority of the RV's municipal councillors. The revolutionary Marxists of the AMG (Workers Power Group) are actively involved in the RV project and have been warmly welcomed by the ex-AKP opposition. RV now has 1,200 members and will have its first independent and democratic congress in January 1993, where the Norwegian revolutionary left will take its most important decisions on programme and action since 1973.
AMG has urged other small groupings such as IS (International Socialists) and the remains of the Norwegian Communist Party to join the RV project, but so far without positive response.
In addition there are some neo-Stalinist party projects based on splinters from the AKP. They will definitely never take part in RV, but are quite active in the No to EC organization on a rather sectarian platform of "national liberation" and class struggle rhetoric. * the anti-EC movement. The traditional conflict between centre and periphery was once again central: farmers, fishermen and people in general in the periphery were unanimously against. In parts of the coun try, and particularly in the north, these groups belonged to DNA, even if the farmers organizations assured the financing and controlled the "Popular Movement against the EEC".
However, gaining the industrial working class was decisive to the outcome of the 1972 referendum. For the first time in history, a marked split occurred between the Social Democratic leadership and its traditional electorate. The leadership of the DNA and LO presented its electorate and members with an ultimatum: the DNA government would resign if it did not win the referendum. Nevertheless, almost half the trade unionists and the DNA electorate voted no. One reason why the opposition inside the Social Democracy was so strong was that an open faction, the Workers Information Committee, was organized for the first time.
Even if the actors remain the same today, the balance between them has chan26 in the last 20 years has weakened the posi- ged. The social and economic development tion of the farmers and the counter cultures. Whilst employment in primary activities has dropped, employment in the public sector has more than doubled. Most of the new employees in this sector are women, and they fear the consequences of drawing closer to the EC. This could explain why twice as many women as men are opposed to Norwegian association with the EC. It has made it easier to stress the social arguments, rather than national and constitutional arguments in the struggle against the EC.
A quasi-alternative to full membership called the EES has set the agenda for discussions about Norway's connection to the European Community during recent years. EES (European Economic Space) is a treaty for the EFTA countries to become fully integrated parts of the single market, and as such enjoy full economic membership in the European Community.
Three aspects of the EES have been emphasised in the Norwegian debate:
• The people are deprived of institutional powers to steer national resources and capital movements;
• The trade union movement loses its control of wage and work conditions;
• The EES will remove environmental restrictions.
The anti-EC organization therefore currently gives priority to the fight against EES, rather than building a broader movement against membership of the EC.
Three-way division
Against this background, the EC struggle is being fought between the defenders of three different solutions: the "neo-Liberalist" supporters of both EC membership and the EES (yes/yes); in the middle we have those who oppose becoming members of the EC (no/yes); finally we have the "Popular-radical" side who oppose both the EC and an EES agreement (no/no). According to recent polls the three blocs are about the same size.
The "yes/yes" bloc consists of the Labour Party leadership, the Conservative party and the Progress Party - the new "big coalition" in Norwegian politics. But the most vigorous supporter is the Employers Association (NHO), which has initiated several reports and recruits leaders. The press is dominated by owners, editors and journalists who have a distinct
International Viewpoint # 233
July 20, 1992
NORWAY
Local elections
Poll yes/yes attitude.
Ridiculous amateurs Ridiculous amateurs
The Social Democrats in the government have had to take the leadership of this bloc because (a) for the moment the Conservatives and Progress Party lack organizational strength and credibility; and (b) the pro-movement is being led by business leaders and young career politicians who even the pro-press accuse of being ridiculous amateurs who lack popular appeal; the Norwegian people has been shocked by several exposures of golden handshakes involving the NHO. Despite the DNA leadership's winning the support of 65% of county conference delegates for its pro-EC policy in spring 1992, the party has a substantial internal opposition on this question.
The no/yes block regard the EES as a lasting national compromise. It consists of the Christian Party (Krf), as well as most of the EC sceptics in the DNA including the youth. About 35% of the delegates at the DNA county conferences supported this opinion — this is a bigger opposition than in 1972. Tactical political arguments lie behind the no/yes position. In spite of a considerable no/no opposition within their own party, Krf has used a no/yes standpoint to exploit their pivotal position in parliament. In the DNA it has not been legitimate to oppose EC involvement entirely, particularly because the Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland is the "mother" of the EES agreement.
Finally, the no/no bloc is dominated by one organization: No to EC, which was
Labour Party (DNA)
Conservatives (H)
Centre Party (Farmers - SP)
Socialist Left Party (SV)
Progress Party (Frp)
Christian Party (Krf)
Liberals (V)
Red Election Alliance (RV) founded in August 1990. The no/no bloc mainly defends the possibilities to influence capitalist development that parliamentary democracy today offers. Secondly this bloc defends the so-called "Scandinavian welfare model"
The double no
Politically we can identify three groups within the no/no bloc.
1. The Centre Party (SP) is the most important political party in the movement, owing to its exceptionally able leader, Anne Enger Lahnstein. Since 1990 ths party has moved to the left from a European point of view. The Centre Party is a leftist party that defends the social and national rights of the people against market liberalism and capitalist forces.
2. The second group comprises the leadership of the Socialist Left Party (SV), the main environmentalist organizations, a small hardcore opposition in DNA with a base in the north of Norway, parts of the trade unions, above all where women are strongly represented, and the urban petty
Sept 1991 (%) June 1992 (%)
30.4 25.7 21.9 23.3 12.0 13.8 12.2 15.5 7.0 8.4 8.1 7.0 3.5 3.2 1.5 0.9 bourgeoisie. The SV has some problems with its no/no position, firstly because some members are opposed to it and secondly because the leaders want to join the government. But because the SV has stressed arguments concerning social welfare, economy, democracy and the environment in their anti-EC campaign and opposed nationalist arguments, SP and the no/no campaign has kept to the left.
3. Leftist activists: Members of SV and RV are often anti-EC. This category also contains local branches of anti-racist organizations, environmental organizations, trade unionists and the women's movement.
Unlike in France or Ireland, the far right is of minor importance in the anti-EC movement. Firstly because they are in any case weak and secondly because they have been effectively denied membership in No to EC. There are about 1,000 leftist activists involved in No to EC — about 1% of its membership. Nonetheless they play a big role in the movement and have legitimacy; so far the Yes movement have not used this fact in their camnaion used this fact in their campaign.
### Changing times
In 1972 the anti-EC movement was mainly an emotional blowout whose arguments were mostly symbolic. The holders of power were not challenged and overall developments in Norway thereafter were similar to those in the EC countries. This has changed now. The political weakening of the Norwegian ruling circles opens the way for a series of victories in the struggle against the details of EC adjustment, which may deepen the political crisis and open class conflict. Furthermore the orientation of the No to EC, which has opposed racists and pro-life forces and calls for progressive alliances in Europe, can bring the Norwegian left out of isolation into a European movement. There has already been cooperation with the anti-EC campaigns in Denmark and Ireland.
Certainly, the oil producing far north has an important role to play in the creation of any alternative, truly democratic Europe. 27
Obituary - Celia Stodola Wald CELIA Stodola Wald, an activist in the US Trotskyist movement for nearly 25 years, died recently after a long battle with scleroderma, in Torrance, California, where she had gone to receive medical treatment. She was 45 years old and is survived by her husband, Alan Wald, cultural editor of the socialist journal Against the Current, and their daughters Sarah, 12 and Hannah, 9.
Celia was born August 27, 1946 in East Orange, New Jersey, and graduated from high school in Fargo, North Dakota in 1964. She received a B.A. degree in psychology from Antioch College in Yellow Springs, Ohio, in 1969. On the Antioch campus she was a well known activist in SDS (Students for a Democratic Society) and the Student Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam. In winter 1966 she was a member of SDS's Economic Research and Action Project (ERAP) in Cleveland, Ohio. In March 1968 she joined the Young Socialist Alliance.
A year later, in Los Angeles, California, she joined the Socialist Workers Party (SWP). In 1971 she was a full time staff member for the National Peace Coalition (NPAC) in San Francisco. Until mid-1975, she was an activist in the Oakland-Berkeley branch of the SWP. She then moved to Ann Arbor where she attended the University of Michigan School of Nursing and was a founder of the Ann Arbor Committee for Human Rights in Latin America. She graduated in 1979 and was elected to Sigma Theta Tau, the national nursing honorary society. From then until the fall of 1982, she practiced nursing in the antepartum unit, Women's Hospital, University of Michigan Medical Center. In 1986 she was a founder of Solidarity, a socialist organization based in Detroit, and of its Fourth International Caucus, of which she remained a member until her death. Later in the year, a gathering will be held in Ann Arbor to commemorate her life. *
July 20, 1992