The movement to get rid of the parasitic monarchy in Norway got a lot of traction this week, so that is nice.
There is an actual hearing in Parliament this tuesday about abolishing the monarchy. Not caused by this but happily strengthened.
this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2026
690 points (99.7% liked)
World News
53749 readers
2300 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I've traditionally been a supporter of keeping the monarchy for its diplomatic functions and (mostly) unifying force among people, but this does feel like a sea-change. Maybe opinions in Norway are more forgiving, I don't know--I moved away many years ago. In my opinion, it's probably time to re-evaluate whether we (Norway) want to keep this going. It was decided decades ago to keep it at least until the current Crown Prince had his turn, but now that's looking like a bad idea. They need to do something, and hopefully they can still wind it down with some dignity. Maybe it's possible to make a nice, clean break when King Harald passes on. Either way, it should be up to the People.
I'm not 100% convinced having a President will be better, seeing as some Presidents like to act as if they're kings. But with all the scandals, I think if anyone still believes monarchs are immune to political influence, they should wake up now.
PS: I was wondering if you have some more information about the hearing (e.g. news article). I can't find it in the Norwegian media. (I read/speak Norwegian).
Yeah, power corrupts. But royalty is excempt from scrutiny way too much. The king keeps pardoning finance crime buddies and it's not even mentioned in the media like other corruption would be.
Anyway, https://stortinget.no/ has info on the hearings :)
Thank you, I found it here. I'm a little bit surprised it's not in the media more.
Pretty sure because it's a routine tradition, and is always expected to end in the favor of keeping the monarchy. So it's not really too interesting unless you are a politician
I guess ‘No Kings’ is doing something after all
You can have a President without having a Presidential system - like, for example, Germany - were that post is mainly being a figurehead/top-diplomat with mainly the power of shaming parliament when they go overboard with some laws, both not actually able to block it, possible with some limited power to dissolve parliament and call new elections.
Basically it's the same thing as a modern day monarch in a Democratic nation, except that people actually get to chose who gets the post, if they turn out to be bad at it they get replaced after 4 years rather than being there for life and they don't actually own a massive chunk of wealth for historical reasons (like, for example, the British Royal Family).
I've lived under Presidential systems (Portugal) and Constitutional Monarchies (The Netherlands, Britain) and vastly prefer the former: the latter is especially fucked up in Britain were the Royals actually have real power (to block laws) - if seldom used - and are the cornerstone of a well entrenched system of patronage and class segregation which is far beyond anything I've seen elsewhere in Europe, though granted in The Netherlands The Royals were a lot closer to normal people - to the point that before becoming King the current ruler used to work as a pilot for KLM - than in Britain.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Does the Norwegian monarchy also generate a significant amount of revenue for the government like the British one does?
I asked this when the final season of The Crown came out. What EXACTLY does the monarch do? There was so much talk of "the work we do for this country" but no explanation of it? In the same vein, how exactly do they generate revenue?
Thanks, that was interesting, and pretty neatly sums up the revenue side of things (and why I think it's a bs argument for their continued existence)
I'm still curious about the "work" that The Crown (show) kept going on about. As mentioned in the rebuttal video, all of that revenue essentially comes about through just existing (and there's no reason it couldn't continue even if the monarchy were officially abolished)
From the outside, (and going by the events in the show) it seems to be just cutting ribbons, and hosting/attending parties. Oh, and a speech once a year. Is that the extent of their work, or do they actually serve some political function that couldn't be done by a regular old diplomat?
Officially, the British monarch can reject any bills that Parliament sends them, effectively vetoing it, but no king or queen has exercised that power since 1708.
They've used threats instead, as well as the power of shaming and the influence they have in many places including the Press (for example, pretty much the whole Board of the BBC has a royal title, be it a Peerage or higher, and this is similar in quite a number of other places, both in the public and the private sector).
Look up the "black spider memos" from the time the current King was still a Prince.
Without clicking I already know what both of those videos will be.
CGP Grey is a liberal hack. He's very skilled at explaining things in an entertaining and easy-to-understand way, but he's really bad at making it clear when what he's "explaining" is his (or someone else's) opinion and not an actual fact. And when it is his opinion, far too often it's a bad one, tainted by some of the laziest liberal status quo bs.
This is one such example, and Shaun's response is justifiably scathing.
I also found it particularly telling when he did his "guns, germs, and steel" explainer (a book that is widely criticised by historians for its vastly oversimplified explanations), and he responded to criticism by laughing it off, and saying there was no problem. But when he later did a video and made a minor mistake by using the name of a submarine-based missile for what was actually a ground-based missile (or something along those lines), he made a huge deal about how important his integrity is and how he could not possibly live with himself if he allowed that misinformation to go uncorrected.
Suffice it to say, I was not particularly surprised when I later learnt the reason Grey pulled out of Nebula was that he (and Veritasium, IIRC?) wanted a business model/corporate structure which would allow him and other early members to profit off of the work of later-added members. An opinion that put him at odds with the other early founders like Wendover and Real Engineering, who preferred the more equitable model.
load more comments
(2 replies)
like the British one does?
pfft. that was some fantastic propaganda. royalty in no way generates revenue, they're fucking parasites.
I honestly don't keep up with them much, so I can't say what the current status is. I didn't even realize until today that Mette-Marit had been connected with Epstein already back in 2019.
It's not just about money, though. When I still lived there ('90s), the common sentiment seemed to be that though they have no political power (even less so than the British), they were good, wholesome ambassadors for Norway and served as a sort of cultural focal point that "everyone" shared pride in. (Obviously not a 100% true, but if you're Norwegian you know what I mean.)
Importantly, one point of pride was that they weren't as embroiled in scandals as other royals. They were "of the people", with one example often cited that King Olav during the oil crisis took his skis on the bus instead of driving. That kind of thing.
The current line of Norwegian royals is even pretty new, so to speak. King Haakon VII was chosen by committee in 1905 after the dissolution of the union. At the time, they passed on becoming a republic. So, it felt more like they had been selected by us rather than they just inherited everything.
But: the whole Epstein business, greed, political influence and all that flies directly in the face of all that pride. That's why I think that case is probably lost now. The trust is gone, the monarchy is tarnished. It's become a liability and expense rather than a point of pride.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The buildings and overboard "state folklore" are what generate revenue, not the Royals - the probability of ever seeing a Royal in person, either as a tourist or a local, is basically zero.
Meanwhile the Royals are a cornerstone of a massive system of patronage and class segregation, not to mention being one of the wealthiest families in Britain. Oh, and the king also has the power to block laws, though he seldom uses it and apparently will instead in the background use the threat of it and of shaming governments (look up the "black spider memos", which date back to his time as prince).
They're pretty much the most anti-Democratic Royals in Europe by a long margin, IMHO.
Strange typo, you wrote "generate" instead of "cost"
load more comments
(1 replies)
You can bet that once the inevitable population-wide vote happens on whether to keep the monarchy, I will vote no. I already didn't like having a monarchy from before, now doubly so.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Sounds like the apple didn't fall far from the tree.
A lifetime of living without consequence where your every whim is met creates dangerously broken people
What happened here is actually worse somehow. Mette marit was a "commoner" known on her circles as a fun party/rave girl. The usual drugs included. She had a son (Marius) with someone from that walk of life. He had the chance to turn 8 or 9 i think before having the title of "royalty" thrust uppon him at the same time his single mother got swept away on all sorts of royal adventures.
Not hard at all to see how that can fuck you up royally.
Edit: just remembered she had a sextape from the good old days, and since it was only of interest to us Norwegians and the internett wasn't as big as it is now they've managed to scrub it. Or that might just have been rumors, but I'm like 80% sure i saw it at one of the early 2000's LAN parties.
Parasites.
all the NONCE kings and princes had ties with epsteins MS kung fu master.
I've heard that this is so bad that it might be the end of the royal family in Norway.
Damn, I wish! I'm against all kinds of kings.
load more comments
(7 replies)
How can one man be so infuriatingly involved in so much corruption globally? I just want to live in peace, urgh
load more comments
(3 replies)
Norwegian here, and I don't think it's gonna change a whole lot. Well, not for her, at least.
Personally I don't care enough about them, and I don't get the impression anyone under 60 care that much either, neither positive or negative. Her husband is genuinely a nice person, so is her father in law (yes, I've met them both). Her son is a scumbag, though. (And he almost ran into me on a bicycle when he was 5 or so!)
So if anyone wants to litigate against her, I'm not gonna stand in the way, but for now this looks mostly like a case of "Should've known better", something several government officials have publicly stated.
Just to clarify my stance on monarchy: Conflicted. In theory it does make sense to have someone who can veto everything on behalf of the state if the government goes weapons grade guano. However, the apolitical nature of a monarch pretty much stand in the way of this. And on the other hand, I'm not a big fan of inherited power.
But all in all, I don't really care that much. Larger portions of my taxes go to stupider things.
While I agree that having an independent body from the main political organ makes sense, I feel like a monarchy isn't a great symbol to have in the first place
And what's going to stop future scandals from happening? Or consequences for them? If a future king does something bad, we can't exactly fire them and replace them with someone else, as that's not how a monarchy works. We only got one tool, and it's to abolish the monarchy. It doesn't feel like great checks and balances
Generally I am against inherent power. And a monarchy is the peak of that, as you simply are in a position of power by having a lucky birth. It is true that lucky births happen constantly and are everywhere, especially if you get born in norway, but it feels wrong to actively support it.
It just doesn't really feel like a system that has a place today. Though I do also realize that there's problems with having a president or the like as well. But generally I support more democracy, not less.
And also as a final note like, if this went hidden for so long until the files got released, I wonder what other stuff got hidden as well? I mean, we got pretty much directly lied to here back in 2019
I'm just uncomfortable with systems that enforce a hierarchy. I think we could do with less of that
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(12 replies)
The fact that Mette-Marit was a single mother and the fact that Høiby's father was a convicted felon created controversy. TV 2 later wrote that "merely by existing, Marius Borg Høiby was seen by many as a scandal for the royal family."
He sure lived up to their expectations. Well cheer up guys, at least he can use your tax money to hire himself the best lawyer available.
How can "the most democratic country" have a monarchy?
Probably for the same reason we still have one in the Netherlands, where a large part of the country can't comprehend abolishing the monarchy because "it's tradition" or "because they do important diplomatic work" (ie brown-nosing other politicians for an idioticly high salary)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'm guessing it's like the UK where they have a monarchy but they don't actually have any real power.
Well, aside from the usual rich person power of being able to commit all sorts of crimes and get away with it.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›