Antisemitism without Jews: the Impact of Redemptive Antisemitism in Norway before the Nazi Occupation

ABSTRACT

In his magnus opus Nazi Germany and the Jews (1997), Saul Friedländer identifies redemptive antisemitism as a model of world explanation, which offers a universal answer to all alleged problems of modern society, such as capitalism, communism, liberalism and cultural, social and biological decline. Its core element is the perception of history and politics as a struggle against the Jews and their alleged world conspiracy. Consequently, Friedländer considers redemptive antisemitism the major ideological precondition for the Holocaust. Apart from the local arrangements of the Norwegian occupation regime (1940–1945), we argue that it was the specifically aggressive form of redemptive antisemitism that provided the ideological basis for the Holocaust. Building on Friedländer’s conceptualization, we define the phenomenon as consisting of three main elements: 1) Dualism and Demonisation, 2) Conspiracism and Intentionalism and 3) Apocalypticism and Palingenesis. By using three Norwegian case studies – articles and books of the radical antisemites Eivind Saxlund, Mikael Sylten and Halldis Neegaard Østbye – we demonstrate how a marginal phenomenon, due to changed circumstances and its transferability, became crucial during the German occupation. Our source material shows the potential for violence and the totality of redemptive antisemitism and underscores the impact of conspiracy beliefs on society.

KEYWORDS:

• Redemptive antisemitism
• conspiracist antisemitism
• conspiracy theories

As one of the most resilient conspiracy narratives, antisemitism needs no relation to reality to survive. This has also been the case in Norway – a country which for most of its history has been a country without Jews and where antisemitic ideas and perceptions have blazed the trail at latest since its 19^th century nation-building process.¹

However, before the Second World War, politically organized antisemitism remained a marginal phenomenon. Still, anti-Jewish conspiracy stereotypes were highly present in the public sphere and disseminated in the press, in satirical publications and in popular literature.² During the Nazi occupation from 1940 to 1945, the Jewish community in Norway was hard hit by the Holocaust compared to other Western European and so-called Germanic countries, with 40% of its members murdered.³ Only in the Netherlands did the German occupation have more fatal consequences for Jewish citizens.⁴

Apart from the local conditions and the practical arrangements of the occupation regime in Norway, which was based on the collaboration of the Norwegian national socialist party Nasjonal Samling [National Unity], we argue that it was the specifically aggressive form of redemptive antisemitism that provided the ideological basis for the Holocaust in Norway. In other words, it was this strain of antisemitism that triggered Nasjonal Samling’s radical hatred against the Jews and the party’s willingness to support the German occupiers, with all consequences.

As a ‘classical’ conspiracist worldview, redemptive antisemitism has all the necessary elements to survive in different contexts, national histories and social surroundings. In this article, we will demonstrate by the example of redemptive antisemitism and its vigour in Norway in the three decades before the Nazi occupation, the challenges conspiracism provides for societies due to their high degree of transferability and detachment from reality. As the case of Norway illustrates, conspiracy theories never remain harmless because of their adaptability to any context.

Our article builds on the concept of redemptive antisemitism as it was developed by Saul Friedländer as part of his groundbreaking research on the Holocaust. Starting with his definition of the term, we continue by developing a hybrid that underlines its historical elements and flexibility. By using three case studies from Norway – Eivind Saxlund (1858–1936) and his antisemitic book Jøder og Gojim (Jews and Goyim, 1910), as well as the antisemitic writings of Mikael Sylten (1873–1964) and party propagandist of Nasjonal Samling, Halldis Neegaard Østbye (1898–1983) – we will demonstrate how a marginal written phenomenon due to changed circumstances and its transferability became crucial during the German occupation. Our cases will show the potential of violence and the totality of redemptive antisemitism outside its ‘country of origin’, Germany. At the same time, it underscores the impact of conspiracist worldviews and, in their most aggressive form, their perception of the world as a life-and-death struggle.

Although there has been a strong focus on the Holocaust in Norway in historical research over the last two decades, the role of redemptive antisemitism as a driving ideological force has not been highlighted until recently. Two articles published by historian Kjetil Braut Simonsen analyse the wartime propaganda of Nasjonal Samling, with a particular focus on the relationship between antisemitic hate speech and the evolution of anti-Jewish policy culminating in mass arrests and deportations.⁵ While several of the core elements of redemptive antisemitism are employed in this analysis, the term itself is not systematically discussed. Therefore, our article focuses on the foundation of this strain of anti-Jewish thought in Norway in the decades before 1940 rather than on the occupation era. At this historical stage, redemptive antisemitism was an oppositional ideological current and not a state-supported ideology, as was the case from 1940 to 1945.

The political careers of Saxlund, Sylten and Østbye have been examined in more detail in three master theses, published in the late 1990s and early 2000s.⁶ Here, the respective biographies, networks and worldviews of these anti-Jewish propagandists are explored. A more recent master’s thesis addresses their role in disseminating The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in Norway.⁷ While these works are highly valuable, a comparative study of the worldview of the three political figures from the angle of a new theoretical framework will contribute to a broader understanding of the ideological content, functions and implications of radical antisemitism in the three decades before the German occupation.

Generally, it is also important to recognize that antisemitism is a transnational phenomenon. Thus, our analysis will draw on broader research on völkisch and National Socialist antisemitism.⁸

Furthermore, by studying antisemitic conspiracism, this article seeks to participate in discussions of the more general dynamics of political extremism, particularly the ideological dimensions of political violence. Apocalyptic and Manichean images of the Other are not limited to radical antisemitism or a particular historical context. Instead, they have served as core features of different variations of genocidal ideology. As psychologists Mikolaj Winiewski, Wiktor Soral and Michal Bilewicz have stressed, in ‘almost all cases of genocide the element of conspiracy and envious prejudice was present’.⁹ From this perspective, the relationship between thought and action – between hateful ideas and practices – are not only historically but also politically highly relevant.

Saul Friedländer’s redemptive antisemitism and its transferability

The term redemptive antisemitism, as introduced by historian Saul Friedländer in Nazi Germany and the Jews, had its 25^th anniversary in 2022. In his magnus opus, Friedländer identifies redemptive antisemitism as a model of world explanation, which offers a universal answer to all alleged problems of modern society such as capitalism, communism, liberalism and cultural, social and biological decline. A crossover of older elements of Christian anti-Judaism and modern racial antisemitism, he understands redemptive antisemitism as ‘born from the fear of racial degeneration and the religious belief in redemption’.¹⁰ Its core element is the perception of history and politics as a struggle against the Jews and their alleged world conspiracy.¹¹ Thus, redemptive antisemitism belongs to the world of religious belief as a sectarian ideology, a conspiracy theory and – as we stress – a concept and a discourse. In this worldview, redemption can only take place by ‘liberation from the Jews – as their expulsion, possibly their annihilation’.¹² Consequently, Friedländer considers redemptive antisemitism the major ideological precondition for the Holocaust.

According to him, the phenomenon is rooted in 19^th century German history and is, first and foremost, a German product, an attempt to give answers to what was considered to be particular German sociopolitical problems.¹³

The French Revolution started a process in which Jews in Western Europe gradually gained civil rights, although at different times in different regions.¹⁴ In Germany, where they were first given rights due to the Code Civil, only to lose them again after Napoleon’s defeat, the Jews did not acquire full civil rights before 1869, which were bound in the constitution of 1871 during the unification of Germany.¹⁵ The process of emancipation, however, triggered a new wave of antisemitic politics and actions that turned into a larger and stronger antisemitic movement.¹⁶

It is in this context, Friedländer understands the evolvement of redemptive antisemitism. He particularly identifies the prominent Bayreuth circle member, völkisch ideologist and Richard Wagner’s son-in-law, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, as crucial to the further development of the concept.¹⁷ In his bestselling book Die Grundlagen des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (Chamberlain, 1899), Chamberlain interprets world history as a polarized struggle between the ‘Germanic’ and the ‘Jewish race’, with the latter figuring as the force of destructivity and evil.¹⁸ Thus, ‘Jewishness’ is not only linked to blood and race but also to a particularly destructive mentality. A reoccurring motif in redemptive antisemitism is the fear of ‘Jewification’ – a social and cultural development where society, as a whole, is ‘infected’ by ‘Jewish ideas’.¹⁹

Although Friedländer applies his concept to the German case and the history of the Holocaust, redemptive antisemitism stands out as a conspiracist worldview with a high degree of transferability to different contexts, nations and historical periods. Building further on his observations, we argue that the phenomenon consists of three main elements: 1) Dualism and Demonisation, 2) Conspiracism and Intentionalism and 3) Apocalypticism and Palingenesis. The combination of these three conceptual pairs constitutes an ideal type, which is also reflected in Norwegian conspiracist antisemitism.

Dualism and Demonisation

As a dualistic perception of reality, redemptive antisemitism represents the past and present as a Manichean struggle between the forces of good and evil. From this perspective, it has served and still serves as a model of interpretation utilized for explaining threatening and destructive social developments. The struggle between the Jewish and the Aryan (read also Germanic or Nordic) peoples was perceived as the primary force of history and politics, with ‘the Jew’ figuring as the incarnation of destructivity, parasitism and decadence. Thus, redemptive antisemitism implies the demonization of Jews.

Although racialist argumentation is an important element, this demonization marks continuity with long-lived religious anti-Jewish traditions. As historian Norman Cohn stressed in his pioneering work of 1966, Warrant for Genocide: ‘Jews have traditionally been seen as mysterious beings, endowed with uncanny, sinister powers’ in large parts of the world.²⁰ From the High Middle Ages and the first crusade, Jews were seen as children of the devil, agents employed by Satan for the purpose of combating Christianity and harming Christians,²¹ an image that continued as an important underlining feature of modern antisemitism. With anti-Jewish agitation increasingly formulated in nationalist and racist terms from the 19^th century onwards, the anti-Jewish discourse underwent important changes. The past and present were now represented as a ‘racial’ struggle between the Jews and the Aryan peoples. Consequently, the alleged ‘destructive character’ of the Jew was claimed to be of a racial nature and thus unchangeable.²² Redemptive antisemitism rests particularly on such ‘racialist’ premises.

The image of the Jew as the incarnation of evil became an instrumental feature in National Socialism, as historian Alan Confino states:

[…] the Nazis defined and attempted to solve the problem of the origins of historical evil. All the problems of the world, from the dawn of humanity via the time of ancient Christianity, of Germany in the Middle Ages, and finally to the modern period were caused by one group, the Jews. The Jews were intrinsically evil; moral corruption, decay and degeneration, and, in the modern world, communism, capitalism and liberalism were all inherently Jewish.²³

Conspiracism and Intentionalism

The term conspiracy theory can in the broadest sense be described as a theory, claiming that one or several conspiracies have taken place. While some researchers associate the term with theories that are downright false, others refer to claims of conspiracy activities that simply have not been proven.²⁴

Whereas conspiracy theories can be limited or large in scope, conspiracism or a conspiracist worldview, according to social scientist Michael Barkun, ‘implies a universe governed by design rather than randomness’, where history and politics is staged by a secret plot.²⁵

Based on conspiracism, a central claim in redemptive antisemitism is that the Jews are pulling the strings behind all historical upheavals, such as revolutions, wars, economic crises and ‘destructive’ ideologies, with the aim of achieving world power. This kind of conspiracy narratives have been an important feature of antisemitism in almost all historical periods, such as in the medieval era, when Jews were accused of staging plots against Christian communities through acts such as ritual murders and well-poisoning.²⁶

Due to the Enlightenment and the process of modernization, conspiracy beliefs underwent secularization. In the 19^th century, antisemitism became an integral part of the fear of and attacks on ‘destructive modernity’.²⁷ In fact, many antisemites in the late 19^th and early 20^th century interpreted modernity itself as staged by a Jewish plot. The most well-known document in this genre is, without a doubt, the falsification known as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, first published in Russia in 1903.²⁸ After the First World War, the Protocols were translated into several languages and distributed in large numbers throughout Europe. The ideological content of the Protocols can be described as a combination of antimodernism and antisemitism. Its main message is that the Jews are working systematically to achieve ‘world power’. Economic crises, revolutions, wars, capitalism, socialism, liberalism and democratic ideas, it claims, are all staged by the Jews.²⁹

As a conspiracist discourse, redemptive antisemitism was also intentionalist. It described complex historical changes as orchestrated intentionally and according to a long-term plan by a secret cabal.³⁰ Furthermore, it can be seen as an expression of the phenomena that social scientist Richard Hofstadter characterizes as ‘the paranoid style in politics’. According to him, the defining feature of the paranoid style ‘is not that its exponents see conspiracies or plots here and there, but that they regard a ”vast” or ”gigantic” conspiracy as the motive force in historical events’.³¹

Apocalypticism and Palingenesis

Redemptive antisemitism describes the contemporary world as being ridden by crisis and decadence. A core premise was that the present society faced a critical historical watershed with only two possible outcomes: either Jewish victory and racial and national degeneration or salvation and rebirth through the successful struggle against the Jews. This apocalyptic mood of thought is an important element in grandiose conspiracy theories on a more general level. As Hofstadter writes:

[t]he paranoid spokesman sees the fate of this conspiracy in apocalyptic terms – he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization. He constantly lives at a turning point: it is now or never in organizing resistance to conspiracy.³²

Thus, redemptive antisemitism has an apocalyptic and millennialist dimension.³³ As Friedländer summarizes, the German hood and the Aryan World were perceived to be on the road to perdition if the struggle against the Jews was not joined – a struggle which was characterized as a life and death fight.³⁴ This perception was a major foundation of National Socialist ideology. Hitler himself expressed a hope for salvation, where the purification of the Aryan blood and the struggle against ‘Jewry’ – the snake in paradise – would pave the way for a new Millennial Reich.³⁵

Within this framework, antisemites tend to consider themselves members of a chosen elite who have revealed the real forces operating in the world and described themselves as enlightened avantgarde.³⁶

As we will see, this is clearly present in the publications of Saxlund, Sylten and Østbye. Although anti-Jewish conspiracy narratives were widespread in Norway in the three decades before the German occupation, all three protagonists interpreted their political activities as a project of public enlightenment. In addition, they claimed to possess knowledge that had been systematically suppressed or ignored by the establishment.

Antisemitism Without Jews: A brief history of anti-Jewish prejudices and politics in Norway

Norway’s most significant attempt to build an independent state was in 1814, when the country, after being subject to the Danish crown for centuries, passed its own constitution on 17 May. At the time, recognized as one of the most liberal constitutions in Western Europe, it is according to historian Håkon Harket likely Article 2, the so-called Jew clause [Jødeparagrafen], which today draws most attention.³⁷ First abolished in 1851 and reinstated by Nasjonal Samling between 1942 and 1945, it banned Jews (together with Jesuits and monastic orders) from entering the country.³⁸ The introduction of the Jewish clause was the result of a well-known antisemitic discourse that had taken place on the European continent, representing Jews as proponents of a barbarian religion and as a state within the state.³⁹ However, what distinguished Norway from its antisemitic sources of inspiration was the fact that the country was basically a country without Jews.⁴⁰

Since the Middle Ages and during the 17^h and 18^th century, Jews were excluded from Norway and only visited the country occasionally in connection with commercial activities, without being allowed to settle permanently.⁴¹ Although Article 2 of the Constitution meant a tightening of the prevailing legal norms, its construction could create local confusion about how to enforce the ban.⁴² This led to Jews being allowed into the country on certain occasions and at different border checkpoints, which, in turn, could result in deportations and imprisonment.⁴³

In the last decade before the final abolishment of Article 2 in 1851, the public attitude in Norway towards Jews changed in line with a new wave of liberalism across Europe. Anti-Jewish sentiments did not disappear but at least diminished.⁴⁴ The feared wave of Jewish immigration to Norway, which had been a major argument in favour of the ban when it was publicly debated, never took place.⁴⁵ The 1865 census counted 25 Jews in Norway, most of them coming from Denmark or Northern Germany and only with temporary residence permits to carry on commercial activities. This changed gradually from the beginning of the 1880s due to the larger mass emigration of Jews from the Russian Tsarist Empire westwards. In 1890, about 214 Jews lived in Norway – most of them in the Norwegian capital and in Trondheim. Compared to Western European Jews, Jews coming from Eastern Europe were a much more visible group. Besides speaking Yiddish, the majority of them had a modest economic background, and as refugees, they had brought their families with them to Scandinavia and settled permanently.⁴⁶ In general, the so-called yids were more often the target of prejudices and vilifications and were considered a burden for society.⁴⁷

Although organized political antisemitism was marginal in Norway compared to other countries, antisemitic ideas were widespread. As mentioned, anti-Jewish stereotypes were expressed in the political press, satirical magazines and popular literature from the beginning of the 20^th century.⁴⁸ Eivind Saxlund’s book Jøder og Gojim (1910), which we will analyse more thoroughly in this article, must be considered the most influential antisemitic writing in Norway in the 1910s and gained positive reviews in the press. At the time his book was published, only about 1000 Jews lived in the country, most of them belonging to a little influential lower middle class, which should have made any efforts to identify a ‘Jewish question’ a dead issue. However, historian Einhart Lorenz stressed that ‘Saxlund’s antisemitic stereotypes and attitudes were part of a “cultural code”’.⁴⁹

From the First World War and with the Russian Revolution, a new wave of antisemitic prejudices freshet Europe and reached Norway. Ideas about the Jews were radicalized, and they were now suspected to be foreign spies, agents of revolution and Bolshevik Jews. In particular, the latter became a popular motive in Norwegian crime literature. Fear of international agents even caused the Norwegian police and the intelligence office to pay particular attention to Jews who wanted to enter the country. In 1917, the Ministry of Justice started the registration of all foreign Jews in Norway.⁵⁰

During the years after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the conspiracist element of antisemitism became even more prominent internationally, also in Norway. In 1920, a Norwegian translation of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was published. Its perhaps most important promoter was the writer and translator Marta Steinsvik, warning against ‘the Jewish world conspiracy’ in lectures across the country during the early 1920s.⁵¹

Anti-Jewish motives that described the Jews as un-national, disloyal to the Norwegian nation and subversive also appeared regularly in the bourgeois' and farmer’s press through the 1920s and 1930s. Here, ‘the Jew’ was associated with communism, capitalism and decadent modernity.⁵² A particularly aggressive political debate was linked to Jewish kosher slaughter, which was prohibited by the Norwegian parliament in 1929.⁵³

Lorenz emphasized that due to the spread of anti-Jewish attitudes in the press, Norwegian bureaucrats completely misjudged the Jews’ situation in Nazi Germany and in annexed Czechoslovakia and Austria in the 1930s. As a result, Norway was, beside the Soviet Union, the only country in Europe where Jews constituted a minority among the refugees, and only a few hundred were given residence permits.⁵⁴ By the time Norway was occupied on 9 April 1940, about 2,100 Jews lived in the country.⁵⁵

In conclusion, antisemitism in Norway was, first and foremost, present as a reservoir of cultural stereotypes. From an ideal-typical point of view, one can differentiate between two expressions of antisemitism in the interwar years: antisemitism as a vague discourse, expressed regularly in the public through a spectrum of negative images and stereotypes, and antisemitism as a total worldview, where the ‘struggle against the Jew’ was perceived as the burning political issue of the time.⁵⁶

Norwegian cases of redemptive antisemitism and their world explanations

Antisemitism and antimodernism: Eivind Saxlund and “the Jewish spirit”

Born in Halden in 1858, a small town close to the Swedish border, Eivind Saxlund lived and attended school in Germany between 1868 and 1870. In 1882, he finalized his law studies in Kristiania (Oslo), and in 1886, still under age 30, he was appointed as a member of the Norwegian Supreme Court.⁵⁷

His antisemitic activities were first and foremost associated with the book Jøder og Gojim, which was originally published in 1910 and then reissued in new and extended versions in 1911, 1922 and 1923. This book drew largely upon German publications, with the antisemitic propagandist Theodor Fritsch, the British-German racialist philosopher Houston Stewart Chamberlain and – in the later and extended editions – sociologist Werner Sombart as the most important sources of inspiration.⁵⁸ In addition, Saxlund frequently referred to anti-Jewish statements made by well-known historical figures, such as Martin Luther and the Norwegian-Danish writer and historian Ludwig Holberg,⁵⁹ aiming to connect his own ideological worldview to a chain of traditions.⁶⁰ Despite the radical anti-Jewish message that was expressed in Jøder and Gojim, Saxlund never became a pariah in the broader Norwegian public sphere. In fact, several reviewers have described his book as a source of ‘objective information’ about Jews.⁶¹

As the first antisemitic propagandist in Norway, Saxlund held the position of ideological mentor. On several occasions, he contributed to Mikal Sylten’s extreme anti-Jewish journal Nasjonalt Tidsskrift,⁶² and Sylten himself held Jøder og Gojim in high regard, describing the book as nothing less than ‘clear, excellent and unique in world history’.⁶³

But what precisely were the main elements in Saxlund’s antisemitic worldview, and to what extent did they correspond to the ideal-typical model of redemptive antisemitism outlined in this article? In general, Saxlund offered a dualist and Manichean interpretation of history and politics, where racialist, cultural, social and religious lines of argumentation were linked together. The ‘Germanic’ and the ‘Jewish’ world were not only represented as different but were claimed to be fighting an ongoing (racial) struggle. ‘When people of different races are clashing with each other’, Saxlund wrote,

struggle will occur. One of them will, completely or partly, strive to displace the other. Such is the natural order, even more when these races are worshipping different religions. However, when it is added that the religion of one of these races commands the hatred of anyone else, the struggle is a matter of course.⁶⁴

This argument corresponded to the ideas advocated by Houston Stewart Chamberlain 10 years earlier. In his Die Grundlagen des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (1899), Chamberlain described history as a bitter, polarized struggle. For him, ‘God was, so to speak, embodied in the Germanic race, and the Devil in the Jewish race’.⁶⁵

Jøder og Gojim also included a section on Jewish religion, blending older elements of Christian anti-Judaism and modern racial antisemitism. Saxlund argued that the ‘real’ meaning of Judaism was hidden from the public; it was ‘expressly prohibited for Jews to reveal their doctrine of faith for non-Jews’.⁶⁶ Furthermore, the Jewish religion would not only be based on a thorough hatred for non-Jews, Goyims but also on the doctrine of ‘blood and race’:

The Jewish religion is national. According to it, Jahve is only the God of the Jews, the God of their race and only the Jews are his people, to whom he in return for their worship has promised world domination […].⁶⁷

Additionally, Saxlund outlined the alleged ‘Jewish character’. His approach was based on a völkisch-romantic differentiation between ‘Germanic’ rootedness on the one hand and ‘Jewish’ rootlessness, money and materialism on the other hand. Thus, antisemitism served as a model of explanation for the rapid and complex social and cultural changes associated with modernity, in line with the contemporary ideological currents on the continent. As historian Christhard Hoffmann demonstrated in his analysis of the fusion of antimodernism and antisemitism in Germany, presenting ‘the new as Jewish, gave modernity a clear-cut face. While the process of modernization remained largely anonymous and obscure, the Jew was easily identifiable’.⁶⁸

The use of antisemitism as a framework to interpret modernity became particularly significant in the second edition of Jøder og Gojim (1911), where Saxlund used Werner Sombart as a main source. Sombart’s book Die Juden und das Wirtschaftsleben, published the same year, described the historical transition from feudalism to capitalism ‘as a shift from a Christian Gemeinschaft to a Jewish Gesellschaft’.⁶⁹ In a similar way, Saxlund associated the ‘Jewish character’ with crude and calculating intellectualism while constructing a diving line between a rooted Germanic ‘peasant race’ and ‘Jewish’ materialism and money.⁷⁰

As mentioned, an important element in redemptive antisemitism is conspiracism. Although Jøder og Gojim suggested that the aim of the Jewish religion was world domination, the book was published about a decade before the mass circulation of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion across Europe. The conspiracist premises were thus somewhat less expressively articulated than later in the Sylten’s and Østbye’s publications. In an article published by the mainstream newspaper Aftenposten in 1922, however, Saxlund explicitly addressed the authenticity of the ideological message disseminated in the Protocols. Here, he claimed that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were written by the founder of cultural Zionism, Asher Ginsberg, and that it was irrelevant whether the document was authentic or a forgery due to the ‘inner truth’ of its message. The Jewish quest for world power was considered a reality that would soon be achieved.⁷¹

It should also be noted that Saxlund preached an anti-Jewish message that was completely detached from the actual presence of the Jewish minority in Norway. On the contrary, he stated explicitly that it was not individual Jews but rather ‘the penetration of the Jewish spirit into our culture’ that made ‘the Jewish question’ urgent:⁷²

The Jewish spirit is infecting our own [spirit], attacking our character, disorienting our moral values, damaging our best racial features, changing our national character, threatening to transform all of us to Jews.⁷³

Thus, Saxlund’s argumentation constitutes a clear example of an ‘antisemitism without Jews’. It served as a prism of interpretation, providing a one-dimensional and tangible explanation of the complex processes of social, cultural and political transformation. ‘The ʻmodern, internationalʼ spirit of reformation which has conquered so many minds’, Saxlund himself summarized, ‘is simply the Jewish spirit, nothing else’.⁷⁴

Although he described contemporary society through a vocabular of crisis and decay, the solutions to the Jewish question he suggested were rather vague. In Jøder og Gojim, he advocated a kind of moral awakening, where the Germanic people protected and nurtured their character traits – among them, courage, bodily strength, the sense of duty, honesty and love or nature were nurtured and protected.

Antisemitism as an obsession: Mikal Sylten and Nationalt Tidsskrift

While Saxlund belonged to the upper social strata, Mikal Sylten, the editor of the extreme anti-Jewish publication National Tidsskrift [National Journal], can best be described as a political outsider. Born in Northern Norway in 1873, Sylten was originally educated as a printer. For most of the time between 1902 and 1914, he lived outside Norway: first in London, then in Germany and finally seven years in New York. According to historian Kristin Brattelid, his anti-Jewish worldview most probably evolved during his stay in Germany.

In 1914, he moved back to Oslo, where he started the periodical Sandheten [The Truth], two years later renamed Nationalt tTdsskrift. Published monthly between 1916 and 1945, the journal propagated an aggressive form of antisemitism. In contrast to Saxlund, who, in Jøder og Gojim, mainly argued within an ideological-abstract framework, Sylten also attacked individual Jews. In the four editions of his publication Who is Who in the Jewish World [Hvem er Hvem i Jødeverden], he listed the names of Jews (and individuals he considered to be Jewish) in Norway and abroad. During the German occupation, Sylten assisted the German Security Police in acquiring an overview of the Jewish minority in Norway.⁷⁵

As with Saxlund, Sylten’s political ideas were not original but inspired by a range of sources, with the German völkisch movement as the most important reference. His most decisive ideological mentor was undoubtedly the German publication Hammer and its founder, Theodor Fritsch, whose writings he regularly republished in Nationalt Tidsskrift.⁷⁶ At the same time, his attitudes towards contemporary far-right politics in interwar Norway were rather ambivalent. Occasionally, Sylten accused right-wing organizations of not showing sufficient understanding of the decisive importance of the so-called ‘Jewish question’.⁷⁷

Ideologically, Nationalt Tidsskrift promoted a dualist worldview in which the ‘Jew’ served as a total explanation of the perils of modernity. Sylten represented history as an ongoing battle between the ‘Germanic peoples and Jewry’. Similar to Saxlund, he defined ‘Jewishness’ in both racialist and cultural terms. Jewish blood would be stronger than Germanic blood due to the strict rules of segregation and isolation. Thus, the Jews would carry on biological warfare through the promotion of racial mixing, prostitution and promiscuous sexuality. As claimed in Nationalt Tidsskrift,⁷⁸ ‘The bastardisation of humanity is […] an important part of the Jewish war of conquest’.⁷⁹ While the word Jew would refer to members of the ‘semitic race’, the journal also applied ‘the Jewish spirit’ or ‘Jewification’.⁸⁰ Already in February 1917, it referred to Saxlund by stating that it was not the character of individual Jews but the ‘penetration of the Jewish spirit into our culture’, which was at the core of ‘the Jewish question’.⁸¹

This line of argumentation followed a pattern well known from continental antisemitic circles. As stressed by historian Steven E. Ascheim, the doctrine of ‘Judaization’ – the notion that ‘ʻthe Jewish spirit’ had somehow permeated society and its institutions’ and ‘seeped through the spiritual pores of the nation’ became a cardinal feature.⁸² Accordingly, Hitler believed that the “inner Judaization of our people” […] was as dangerous as the tangible Jewish presence’.⁸³

On the most general level, antisemitism, as expressed by Sylten and his journal, materialized as secular demonology, representing ‘the Jew’ as the very incarnation of evil and destructiveness. ‘The Semites’, Nationalt Tidsskrift claimed in 1923, had worked as the destructive and disruptive agent throughout the ages.⁸⁴ Thus, as in Saxlund’s case, antisemitism served as a tool for orientation, linking complex historical and social developments to a single cause. As Brattelid has documented, Nationalt Tidsskrift not only described Bolshevism and world capitalism but also the emergence of ‘decadent’ modernity itself as staged by a Jewish plot: ‘Jewry became more or less equivalent with modern entities, such as large-scale capitalism, large scale industry, bolshevism, communism, democracy and women’s liberation’.⁸⁵

In short, conspiracism became instrumental. Already in the very first issue of Sandheten, Sylten claimed that a conspiracy against humanity exists: ‘a thousand-headed beast, a giant octopus, striving to capture all humanity in its grasp’.⁸⁶ When The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was widely distributed internationally from 1919/1920, Nationalt Tidsskrift quickly became an active promoter of its political message. In March 1920, half a year before the protocols were published in Norwegian under the title Den nye verdenskeiser, Nationalt Tidsskrift commented extensively on the German translation. The Protocols, it concluded, was nothing but a programme for battle, orchestrated by the Jews with the aim of conquering world-power.⁸⁷

The linkage between conspiracism, and the intentionalist perception of history and politics, as well as a deep-rooted scepticism towards ‘decadent’ forces of modernity, is clearly exemplified in Sylten’s antifeminism. In 1923, Nationalt Tidsskrift published an article about women’s liberation written by one of the contributors to the German Hammer. In an editorial introduction to this piece, Nationalt Tidsskrift stated that the women’s movement was part and parcel of the Jewish struggle for power. More concretely, the journal described the emancipation of women as a revolutionary project, causing chaos between males and females, undermining the family and marriage and thereby paving the way for ‘Jewish domination’.⁸⁸ It is hardly a coincidence that Sylten’s sources of inspiration, also in this case, were German. As historian Ute Planert stressed, antisemitism and antifeminism went hand in hand in organizations such as the Alliance for the Combat of Women’s emancipation [Deutscher Bund zur Bekämpfung der Frauenemanzipation, 1912–1920].⁸⁹

In general, Sylten described himself as a mediator of truths and facts about the world that had systematically been hidden or ignored within the broader public sphere, claiming that the Norwegian public lacked knowledge of the ‘hidden forces’ operating in the world. Thus, his rhetoric fits into the concept that political scientist Michael Barkun has called ‘stigmatized knowledge’. His term refers to knowledge claims ‘that have been ignored or rejected by those institutions we rely upon to validate such claims’, such as ‘universities, the medical and scientific communities, government agencies, major mainstream media, and in some cases religious authorities’.⁹⁰ An important premise within conspiracist discourses is that such knowledge is intentionally suppressed by the establishment and the elite.

In line with these premises, Sylten represented antisemitism as public enlightenment, counter to major newspapers, which were claimed to be under ‘Jewish influence’.⁹¹ In other words, he saw himself as a member of a chosen elite, promoting ‘truths’ that have been ignored or rejected by the political, cultural, and educational elites.

Antisemitism as sectarian party politics: Halldis Neergaard Østbye

In contrast to Mikal Sylten, who positioned himself outside party politics in the 1920s and 1930s, Halldis Neegaard Østbye joined Quisling’s Nasjonal Samling long before the German invasion into Norway in April 1940.

Born in 1898 in Stor-Elvdal in Eastern Norway, Østbye moved to Oslo as a youth and worked as an office clerk after graduating from high school. In late summer 1933, she joined Nasjonal Samling only months after the party was established. Her party career started in 1934, when she was appointed propaganda leader for the party’s woman organization [Nasjonal Samlings kvinneorganisasjon]. From spring 1935, she worked at Nasjonal Samling’s office of press and propaganda under the leadership of Gulbrand Lunde, the later minister of public enlightenment and propaganda in Quisling’s collaboration government. Between 1937 and January 1940, she was employed as editor of Nasjonal Samling’s major newspaper, Fritt Folk,⁹² at a point when the party was reduced to a political sect with very limited support and influence.

Østbye’s antisemitic worldview was presented comprehensively in her book Jødeproblemets og dets løsning [The Jewish problem and its solution], published in 1938. As was the case with Saxlund and Sylten, Østbye presented Jews as the universal source of evil. ‘The Jewish problem’ she claimed, was not restricted to a particular Volk or nation but was of a universal nature and thus ‘a concern for all people’.⁹³

This line of reasoning was rather common in modern nationalist antisemitism as it evolved in the late 19^th and early 20^th century. As sociologist Klaus Holz stressed, the fusion of nationalism and antisemitism rested upon two different logics of dualist categorizations: On the one hand, the national ‘we-group’ was contrasted with other states, nations and peoples, which were described as foreign and the other. On the other hand, antisemitic agitation built upon a binary scheme in which all nations/peoples were contrasted with Jews. In short, the antisemites constructed ‘the Jewish question’ as an international national question, where the very principle of national identity was at stake.⁹⁴

‘History as a whole’, according to Østbye, revealed itself as ‘an unbroken chain of conflicts between Jews and non-Jews in almost all countries’,⁹⁵ as the Jews, due to their ‘rootlessness and strange mentality were predestined for all movements [marked] by an anti-national and international tendency’.⁹⁶ Thus, the dualist categorizations permeated her perceptions of both the past and the present.

Østbye explicitly rejected that the Jews constituted a race but would rather belong to a ‘bastardised’ people. Nevertheless, the secret about their strength would be the recognition of the laws of blood rooted in Judaism.⁹⁷ As was recurring in redemptive antisemitic conspiracist belief, she associated the term ‘Jewish spirit’ with Marxism, intellectualism, fixation for money and destructive materialism.⁹⁸ In other words, racialist, religious, ideological and cultural forms of argumentation blended, as was the case in Saxlund’s and Sylten’s writings.

Accordingly, Jødeproblemet og dets løsning provided an intentionalist perception of history and politics based on conspiracism. Østbye claimed that the Jews not only controlled the banks, the stock markets and press but that financial capitalism was symbiotically entangled with world communism and international freemasonry, with the aim to achieve subversive ‘Jewish’ goals. Here, she referred explicitly to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which she believed had been proven to be the ‘secret program for a Jewish World revolution’: However one evaluates the authenticity of the protocols ‘there can be no doubt that it contains the program of a secret and terrible organisation, which carries the faith of the peoples within its hands’.⁹⁹

A particularly important element of the conspiracist worldview was the myth of Judeo-Bolshevism, which was asserted to be a Jewish plot. As historian Paul Hanebrink writes:

[…] the belief that Communism was created by a Jewish conspiracy and that Jews were therefore to blame for the crimes committed by Communist regimes became a core element of counterrevolutionary, antidemocratic, and racist ideologies in many different countries.¹⁰⁰

In addition, in Norway, especially during the 1920s, anti-Bolshevik and anti-Jewish conspiracy stereotypies were disseminated by mainstream newspapers affiliated with political conservatism and the Farmer’s Party [Bondepartiet].¹⁰¹

When Østbye’s Jødeproblemet og dets løsning was published, Nasjonal Samling promoted a radicalized variation of anti-Communism, where not only the communists but also the social democrats were claimed to be staging a secret Marxist plot.¹⁰² Here, an important ideological element was the concept of Cultural Bolshevism, a theory that assumed that the radical left was systematically spreading immoral values, with the intention of undermining resilience against revolutionary forces.¹⁰³

Accordingly, Østbye claimed that the Jews not only had conquered power through Marxism and liberalism, with the very aim to promote racial mixing to abolish national borders and to establish a ‘worldwide Soviet republic under Jewish leadership’,¹⁰⁴ but also that the Jews sought to undermine traditional moral values through decadent literature, theatre, the film industry and medical science. Particular attention was paid to the topic Østbye herself called ‘the Jewish sexual revolution’. In particular, psychoanalysis was attacked and accused of undermining marriage and traditional family life. Hardly regarding any other aspect of Cultural Bolshevism, ‘the Jewish infection [is] as clear as within the sexology’.¹⁰⁵

Jødeproblemet og dets løsning also provided a solution to the alleged Jewish question. On the most general level – just like Sylten and Saxlund – Østbye believed that the real mechanisms ruling the world were hidden from the public, who, therefore, was in need of enlightenment.¹⁰⁶ Although describing pogroms as an understandable reaction against ‘Jewish’ power and exploitation, these could hardly provide a sufficient solution to the Jewish question.¹⁰⁷ Instead, she advocated dissimilation: Prohibition of Jewish immigration, prohibition of marriage between Jews and non-Jews and possibly also the migration of the worldwide Jewish population to one single isolated region, for instance, Madagascar.¹⁰⁸ In short, Østbye embraced the radical anti-Jewish policy of the Hitler regime, with all its possible consequences.

From ideology to deeds

On 19 June 1940, two and a half months after the German occupation of Norway, Østbye published a piece in Nasjonal Samling’s party newspaper Fritt Folk, in which she addressed the mechanisms behind the ongoing World War. Her message was well known: the war was orchestrated by a powerful Jewish cabal, and ‘international Jewry’ pulled the strings between all the enemies of National Socialism. Portraying the Jews as a powerful force, Østbye was, however, rather optimistic:

[…] THIS TIME WILL BE THE LAST TIME. Their [the Jews] era is over. Let us not inflict our country with more misfortune for their sake.¹⁰⁹

The statement is interesting for one reason in particular: it points to the changing framework within which redemptive antisemitism operated before and during the German occupation. In the decades before 1940, Saxlund, Sylten and Østbye were energic proponents of a totalizing antisemitic worldview. They described history and politics as a battle between good and evil, with ‘the Jew’ figuring as the incarnation of disruptive social and political forces, moral dissolution and decay. The prevailing historical development since the French Revolution of 1789 was perceived as intentionally staged according to a subversive plan. The logical conclusion was a vision of redemption; the key to solving present dislocation and decadence was to liberate society from Jewish influence.

As mentioned, anti-Jewish conspiracy stereotypes were widespread among the Norwegian public. However, this particular radical variation in anti-Jewish thought was rather marginal. In fact, antisemitic propagandists such as Saxlund, Sylten and Østbye regularly complained that Norwegians did not recognize the significance of ‘the Jewish question’. By the time Østbye published Jødeproblemet og dets løsning, her suggested solution – a thorough dissimilation of all Jews – seemed to be more or less utopian.

The German invasion fundamentally changed the political framework. Norway came under the sway of a totalitarian Nationalist Socialist regime, with redemptive antisemitism at the core of its ideology. In their political propaganda, both the German occupying power and Nasjonal Samling represented the ongoing World War as a battle of life and death between the Nordic–Germanic world and the sinister and subversive force named international Jewry. This conspiracist reasoning served as the ideological rationalization of the anti-Jewish policy, culminating in the mass arrests and deportations of Jews in Norway in the autumn of 1942 and the winter of 1943.¹¹⁰ In this context, redemptive antisemitism served as the ideological rationale for radical anti-Jewish actions.

More concrete, the German occupation created new possibilities for former marginal ideological actors. While Saxlund died in 1936, and never experienced the ‘triumphs’ of redemptive antisemitism in Norway, Sylten served as an ‘advisor’ for the German Security Police when mapping the Jewish minority in Norway.¹¹¹ Thus, he became affiliated with the anti-Jewish policy culminating in arrests, deportations and mass murder.

Østbye’s writings were used as educational material by the collaboration regime.¹¹² Moreover, she publicly applauded the anti-Jewish policy. In an article published in the national socialist journal Hirdmannen on 28 November 1942, two days after the deportations of 529 Jews to Auschwitz with the cargo ship Donau, she stressed that the struggle against Jewry was still not over due to the prevailing influence of the ‘Jewish spirit’.¹¹³

A crucial aspect that can be derived from these historical trajectories is that extremist political ideas can have major consequences – even when they, at a given historical stage, appear insignificant. The underlying structures of redemptive antisemitism, the conspiracist perception of history and politics, the demonization of the other and the apocalyptic diagnosis of society are recurring ideological features of political violence, although the contexts are constantly changing. A well-known reminder of the violent implications of apocalyptic conspiracism is the terrorist attacks in Norway on 22 July 2011, which the perpetrator considered a necessary form of self-defence against the subversive forces of ‘Cultural Marxism’.¹¹⁴ In other words, conspiracism is a blueprint for violence.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Nicola Karcher

Nicola Karcher is a historian and Associate Professor in Social Science at the Østfold University College, Norway, where she leads the research group Politics, Religion, Ideology and Society in Education (PRIS) and is a member of the Research Steering Committee on her faculty. She is also co-head of the steering committee of the Network for Nordic Fascism Studies (NORFAS). Karcher has been part of the research project Democratic institutions facing Nazi occupation: Norway in a comparative perspective from 2013 to 2017, at the Norwegian Holocaust Center (HL-senteret), financed by the Norwegian Research Council. She has been a visiting researcher at the NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies in Amsterdam and a guest lecturer at the University of Valencia. Karcher’s PhD thesis in 2012 dealt with Norwegian-German fascist networks in the interwar period. She has published articles and books in Norwegian, German, and English on the history of fascism and occupation history, particularly with respect to the Nordic countries. In her monograph Kampen om skolen (Dreyers forlag, 2018), she analysed fascist education in the light of Nazification policy and civil resistance in occupied Norway. Karcher is the co-editor of the anthology Nordic Fascism: Fragments of an Entangled History (Routledge, 2022).

Kjetil Braut Simonsen

Kjetil Braut Simonsen works as a researcher at the Jewish Museum in Oslo, Norway. He has written extensively on antisemitism, the Holocaust, Jewish history and the far right before, during and after the Second World War in journals such as Scandinavian Journal of History and Historisk tidsskrift. In autumn 2023, he published the monography I skyggen av Holocaust: Antisemittisme i norsk historie 1945–2023 (Humanist forlag) on antisemitism in Norway from the end of the Second World War to the present day. In this book, he analyses the character and development of Norwegian post-Holocaust antisemitism, focusing both on the far right, the public debate, and the political left. Simonsen has been a PhD candidate in the research project Democratic institutions facing Nazi occupation: Norway in a comparative perspective from 2012 to 2016, at the Norwegian Holocaust Center (HL-senteret), financed by the Norwegian Research Council. In his PhD thesis of 2016, he analyses the Nazification of the Norwegian ministerial bureaucracy and its manoeuvring room during the German occupation. He is the co-editor of the anthology Historie og moral: Nazismen, jødene og Hjemmefronten (Dreyers forlag, 2020). Simonsen received the prestigious Sverre Steen Price from the Norwegian Historical Association in 2021.

Notes

1. See among others, Harket, Paragrafen; Ulvund, Fridomens grenser.

2. See, for example, the standard work of Jong, Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden, 698–883.

3. Bruland, Holocaust i Norge; Corell, Likvidasjonen; Johansen, ed., På siden av rettsoppgjøret.

4. Moore, Victims and Survivors. See also Hirschfeld, Nazi Rule.

5. Simonsen, “Threats and Euphemisms”; Simonsen, “En apokalyptisk antisemittisme”. See also Westlie, Det norske jødehatet.

6. Christensen, “Jøder og Gojim”; Toftesund, ‘ʻDa allt folketʼ’; Brattelid, “Mikal Sylten”.

7. Ringdal, ‘ʻNorge, vokn op!ʼ’.

8. See, for example, Berggren, Nationell upplysning; Bak, Dansk antisemittisme; Bak and Emberland, ‘Early Nordic Fascism and Antisemitic Conspiracism’.

9. Winiewski, Soral and Bilewicz, “Conspiracy Theories”, 32. A clear case apart from National Socialism, is Rwanda. See Hintjens, “Explaining the 1994”, 263.

10. Friedländer, Nazi Germany, 87.

11. Friedländer, Nazi Germany, 84–5.

12. Friedländer, Nazi Germany, 87.

13. Friedländer, Nazi Germany, 86–7.

14. Birnbaum and Kaznelson, eds., Paths of Emancipation.

15. Mosse, ‘ʻSchutzjudenʼ’.

16. Pulzer, The Rise.

17. Friedländer, Nazi Germany, 89.

18. Mosse. The Crisis, 94–5; Berggren, “Ras och religion”; Field, Evangelist of Race.

19. The term ‘Verjudung’ was applied by Richard Wagner already in 1850, and in the late 1860s a term with similar connotations was employed by French antisemites. During the German occupation, it became an important feature of the anti-Jewish propaganda of Nasjonal Samling. Rose, Revolutionary antisemitism, 40; Modras, The Catholic Church, 243; Simonsen, “Threats and euphemisms”.

20. Cohn, Warrant for Genocide, 25.

21. Cohn, Warrant for Genocide, 26.

22. On German and Austrian ‘racialist’ antisemitism, see, for example, Pulzer, The Rise, 47–57.

23. Confino, A World, 236.

24. Dentith, “Conspiracy theories”, 94–104.

25. Barkun, A Culture, 3.

26. See, for example, Heil, Gottesfeinde – Menschenfeinde. On antisemitism as a longue-durée conspiracist tradition, see Simonsen, “Antisemitism and Conspiracism”, 357–70.

27. On antimodernism and antisemitism in Germany, see, for example, Hoffmann, ‘ʻThe Newʼ’, 100; Volkov, Germans, Jews, 107–18; on France, see Caron, “Catholic Political Mobilization”, 296, 300–1; on Russia for example, Kellogg, The Russian Roots, 30–46.

28. Simonsen, “Antisemitism and Conspiracism”, 362–3.

29. On the Protocols, see, for example, Cohn, Warrant for Genocide; Bronner, A Rumour; Utrup, Kampf gegen; Webman (ed.), The Global Impact.

30. On conspiracism as a form of intentionalism, see, for example, Cubitt, The Jesuit Myths, 2–26.

31. Hofstadter, “The Paranoid Style”, 29.

32. Hofstadter, “The Paranoid Style”, 29–30.

33. ‘Millennialism’, according to historian Richard Landes, refers to belief systems assuming that the world will be radically transformed at some point; that a new utopian order will be realized on earth. While millennial movements historically have been religious in outlook, they also can rest on secular premises. See Landes, Heaven and Earth, 20.

34. Friedländer, Nazi Germany, 87.

35. See, for example, Frøland, Nazismens idéunivers, 181.

36. Simonsen, “En apokalyptisk antisemittisme”, 60.

37. Harket, Paragrafen, 12.

38. On the history of Article 2, see in detail, Harket, Paragrafen; on its reinstatement during the German occupation, Bruland, “The 1942 Reinstatement”.

39. On this discourse, see in more detail, Rürup, “The Politics of Jewish”; on its impact in Norway, D’Aprile and Harket, “Constitutional Discourse”.

40. On the term, see also Antisemitism without Jews by journalist Paul Lendvai, published in 1971.

41. Mendelsohn, Jødenes historie, 9–46; Ulvund, “The Practice”, 143–6. On the history of the enforcement of Article 2, see also in detail, Ulvund, Fridomens grenser.

42. Ulvund, “The Practice”, 149–58.

43. Ulvund, “The Practice”, 158–64.

44. Ulvund, “The Practice”, 169.

45. Lorenz, ‘ʻVi har ikke invitertʼ’, 36–7.

46. On Jewish life in Norway from the 1880s, see Gjernes, “Jødar i Kristiania”; Mendelsohn, Jødenes historie; Sebak, “ … vi blir neppe”.

47. Lorenz, Jødenes historie, 204–32.

48. Emberland, “Antisemittismen i Norge”, 406–7; in more detail, Lien, ‘ʻ … pressen kan kun skriveʼ’. See also Brakstad, “Jøden som kulturell konstruksjon”.

49. Lorenz, ‘ʻVi har ikke invitertʼ’, 37; Volkov, Jüdisches Leben, 62. All non-English quotes are translated by the authors of this article.

50. Lorenz, ‘ʻVi har ikke invitertʼ’, 38–42, Emberland, “Antisemittismen i Norge”, 404–8. See also Henden, “Tidlig norsk kriminallitteratur”.

51. Ringdal, ‘ʻNorge, vokn op!ʼ’, 84–6.

52. Lorenz, ‘ʻVi har ikke invitertʼ’, 39–42; Karcher, “Victor Mogens”; Simonsen, “Nasjonalitetens antitese”.

53. See in detail, Snildal, “An Anti-Semitic Slaughter”.

54. Lorenz, ‘ʻVi har ikke invitertʼ’, 48–50; Brustad, I limbo, 61–5, 73–102.

55. Bruland, Holocaust i Norge, 28.

56. See in particular, Simonsen, “Antisemittismen i Norge”, 21–50.

57. Ringdal, ‘ʻNorge, vokn op!ʼ’, 58.

58. See Saxlund, Jøder og Gojim (1910 edition), 8. Here, Saxlund mentions Fritsch’s book Handbuch der Judenfrage and Chamberlain’s Die Grundlagen des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts as sources of inspiration.

59. See Saxlund, Jøder og Gojim (1910 edition), 19–23 (on Holberg), and 78–83 (on Luther).

60. Such an ‘interpretation of tradition’ was common in modern antisemitic agitation. See Hoffmann, “Christlicher Antijudaismus and moderner Antisemitismus”, 306.

61. Christensen, ‘Jøder og Gojim’. Saxlund also seems to have gained influence in more respectable political circles, particularly within the movement affiliated with the Norwegian Agrarian Association [Norges Bondelag] and the Farmer’s Party [Bondepartiet]. In 1923, the party’s main newspaper, Nationen, stated in an editorial that a large Jewish movement threatened to strangle Europe, and that Saxlund beckoned a ‘racial struggle that the Norwegian people one day will regret to have averted’. Editorial, Nationen, 26 June 1923. See also Simonsen, ‘Nasjonalitetens antitese’.

62. Brattelid, ‘Mikal Sylten’, 43.

63. Quoted in Brattelid, “Mikal Sylten”, 43.

64. Saxlund, Jøder og Gojim (1910 edition), 13.

65. Mosse, The Crisis, 95.

66. Saxlund, Jøder og Gojim (1910 edition), 27.

67. Saxlund, Jøder og Gojim (1910 edition), 33.

68. Hoffmann, ‘ʻThe Newʼ’, 112.

69. Herf, Reactionary Modernism, 136.

70. Saxlund, Jøder og Gojim (1911 edition), 148.

71. “Den nye verdenskeiser”, Aftenposten, 10 January 1922.

72. Saxlund, Jøder og Gojim (1911 edition), 15.

73. Saxlund, Jøder og Gojim (1911 edition), 21.

74. Saxlund, Jøder og Gojim (1911 edition), 145.

75. Brattelid, 'Mikal Sylten'.

76. See for example, Stoltheim, F. Roderick [Theodor Fritsch], ‘Jødernes indflydelse paa kvinderne’, Sandheten, no 5/6 (1916): 68–75; Bönisch, “Die ʻHammerʼ-Bewegung’, 350.

77. See, for example, ‘Fedrelandslagets bukkesprang”;, Nationalt Tidsskrift, May 1934; Brattelid, “Mikal Sylten”, 77–8.

78. Brattelid, “Mikal Sylten”, 63.

79. Nasjonalt Tidsskrift, quoted in Brattelid, “Mikal Sylten”, 62.

80. See Nationalt Tidsskrift, 12 December 1920.

81. “Sandhetens sak”, Sandheten, February 1917.

82. Ascheim, “The Jew Within”, 45.

83. Hitler referred in Ascheim, “The Jew Within”, 67.

84. See, for example, “Jødedommen i oldtiden som nu”, Nationalt Tidsskrift, no. 5 (1923).

85. Brattelid, “Mikal Sylten”, 76.

86. Quoted in Brattelid, “Mikal Sylten”, 67.

87. “De vise fra Zion”, Nasjonalt Tidsskrift, March 1920.

88. Nationalt Tidsskrift, August 1923.

89. Planert, “Women’s Suffrage”, 117. See also Guido, The German League, 101–2.

90. Barkun, A Culture, 26.

91. Brattelid, “Mikal Sylten”, 33.

92. For details, see Toftesund, ‘ʻDa allt folketʼ’, 28–52.

93. Østbye [Irene Sverd], Jødeproblemet, 9.

94. Holz, Nationaler Antisemitismus, 543.

95. Østbye [Irene Sverd], Jødeproblemet, 10.

96. Østbye [Irene Sverd], Jødeproblemet, 16.

97. Østbye [Irene Sverd], Jødeproblemet, 10.

98. Østbye [Irene Sverd], Jødeproblemet, 53.

99. Østbye [Irene Sverd], Jødeproblemet, 86.

100. Hanebrink, A Specter Haunting, 4.

101. See in detail, Lien, ‘ʻ … pressen kan kun skriveʼ’; Snildal, “An Anti-Semitic Slaughter”. See also Simonsen, ‘Nasjonalitetens antitese’, 65–108.

102. Figueiredo, ‘Nasjonal Samling’, 79–88.

103. Figueiredo, “Nasjonal Samling”, 88–92.

104. Østbye [Irene Sverd], Jødeproblemet, 56.

105. Østbye [Irene Sverd], Jødeproblemet, 30.

106. Østbye [Irene Sverd], Jødeproblemet, 7.

107. See also other Norwegian antisemitic far-right organizations’ attitude towards the pogroms in Nazi Germany, for example, Karcher, “National Socialisms in Clinch”, 51–70.

108. On the so-called Madagascar solution in detail, see Brechtken, ‘Madagaskar’.

109. Østbye, “Jødenes krig”, Fritt Folk, 19 June 1940.

110. Simonsen, ‘Threats and Euphemisms’, 228–48; Bruland, Holocaust i Norge.

111. Brattelid, “Mikal Sylten”, 107–16.

112. Toftesund, ‘ʻDa allt folketʼ’, 86–91.

113. Østbye, “Jødeånden må bekjempes over alt!”, Hirdmannen, 28 November 1942.

114. Zia-Ebrahimi, ‘When the Elders’, 314–37; Bangstad, Anders Behring Breivik, 71–106.