Norway’s Progress Party has been accused by Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre of using political techniques that resemble the far right in the USA, after party leader Sylvi Listhaug claimed that the Labour Party (Arbeiderpartiet, Ap) and the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (Landsorganisasjonen i Norge, LO) operate a “troll factory” spreading falsehoods about her party.
Listhaug turns the Progress Party conference into an attack on Labour
Sylvi Listhaug, leader of the Progress Party (Fremskrittspartiet, FrP), used her opening speech at the party’s national conference at Gardermoen to present FrP as Norway’s main opposition force and to accuse Labour of having lost contact with ordinary workers.
Listhaug said Labour was no longer “the workers’ party”, but “the state’s party”, arguing that its leadership was more comfortable in Davos and international forums than with electricians, kindergarten workers or lorry drivers in Norway. She also suggested that Labour should change its name to “the Administration Party”, “the Tax Collectors’ Party” or “the Committee Party”.
The speech reflected a broader FrP strategy: presenting the party as a vehicle for lower taxes, more individual freedom and a more forceful state response to crime. Listhaug also referred to the fatal shooting near a football pitch at Økern in Oslo, arguing that parents now question whether it is safe for children to travel around the capital for football matches.
The “troll factory” claim raises the temperature in Norwegian politics
The most controversial part of the speech came when Listhaug accused Labour and LO of having a “persistent and problematic relationship with the truth”. She said they were fabricating falsehoods about other parties’ policies because they lacked results of their own.
Listhaug then described Labour’s headquarters at Youngstorget as a “troll factory”. In political language, the term usually refers to an organised operation that systematically spreads disinformation, manipulation or false narratives online.
The accusation matters because it moves the confrontation beyond ordinary political criticism. Instead of saying that an opponent is wrong, misleading or ineffective, the term suggests a deliberate machinery of deception. In a Nordic political culture that has traditionally valued institutional trust and restrained public debate, that language has drawn attention.
Støre says FrP is using methods seen in the USA far right
Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre rejected Listhaug’s attack and said the Progress Party was adopting techniques associated with the far right in the USA. Speaking to NRK, he argued that Norwegian politics should not copy that style.
“We must be able to disagree with each other without calling each other liars,” Støre said, according to NRK.
Støre also described Listhaug’s speech as heavy on slogans and light on new ideas. He said FrP was talking about other parties rather than offering practical solutions for people’s lives, while Labour’s political project remained based on the idea that strong communities create opportunities.
His response suggests that Labour will try to frame FrP’s communication style as a threat to Norway’s political norms, rather than responding only to individual policy proposals. That may become a central line of conflict as Norway moves toward the 2027 local elections and the 2029 parliamentary election.
FrP is growing while the political language becomes sharper
The exchange comes at a moment of strong momentum for the Progress Party. In the 2025 parliamentary election, Labour remained Norway’s largest party, while FrP became the second-largest force in the Storting and nearly doubled its number of seats, from 21 to 47. Listhaug used the conference to describe FrP as Norway’s largest and leading opposition party.
Recent polling has added to that confidence. Aftenposten reported that FrP topped April polling at 28.5 percent, ahead of Labour at 21.7 percent. That makes the party’s communication strategy politically significant beyond a single conference speech: FrP is no longer only challenging Labour’s policies, but also trying to replace Labour’s traditional claim to represent “ordinary people”.
FrP’s own conference messaging focused on the cost of living, lower taxes and fees, security, health care and a stronger state response to crime. The party has long combined tax-cutting, anti-bureaucracy and tough-on-crime positions with criticism of immigration and the political establishment. Under Listhaug, it has increasingly sought to speak directly to voters who feel that public services, security and living costs are not being handled effectively by the governing parties.
The political risk for FrP is that aggressive language can mobilise supporters while also making it easier for opponents to portray the party as importing polarising tactics from abroad. The risk for Labour is different: if it focuses too heavily on condemning FrP’s tone, it may struggle to answer voters who are drawn to FrP’s message on crime, taxation and everyday economic pressure.
Nordic politics faces a broader test over polarisation
The dispute is not only about one speech. It reflects a broader question facing Nordic democracies: whether political debate can remain high-trust and fact-based while parties compete in a media environment shaped by short clips, social platforms and sharper partisan identities.
Norway is often seen internationally as a country with strong democratic institutions and relatively high political trust. But the language used in domestic politics is changing, as parties compete for attention and try to define opponents in more personal and adversarial terms.
For the Progress Party, the confrontation may reinforce its image as an anti-establishment force willing to challenge Labour directly. For Støre and Labour, it offers an opportunity to argue that Norway should resist a more polarised political style associated with the USA far right.
The next test will be whether the debate remains focused on political rhetoric, or whether it shifts back to the issues Listhaug highlighted: crime, taxes, public services and the role of the state in Norwegian society.
