Pelshval

Antropologiske betraktninger om pelshvaldrift

Theory on conspiracy theories

05.10.2026 /

The definition of a «conspiracy theory» in the Norwegian version of Wikipedia is as follows (when translated with DeepL.com):

A conspiracy theory is a theory or the belief that problematic social conditions or other phenomena are the result of a secret conspiracy in which powerful groups collude in a hidden plot to advance their own interests. According to the common definition, this assumption is not empirically proven or is at odds with established or generally accepted explanations.

Conspiracy narratives explain political, social, and historical events and social conditions as the result of diversionary tactics orchestrated by covert associations of powerful individuals, rather than as the result of open activities, well-known causes, and natural circumstances. These hidden networks are often described as “power elites” that represent of “everything that is wrong with the world”—groups that seek to gain personal advantages, harm others, or keep the truth hidden from the general public.

I wish to point out, from the start, that according to this definition, I am almost what Neil Oliver calls a «card-carrying conspiracy theorist». I must stress the word «almost», because there are, here and there in the definition, words and expressions (highlighted) and even a phrase, that I definitely do not ascribe to.

Firstly: Although I am sure there are secret conspiracies of powerful individuals – and there are certainly publicly known groups of the very rich and/or very powerful people that meet regularly and reach undisclosed decisions (the Bilderberger group, the Mont Pelerin Society, the Trilateral Commission), the aspirations of what some call the 1% and others call the Epstein Class are well known.

Do they have an organised agenda? «Tja….,» as we say in Norwegian, they don’t really need to, do they. They merely want, quite simply, what I want: To rigorously protect their wealth and to add to it. They are, like me, human.

The difference between them and me – the vast difference – is that when an oligarch wants another pin-striped jet plane, he can reduce my wages, and he will be able to convince the powers-that-be to cut wealth tax and consequently to erode the national health service. As for the likes of me, all we can do, if worst comes to worst, is to join the ranks of the homeless.

Secondly: the phrase “Everything that is wrong with the world” is quite simply an insult to the conspiracy theorist’s intelligence. And yes, I take offence against Wikipedia for misrepresenting people like me.

More precisely, we humans – the species that has called the shots for at least 70,000 years in continent after continent – have not been up to the challenge in terms of long-term planning. We exterminated species and habitats without intending to and we have killed each other because we were convinced we had to. More recently, we have invented smartphones, internet and AI that were all in so very many ways blessings, but that also have unintended and largely unforeseen egregious effects on individual and societal development.

So, having removed the offensive expressions from the (translated) Norwegian definition of «conspiracy theory» and trimmed it a little, what is left is this:

A conspiracy theory is the conviction that some problematic social conditions or other phenomena are the result of initiatives undertaken by powerful entities to advance their own interests.

Conspiracy theories tend to be at odds with established or generally accepted explanations.

More often than not, they are not empirically proven, partly because empirical “proof” relies on “systematic”, long-term observation and patient collection of data (which is not always available to the public), in short on painstaking work that no private or public entity is willing to pay for.

Conspiracy narratives explain many political, social, and historical events and social conditions as the result of tactics orchestrated by “powerful individuals or organisations, rather than as the result of democratically controlled activities or natural circumstances. Said individuals or organisations are often described as “power elites” that seek to gain personal advantages for themselves and/or their families and/or social group.

Obviously, they wish to keep the nature and purpose of their activities hidden from the general public.

Example: Smoking has long been known to cause lung cancer. Only in 1950 was Richard Doll conclusively able to demonstrate the link, though suspicions had been rife since the late 18-hundreds. The tobacco companies had done their best to hobble research, not because they wanted to cause lung cancer, of course, but because their goals were more important to them than public health. They spent oodles of money to preserve their wealth and add to it. Take a look at the evidence, if you are in doubt: TIRC, or PR company Hill & Knowlton. If you are still in doubt go to the Smithsonian, but don’t tell me the tobacco companies had honourable intentions.

Now they have been defrocked, as it were, as have the climate change denialists. But the defrocking took time – enough time for them to relocate (“diversify”) their moneys, while we, in the mean time, un-moneyed as we are, were ridiculed.

***

What we actually have in common – the 1% and the rest of us – is fear that we are entering financially dangerous territory. There will be inflation, possibly hyperinflation, most probably stagflation… very possibly something very much worse, though we don’t hear much about these fears: God forbid a bank run.

Moreover, the “democratically elected” leaders in the political West, as well as the unelected leaders of the EU are being so bloody pig-headed and irresponsible that absolutely everything is bound to go from bad to infinitely much worse. Everywhere. Unless, of course, the 99% interfere in a meaningful manner.

Even in Norway, we will be cordoned in, as it were, by companies that will impose dramatic price hikes on food and for supplying water, electricity and petrol, and for collecting garbage., Most of the said companies are owned by other companies that are owned by others in turn (banks). I and most of my compatriots are at the bottom of the food chain in this country.

Let us for a moment consider, then, that there are whole countries who are at the bottom of the global food chain. There are people living in those countries too. Let us think about that and shudder.

***

Allow me to backtrack for a moment, to before the issue of the impending financial difficulties appeared on the horizon.

If you had a company with 600 employees in your own country (a), and you and your company were doing just fine until you discovered that by relocating to another country (b), you would pay less tax and far less wages… am I being a conspiracy theorist if I maintain that by relocating you were serving not your country but your wallet?

Greed is a known construct. Even in the Bible, and, or so I’ve been told, no less so in the Quran.

Take the 1054 Schism, for example. Do you really expect me to believe that it was about the “filioque” or the matter of leavened or unleavened bread? I put to you that it was a result of festering power struggles ever since Charlemagne’s reign.

Back in the day, the filthy rich were more honest than they are today. Take the German Peasants’ War, 1524–1­525: The rich did not even pretend to care whether their peasants had food on the table, and had no compunction about slaughtering 100,000 of the poorly armed people who dared defy them.

By 1568, with the printing press, the filthy rich had the “media” to consider and soon learnt to tell glossy lies to explain their killing sprees during the following 80 years’ war between the Netherlands and the bigoted Spanish (Habsburg) rulers. It was all for the greater glory of God, of course. The subsequent 30 years’ war (1618 –1648) that killed millions and millions of Europeans was llegedly, again, for the greater glory of God.

I do not for a moment doubt there were many who truly believed that leavened (or unleavened) bread was heresy! I do not doubt that there were deeply religious people who sincerely believed that Huguenots or Catholics or Arians or whatever… were an abomination to the Lord.

But I am absolutely sure that they were told, in no uncertain terms that such was the case! After all, they were like us – merely human. We humans tend to believe what we are told, if we are told often enough or by the “right” people.

Since time immemorial, there have always been persons who called the shots and who were willing to tell the lies that were called for to satisfy their cravings. There are at all times, in all societies, some few individuals who recognise no limits to their own personal exceptionalism. Some have been mere murderers, others have been dictators, yet others have been Popes, Bishops, generals, FBI-directors, presidents, finance ministers….They have told us what to believe and we have believed them.

They have called the shots throughout history and they still do.

What is absolutely certain, however, is that the New Testament, revered above all other texts by the Catholic Church, the Protestant Church in all its varieties and the Greek Orthodox Church does not advocate ruthless killings of millions of people. So we can conclude, looking back to the seventeenth century that the 80 years’ war and the 30 years’ war – both religious wars – were deeply illegitimate.

I put to you that current warmongers are unlikely to be morally superior to the warmongers of the past.

Coming soon

24.09.2026 /

The Intercept and the Quincy Institute have co-produced a “mocumentary” about the benefits of defending Democracy.

In case you are in doubt about the underlying facts, you might find details in the relevant Responsible Statecraft article. As the article notes:

A July 2026 Senate investigation, meanwhile, revealed dangerous living conditions at military bases in Georgia, including “reports of lead exposure affecting newborn health, severe mold contamination leading to emergency room visits, flooding in living areas, and more.”

Wartime environments have been no better, as evidenced by the deplorable conditions — including food shortages and inoperable plumbing — during the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln’s extended deployment near Iran, which ultimately led multiple sailors to attempt to jump overboard.

You will find even more details, of course, on the pages of the Brown Cost of Wars project.

* On the page Some of the Costs of War Project’s main findings
the first item, about “576 civilian casualties”, refers to Yemen, as you will see if you open the link. No wonder the Yemenites are fed up.

It appears that Chancellor Merz and the unelected EU chief Ursula von der Leyen wish to emulate US achievements in defence of Democracy.
Good luck with that.

Så til noe helt, helt annet

23.09.2026 /

Nemlig sauer. På Island. Hver september drives ca 750 tusen sauer fra allmenningen ned til bygdene rundt omkring i landet. Fra sted til sted varierer opplegget, men stort sett anses sauesanking som en av årets største begivenheter i et land som enda verdsetter ritualer og skikker mer enn Netflix og HBO.

Jeg kan bare fortelle om sauesankingen slik den skjer i ett av landets mange bygdesamfunn. Folkene her bor i en dal som strekker seg skinnende grønn fra en bred fjord som skal til å møte havet, og inn i landet hvor den som smal dalbunn til slutt møter veggen i fjellmassivet.

(NB: Det jeg vil fortelle har jeg ikke selv sett men hørt fortalt av en som opplevde det.)

Dalen er vakker og blir ikke fraflyttet selv om gårdsdrift er erstattet enkelte steder med annen virksomhet. Én driver sågar et fransk bakeri, vet jeg. Men man har gjerne noen sauer, uansett, om ikke av andre grunner for å kunne bli med på sauesankingen i september.

I grålysningen på den avtalte dagen kjører alle mennene – bare menn, ja – til den innerste gården i dalen. De har med seg niste, sovepose, og rikelig med sprit. Hestene som de har ridd til den innerste gården en dag eller to i forveien, er uthvilte og rastløse. Godt voksne hester vet hva som er i vente, og de unge skjønner at nå skjer det noe spennende. En god islandsk hest er per definisjon litt vill av seg, og løper gjerne løpsk ved det minste påskudd, så dette lover godt for de fleste av dem. (Nordmenn har ikke forstått at vi får bare de daffe hestene islendinger ikke vil ha.)

I andre halvdel av september kan det være ganske kaldt og guffent; men desto mer tåke og frostrøyk, desto bedre er stemningen i det mennene saler hestene og gjør seg klare.

Så starter turen innover og oppover i allmenningen. Hver mann har minst én ekstra hest i tømme. Rytterne prøver å husholde hestenes krefter uten å frata dem lysten til å skryte over hvor raske de er.

Noe av det som er litt enestående med disse halvville islandske hestene, er at de kan virkelig gå i fjell, i ur hvor steiner ruller under hovene, ytterst på knauser og opp steinbratte stier – ja, for stier finnes; det har sauene sørget for. Når de går i slikt terreng blir selv de verste skrytepavene (hestene altså) fornuftige, ja, rett og slett sindige. Dette har de lært fordi de selv i unge år er blitt sluppet fri i almenningen.

Og islandske sauer er som villgeiter. De går hvor normale mennesker ikke våger sette sine bein. Og de vil absolutt ikke finnes og drives fra frihet til fangenskap nede i dalen.

Først ut på kvelden er gjengen fremme ved “brakken”, en hytte dalens menn har bygget på dugnad nettopp for dette formål. Hestene blir sluppet på beite i et inngjerdet område sammen med alle sauene man har klart å finne og drive foran seg i løpet av dagen, og for mennene starter festen. Det er rikelig med mat. Enhver som kjenner islendinger vet at tradisjonell islandsk mat, er og blir tradisjonell islandsk mat, på tvers av seklene, saltet, syrnet, hengt eller det som verre er (som tilfellet er for haikjøttet).

En annen sær-islandsk greie er versemakeri. (I Norge har vi enkelte steder noe lignende, kveding, jf. NRK serien om Sestesdal.) En “ferskeytla” er en firelinjet strofe med kryssrim der 1. og 3. verselinje er lengre enn 2. og 4. Man konkurrer om å lage ferskeytlar, ev, utfordrer med å lage “forpart” med et håpløs rim-par som motparten må lage “bakpart” på.

I brakken ligger det en “gjestebok” bestående av alle ferskeytlarnir som sauesankerne har produsert over decennienes løp. Jeg tipper den nå har mange bind.

Nok en ting om Island: Når islendinger drikker, så slåss de ikke: De synger! Akkurat denne dalens sauesanking ble faktisk foreviget i en film (fra 80-tallet) jeg ikke husker navnet på, fordi noen av mennene i dalen virkelig kunne synge! Og det kan de enda. Som alle andre islendinger på fylla synger de bl.a. nasjonalromantiske sanger fra 18- og 19-hundretallet. Men disse gutta synger flerstemt. Jeg har et bilde av dem der de står sammen med hestene sine utenfor “brakken”, høytidelig vendt mot månen over fjellet, og synger. I sin tid var en av dem – han er kanskje ikke lenger blant oss – en virkelig “tenor”. Nei, han sang ikke Puccini, men han sang visa om kosakk-opprørshelten Stenka Rasin. Veldig dramatisk; mange, mange vers og lytterne holdt andektig pusten i hvert vers der han nærmet seg høye C. Han skuffet dem aldri.

Man gråt gjerne en skvett i sangen. Islandske menn gråter aldri, forstås, bortsett fra … ja, nettopp. Du har skjønt det. En kvinnelig samboer som sa hun ville bli med på sauesankingen, fikk beskjed om at om hun gjorde alvor av trusselen ville han aldri tilgi henne.

Dalens menns kjærlighet til dalen og til sangen var så stor at en av “dikterne” bak ferskeytlarnir i gjesteboka, laget en gang en slags hymne til dalen som blir sunget til en særdeles lang og komplisert Taube-melodi. Det er blitt Hymen med stor H. Alle i dalen kan den.

På skolen lærte jeg at innledning (hvor man gjør rede for bakgrunn og omstendigheter m.m.) aldri må utgjøre mer enn en tredel av stilen. Akk, som man vil skjønne av det som følger, gjorde jeg aldri karriere som stilskriver.

Våen 2026 falt hesten som en av dalens menn red. Han hadde drevet med hester hele sitt liv. Det var ikke minst hester gården hans var kjent for i dalen. Han ble så alvorlig skadet at han ikke en gang kan overføres til pleiehjem: Han bor på sykehuset i byen.

Hver dag kjører kona hans tilsammen 100 km frem og tilbake til sykehuset for å være hos ham. Hvis det er brukbart vær, kjører hun ham i rullestol ut til byens vakkert blomstrende park hvor det er et sjarmerende konditori.

Han og hans brødre hadde alltid vært selvskrevne deltakere i sauesankingen. Og hestene deres, ikke minst. I år ville han og hestene hans ikke kunne være med.

Like før årets største begivenhet i dalen, sauesankingen – eller var det like etter, det har jeg ikke fått med meg – sitter han og hans lojale kone som vanlig på terrassen til konditoriet i parken. De er 50 km hjemmefra.

Plutselig hører de kjente toner et stykke unna. Det er Hymnen som synges. Rundt 40 karer er kommet til byen for å hedre den knuste kammeraten sin. De nærmer seg rolig syngende. Hymnen har mange vers, nok til at de kan gå til konditoriet og stille seg opp som om de aldri har gjort annet – som et profesjonelt operakor, opptil flere meter mellom hver for liksom å fylle scenen, kan man si. (Jeg har sett og hørt en videosnutt som foreviger begivenheten.)

Det er en nydelig dag – ikke en sky på himmelen, blomster i bedene, og andre besøkende i parken stopper opp for å lytte … og mennene synger.

Beretningen min ender her. Jeg vet ikke hva pasienten sa, hvordan han reagerte. Jeg spurte faktisk ikke, og det ble heller ikke formidlet. Jeg tenker hver og en selv får forestille seg hva mannen kan ha følt.

National interest – more 9/11

20.09.2026 /

A president or prime minister (or whoever officially calls the shots in a country), may have excellent qualities, but the one quality such people invariably lack is – by necessity – honesty.

Politics is a mixture of hockey and poker: You break your opponents bones, and you screw your allies. Look at President Trump: He succeeded didn’t he, in getting to the top, and he still hasn’t been impeached. They say he confabulates and he is certainly less – how shall I put it? – “subtle” than most of his predecessors in the role. But they have all – without exception – lied incessantly and with great determination, through their teeth.

A would-be president or prime minister may even have admirable intentions. I do not doubt, for instance, that some, even in the US, have been motivated by a wish to improve life for their compatriots.. Once in office, however, they soon learn that “national interests” are equated, not with the welfare of ordinary men, women and children, but with corporate interests, military-industrial interests and the interests of the financial institutions. Why? Long story. I guess you could call it an “ideological story”. For the record, though, allow me to remind you that “national interests”, as defined by the European elites over the past five centuries, were not guided as much by “ignorance” (for instance a feigned inability to understand that people with dark skin and peasants were human) as by self-interest.

Corporate interests regularly require new resources – oil, minerals, cheap labour etc. – which in turn require colonialism by hook or by crook, e.g. by “regime change operations” or outright economic or military war. (Remember how President Trump at the start of his term bandied for “deals” in Ukraine?) Financial interests (e.g. banks) require collateral. The “military-industrial complex” requires wars. After all, somebody has to keep buying and using the junk the war people produce.

Since 1945, Europe has lost much of its stolen foreign assets, but it still makes up part of the political West, and enthusiastically applauds whatever adventures its younger big brother wishes to engage in – guided, as always, by elite self-interest. Voters have absolutely no say, as no president or prime minster can change the game without changing the system.

My first introduction to USA’s innumerable grabs for lebensraum was the tale of the Dulles brothers’ shares in and work for United Fruit in Guatemala and the coup against that country’s president Arbenz in 1954. By now, the truth of this matter is admitted even by mainstream sources.

Ten years later, however, Allen Dulles, was President Kennedy’s powerful nemesis (as CIA-chief). Kennedy was finally able to fire him. So why was Allen Dulles on the Warren Commission?!!! The Warren Commission’s investigation was my first introduction to a classical US “deep state” cover-up.

There can be no doubt that Kennedy had many enemies: J. Edgar Hoover, for one. The Cubans were probably the least of his problems: By 1963, the worst excesses of McCarthyism may have been curtailed, but to this day, demands for a national health service is maligned as “Communism”, and “Communism ” is the worst swear-word in the US language.

With his so-called Peace Speech on June 10, 1963, the Commencement Address, Kennedy may have signed his own death warrant. From the point of view of his detractors, his younger brother Bobby was definitely no better, so they wasted no time in finishing him off as well.

Last year, heavily redacted files were released about the JFK assassination. We now know that the CIA Counterintelligence Chief, James Angleton performed operations for Israel. What also came to light for the first time was that Angleton had been monitoring Lee Harvey Oswald closely since 1959. The CIA had previously denied having any knowledge of him prior to the assassination. The rest will only be revealed when the implicated parties, their associates and offspring are long gone, but as Jefferson Morley writes in an interesting piece about Angleton and Oswald, “What we see in the new [2025] J.F.K. files is a pattern of malfeasance.”

My second introduction to a monumental US cover-up was – yes – 9/11. From a foreign perspective it seemed completely ludicrous that four hijacked planes would be allowed to traverse, unmolested and uncontested, US territory. Few US citizens dare challenge the official narrative for fear of being labelled “conspiracy theorists”. (In the old days they would have been accused of heresy. No joke, that. In Spain, for instance, heretics were burnt at the stake.)

On 9/11 2026, Kit Klarenberg writes:

While British detectives apparently believed they possessed “more than sufficient evidence” to extradite Bayoumi to stand trial, Washington ordered him freed, and he returned to Saudi Arabia. US authorities’ resistance is understandable, given the overwhelming abundance of evidence pointing ineluctably to the CIA at the very least actively facilitating the 9/11 attacks, if not carrying them out, using the Saudis as scapegoats. [Pelshval highlighting]

I strongly recommend the article!

“9/11” became the “New Pearl Harbour” referred to by the neocon Project for the New American Century (PNAC), in the document Rebuilding America’s Defences, September 2000. In the first paragraph of that document’s Introduction, we read that PNAC’s, “goal is to promote American global leadership”.

Members included Robert Kagan, Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz.

These people and their associates and allies would subsequently be responsible for the “‘War on terror”.

Result: Roughly 4400 US deaths and 32,000 US injured and roughly one million non-US deaths in the Iraq war alone. There is growing suspicion that they should also be held accountable for the roughly 3000 9/11 deaths and the thousands of others who have suffered long-term health effects from noxious gases, etc.

Was it worth it? It must have been, because they have been conducting wars of aggression, left, right and centre to this day. Now we learn that Iraq’s oil revenues have been controlled by the US ever since that first illegal war in 2003 and that the US consequently has a choke-hold on Iraq,

So 9/11 was a “false flag attack”? In modern warfare, which depends on winning public support (“hearts and minds”), false flag attacks are essential elements of the arsenal. After the 9/11 attack, the US population accepted “war on terror” and serious curtailments of the Bill of Rights.

Another example of “false flag attacks” is probably the “Bucha massacre” in Ukraine. It shocked Europeans out of their usual determined non-committal lethargy. Since Bucha, outraged Europeans have accepted massive tax-payed military support to Ukraine. (The Bucha massacre was almost certainly staged.)

I will not now discuss the other US wars of aggression that followed in the wake of the convenient “New Pearl Harbour” on 9/11, wars that formed part of the “war on terror”. Nor will I discuss, here, the 9/11 of 1973, which also – at the behest of USA – lead to 3000 extra-judicial killings – quite apart from the 40,000 or so persons who were tortured and incarcerated in concentration camps during the following years.

Nor will I discuss European “national interests”, truly a convoluted theme, since nobody quite knows just what “Europe’’ means anymore. A few days ago, the popular Scottish TV presenter and writer, Neil Oliver, said on the Duran: “If you start out with a lie, all you can do is to keep lying and your lies become more and more Byzantine”. Hear Niel Oliver’s take on Europe’s journey in a parallel world.

The players that orchestrate wars on false grounds and false flag attacks come in all colours, from young aspiring professionals longing to make it to the top, members of the FIRE set (Finance, Insurance, Real Estate), oil barons, tech-sociopaths to mere hangers-on. And of course the war-people.

Some of the most ambitious characters are smart enough to shy away from the headlines. These days a shady character called Steven Miller is said to be controlling the President. What do I know? So much is hidden from us, but the stakes are gargantuan and the bets nuclear.

Players dribble their sinister programmes around gate poles and through goal posts, pausing at tactical moments to dole out tempting titbits of the programme they claim to be pursuing, “fight for democracy” … “justice for all” … more recently also “equality”… adding “so help me God” for good measure. Never mind that millions have died and keep dying, for instance under buildings razed to the ground by “our boys” or our Zionist friends. We sing lullabies to our children, whispering, “never mind, dear, this is all in defence of Democracy”.

Med slike venner…

11.09.2026 /

Jeg sto og så ut over fjorden fra Hvervenbuka som ligger på østsiden av fjorden rett utenfor Oslo. Lamslått, sto jeg der jeg nettopp hadde kommet rundt en sving og oppdaget at det var en stor svart skygge som blokkerte utsikten over til vestsida. En enorm svart skygge. Verdens største hangarskip, var det noen som sa.

***

Sceneskift: Jeg sto et sted på østsida av fjorden og så ut over en liten armada av luksuriøse fritidsbåter. De var pyntet til fest med vimpler og flagg og stimet inn mot Oslo. Mens jeg sto der og lurte på hva de feiret, oppdaget jeg en gjenstand som liksom fløt et par titalls meter over dem. Gjenstanden var formet som en halvrøkt sigar og oppførte seg som en frivol ballong – en ballong som usynlige lekende hender forhindrer fra å falle på bakken.

Dette var en drøm, forstås. Visste jeg at jeg drømte? Man gjør jo av og til det. Men før jeg kom så langt som til å lure på hva var virkelig, og hva var drøm, strammet den halvrøkte sigaren seg opp, skjøt fart og forsvant i retning Oslo sentrum. Et øyeblikk senere hørtes et brak.

Den lille feststemte armadaen lot seg ikke affisere. Jeg lurte fortvilet på hvordan jeg kunne advare dem mot å fortsette inn mot Oslo. Avmakten må ha vekket meg.

***

Rystet våken, visste jeg umiddelbart hva som hadde fremkalt en drøm om et angrep mot Oslo:
Det var nemlig en overskrift jeg så i går i et høyst seriøst og respektert USAnsk tidsskrift: Norges beslagleggelse av et russisk skip er en farlig opptrapping. Den overskriften er en advarsel til norske styresmakter. De leker med ild. Støre vil gjerne være stor blant de store EU-bøllene? Han vil imponere ved å være bestis med Zelenski? Uansett hvilke motiver Støre har, så er han på forferdelig feil spor.

Benign?

08.09.2026 /

For some reason – maybe I’ve been reading the wrong sort of literature – the only collocations I know for the word benign are “tumour” and “hegemon”.

“We were all relieved to learn that her tumour was benign.”

” USA was a benign hegemon.”

At present, USA is no longer a hegemon, and it certainly isn’t and never has been benign. Look at all the wars – the past, present and future wars.

***

But this post is not about my views, not even about the Ukraine or Iran wars. I would like to bring to your attention the work of a Swede living in Norway who has devoted his career to research.

Ola Tunander is “research professor emeritus” at the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO, an institution that he has served since 1987). He is a heavyweight on research about inter alia the cold war and Nordic security issues.

However, he is not first and foremost a particularly good writer. The articles I wish to bring to your attention are not eloquent. They will not move you to tears. In fact they may even bore you because they are detached, painfully detailed and based on research over many years. Moreover they concern a topic that may not even interest you: the assassination of the Swedish prime minister, Olav Palme, in 1986. The police investigation was reminiscent of that following the killing of a US president in 1963: It was farcical.

The reason I recommend the four articles is that they demonstrate that USA’s intentions never were, in any sense or anywhere, “benign”, not before the fall of the Soviet Union nor after. Not in Europe nor anywhere else. Not even in Sweden and certainly not for the majority of US citizens. Also, they demonstrate that no matter how honest a cop you are, or police prosecutor, or forensic scientist, or witness, you will do as you’re told if you smell sulphur. Else: you will at best lose your job. And people do get killed, you know.

The four articles focus on and examine the reliability of various sources. If you find you haven’t the patience for such scrutiny, I advise you to read as much of Part I as you can manage and then skip to Part IV.

Part I

Part II

Part III

Part IV

The bottom line — whether or not you do actually read those four articles, is that the US billionaires running USA will stop at nothing in order to get rid of anyone standing in their way. The most recent case in point is the rape of Venezuela, which they have been planning for decades in both parties, with repeated unsuccessful coup attempts and regime change operations and by demonising its leaders,. Trump finally did it! Yup, he’s a degenerate, but his foreign policy differs from that of past administrations only in that it makes no attempt to pretend to be benign.

Tiden og sånn

04.09.2026 /

På sin Substack-side skriver Deaglan O’Mulrooney:

For rundt fem år siden… var jeg en ihuga støttespiller av Ukraina. … og skrev, om den ene og den andre, at de spredde russisk propaganda. …

Men nå, altså fem år senere, har jeg fullstendig endret oppfatning, ikke på grunn av noen enkelt hendelse, men fordi jeg startet denne nettsiden og måtte sette meg inn i folkemordet på palestinerne. Jeg måtte også lese meg opp om Israel, det amerikanske imperiet, Kina, Latin-Amerika og alt derimellom. Det ble klart for meg at etablerte nyhets-kanaler her i Vesten, som jo alle oppfordret meg til å støtte Ukraina, nettopp var de som fortalte meg at det ikke foregikk noe folkemord i Palestina. Det var også de som hadde løyet om Kina, Venezuela og Cuba. Det var da jeg begynte å gjøre mine egne undersøkelser.

[oversatt av Pelshval] [uthevelse av Pelshval]

Tittelen på artikkelen klippet er hentet fra, er the Ukrainian people are fighting for their survival…against Ukraine, etter min mening en av de mer treffende overskriftene jeg har sett i det siste. For makan til mishandling av egen befolkning skal en lete lenge etter. Hvis du ikke ønsker å lese den, vil du kanskje likevel titte på forfatterens link til en side med nesten 10 000 video-snutter tatt av tilfeldige vitner til Ukrainske myndigheters jakt på kanonføde. Her er f.eks. “busification” i Odessa.

Det er ikke nytt at Ukraina ikke er et demokrati. Det som er nytt er at stadig flere mennesker skjønner det. Og jeg synes det Deaglan O’Mulrooney påpeker er særdeles interessant, nemlig at han så hvordan nyhetskanalene og statslederne i de fleste land i “Vesten” benektet eller legitimerte Israels barbariske nedslakting av det palestinske folket og at han derfor følte seg nødtvungen til også å gå det rådende narrativet om Ukraina nærmere etter i sømmene.

Jeg har vært inne på en lignende tanke. Vår utenriksminister, Espen Bart Eide, har gjentatte ganger vært meget klar i sin skarpe kritikk av Israels ulike menneskerettsforbrytelser. Norge er sågar en av de første landene i Europa som anerkjente “Staten Palestina”. Jeg har i samtale med venner omtalt ham som “sleip”. Han vet at Palestina har mange venner her til lands, og han vil ikke terge oss med å følge Storbritannias og Tysklands linje i forhold til Israel. Norge er på “riktig side” hva gjelder folkemordet, og nordmenn opplever derfor ikke det Deaglan O’Mulrooney opplever, nemlig at myndighetene og den etablerte pressen juger om Palestina og at man derfor ikke kan ha tillit til dem.

Jeg har påstått at det derfor er takket være Bart Eide at vi i Norge nærmest til siste mann og kvinne er villige til å sende milliarder til Ukraina.

Jeg har muligens tatt feil om vår utenriksminister. Det kan hende han ikke først og fremst er “sleip”, men tvert imot rakrygget. Ola Tunander later til å gå god for Espen Bart Eide, om ikke for vår statsminister.

For den politiske ledelsen, for statsminister Jonas Gahr Støre, har en bok av den antirussiske Yale-professoren Timothy Snyder vært av største betydning, og Støre har gitt boken til sine venner. Men Snyders fremstilling av en historisk tale holdt av Putin er direkte uriktig, og den har ført til en partisk tolkning av Russland.

For utenriksminister Espen Barth Eide er FN-pakten, altså folkeretten, det viktigste, men han var ikke klar over hva som faktisk skjedde i Kiev i 2014. Slik forstår jeg det.

[KI-oversatt] [Uthevet av Pelshval]

Det Ola Tunander skriver veier gjerne tungt hos meg.

Og hvem er så Ola Tunander? Jo han er en tungvekter innen fredsforskning og sikkerhetspolitikk. Han ble bl.a., som “seniorforsker i 1989, leder for PRIOs forskningsprogram i utenriks- og sikkerhetspolitikk i 1995 og forskningsprofessor i 2000. Hans CV er en murstein.

På den annen side er Ola Tunander en svenske som ser skrekkelig streng ut, men som har en lun sans for humor. Det kan jeg slå fast fordi jeg har hørt ham tale. Første gang jeg støtte på navnet hans, var i en bok utgitt i 2019, Krigens uutholdelige letthet, redigert av tidligere oberstløytnant Tormod Heier. Boka var en vekker for meg, for å si det pent. Den levnet ingen tvil om at norsk deltakelse i Libya-operasjonen var skamløs. Den godeste Jens Stoltenberg vil ha mye å stå til ansvar for hvis han noensinne skulle møte Vårherre.

Heier og Tunander bidro med hvert sitt kapittel i boka. Det gjorde de igjen i boka Krigen i Ukraina, utgitt i 2023. At de hadde våget å skrive så kritisk om vår entusiastiske utslettelse av Libya var påfallende, syntes jeg, så jeg leste med interesse Krigen i Ukraina. Igjen var det Heier som var ansvarlig for utgivelsen. Og igjen vanket det kritikk av NATO. Den kritikken har kostet ham dyrt.

Ukraina-krigen er uten tvil den største katastrofen som har rammet Europa siden annen verdenskrig. Analysen av dens årsaker, har vært på bunnivå. Følgelig har også håndteringen av den vært suicidal. I så måte har Heier og Tunander vært blant svært få svaler på den norske akademiske himmelen, men de blir ikke hørt av dem som styrer skuta. De blir heller kike hørt av landers øvrige innbyggere; det sørger NRK og den såkalt “redaktørstyrte” pressen for.

I andre land, derimot, begynner folk så smått å mistenke at fortellingen om den slemme trollmanen Putin som vil spise stakkars lille Ukraina og dernest resten av Europa – at den fortellingen ikke er vanntett. Det har oppstått lekkasjer i den. Det siver ut om Zelenski at han digger døde nazister, og at han er kompis med Netanyahu. Ja, og så er det igjen dette med at de som mest ivrer for å drepe russere også benekter eller legitimerer folkemord.

Det skurrer. Det faglige uttrykket for det som stadig flere opplever er “kognitiv dissonans”, jf. dette dypt frustrerte innlegget. Han som skriver (og han skriver meget godt!) har så vidt jeg vet ikke tidligere stilt spørsmålstegn ved NATO-landenes deltakelse i Ukraina-krigen. Som Tormod Heier og Julie Wilhelmsen har fått erfare, er det jo ikke lov. I hvert fall ikke i Norge.

Men i Frankrike, Tyskland, Italia har det lenge vært lov – og nå også i USA og Storbritannia. I alle disse landene, hvor tilliten til maktinstansene er minimal, tror folk ikke lenger på historiene de får servert ovenfra. Det er på tide at også vi i Norge våkner! Sammen med finnene og svenskene, er det nemlig vi som har mest å tape på den krigen som EU og Storbritannia akter å framtvinge.

Se forressten samtalen mellom Ola Tunander og Espen Alnes om Ukraina-krigen.

Witness

27.08.2026 /

Look at them.

Look at them again. Each one alone in his own world. When you walk like that, trudging for miles through snow from one scene of death and destruction to another, memory becomes a mosaic of fragments. God only knows what these German soldiers had been thinking as they committed their crimes against humanity, particularly on the Russian front, and what may or may not have been revisiting them in this picture. Here, silently crossing an endless plain, they were exhausted, probably hungry, and deeply disturbed.

Am I defending them. Certainly not! But I put to you that they were victims, just as whole populations have been victims, again and again and again throughout history. So were the peoples governed by Churchill and Stalin, but it just so happened that Hitler crossed a red line, from our perspective, that of considering certain “races” of the human species “untermenschen”. He was not the only one, of course: The British, the French, and the US Americans, to name but the most powerful, refused to accept the Jewish refugees on the St. Louis in 1939. And to this day, they consider African and Latin American lives, not to mention Palestinians and Iranians dispensable.

We were not informed, I repeat, just as we are not being informed now. We are only useful for the high and mightily insofar as we are ignorant of their misdeeds.

To this day, people like you and me are unwittingly committing heinous deeds on behalf of the rich and powerful (currently the US government) in the Middle East, in Latin America and wherever they can get a foothold (Venezuela, Mexico, Argentina, Equador, Colombia, Bolivia, Honduras, Guatemala…).

Imagine a feature film called “The American Way”. We follow the protagonists, Marco Rubio and the ghosts of the Dulles Brothers, as they loot Latin America’s resources and arrange for political opponents to be assassinated. Unlike them, most of their soldiers have “hearts” – in the sense that killing (e.g. by starvation) innocent people goes against the grain (most ordinary people have moral fibre). The brave and decent US soldiers refuse to do the bidding of Rubio and the Dulles brothers, so wave after wave of collective suicides hamper the extractivist operations.

In the real world, cries of anguish ae now being heard from US aircraft carriers. Larry Johnson on Sonar 21 has published a heartbreaking letter from a grieving father:

He was deployed to Abu Dhabi for about 10 months. He was supposed to return on March 2nd, but the events on Feb 28th (which was also his BIRTHDAY) changed that abruptly, extending his deployment almost six months. He returned about a month ago.

… He immediately checked himself into the hospital for PTSD …[and was] released after a week or so, despite his own protestations,

…Operational security prevented us from speaking as regularly as we did prior to the war starting, but I do know he was deeply affected by the double tap Tomahawk missile strike in Minab, and was sickened by the genocide in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon. Nobody, he said, believes in the mission.


We who live in Europe have difficulty understanding the cost of war. I actually believe that US Americans know more about it, because relatives and friends of the 58,281 US Americans who lost their lives in Vietnam and many permanently traumatised US veterans are still alive. But do they see the Vietnam war from the Vietnamese perspective?

In Europe we are being goaded into a war that we will definitely not win. I’m not saying that Russia will win the war Europe is so gung-ho to wage, but Europe will certainly not. The war the EU is hankering for will be a net disaster for all of us.

There are too many boys and girls playing war games on their computers!!!
There are too many bored boys and girls who hanker for a bit of action. What do they know of the consequences of “action”?

And too many of us – including myself — did not notice a crime against humanity committed by the USA and the UK in the mid 1970s and ever since. (One of the many, it is true, but this one had a troublesome witness: John PiIger.

John Pilger was a witness of many US/UK crimes. The UK and USA are surely glad he is dead, but his voice is not. See Pilger films.

According to AP News, the USA has used the Diego Garcia Base as “an all but indispensable platform” for “security operations” in the Middle East, South Asia and East Africa”. Dirty business, to say the least. Here is John PIlger’s documentary about Chagos/Diego Garcia.

Kto vinovat?

25.08.2026 /

Kto vinovat is the title of a novel published in 1846. It was written by the Russian socialist Alexander Herzen. I was taken in by it when I was a student, but I remember next to nothing of it now, though I am sure I much prefer the Russian title to the English translation: Who is to blame? The Russian question sounds more peremptory, does it not? And with good reason: The fabulously rich landowners that governed Russia were an utterly futile gang of parasites living off the labour of the serfs. In practical terms the serfs were slaves. They really were the property of the landowners. Russian landowners were thus worse, even, than the British landowning rentiers so disparaged by Adam Smith.

In 1861, the serfs were “emancipated” de jure if not de facto, in the sense that they owned nothing but the rags they wore. At the end of the century, abject poverty was still endemic in the countryside as described in several of Anton Chekhov’s short stories. At any rate, Alexander Herzen was credited with having brought the plight of the serfs to the attention of the educated public with his writing.

Fortunately, some of the Russian landowners had sons – yes, mostly sons, since women were valued at best as decorative household assets or in some cases as wealthy heiresses – sons, then, who felt terrible about the injustice of it all. Tolstoy is the most famous of them, but there were very many others – including a large number of wonderfully gifted composers and writers, one of them being Alexander Herzen.

I remember that his novel Kto vinovat painted a picture of how education and self-respect would eventually enable the suppressed and suffering masses to earn a living and have dignity, The expression “suppressed and suffering masses” is no joke, believe me, though it sounds like Soviet propaganda, I know. It is none the less a reality many places even today, not least in Latin America, where Trump’s cronies are destroying what little was left after the end of the brutal Kissinger-aided dictatorships.

In Russia’s case, what Herzen started ended with a revolution – the jury is still out about the merits of that revolution. You will know my opinion about it when I tell you that in Spain, where there was no revolution, “education, literacy campaigns and self-respect” were drowned in bloodbaths in the 1930s to be followed by nearly 50 years of religious and political state terror.

What I do remember of the book was the exquisite courtesy and mutual respect between the two protagonists, a man and a woman living together. They loved each other, but they were to have separate rooms, to dress for dinner, and to knock on each other’s door to request admittance. Back then, I gave much thought to this approach to “equality between the sexes”. It seemed very outlandish, but it also made sense. After all, cohabitation tends to wear down what might initially have been “true love”. There is daily friction, repetition, boredom…You know, I am sure.

But in the end, things do not work out for Herzen’s protagonist couple. Kto vinovat?

***

Norwegians tend to be averse to conflicts. I believe “conflict avoidance” is a technical term.

If a Norwegian knows of a couple who are engaged in particularly acrimonious divorce proceedings, he or she will say “it takes two to tango”, meaning: let’s divide the blame equally.

Even about Palestinians and Israel, they would actually say, “Well, you know the issue is very complicated.” I would say: “It is not! Israel is an apartheid state.” Then they would try to appease me: Israel has made mistakes, but so have the Palestinians.” Meaning, again: Let’s divide the blame in two equal parts.

Why, then, are Norwegians so adamant with regard to the Ukraine war? As I have previously stressed: Norwegian journalists and Norwegian foreign service officials are very well educated. They are the crème de la crème in terms of university results. So why are they pretending to be blind, deaf and suffering from learning disabilities? Russia, you see, is to blame for absolutely everything.

The Palestinians have certainly made mistakes. Who hasn’t? But Israel is now finally being recognised by most, not least by Norwegians, as a genocidal state. The dividing line today is between those who recognise genocide as legitimate (e.g. most of the US Congress) and those who don’t. That is the extent of our moral decay!

At least Russia is not being blamed for genocide. Not yet. But mark my words: Once the political West finally admits that Ukraine has lost the war, they will accuse Russia of genocide.

My question tonight is: Why is there no discussion in the Norwegian media about ultra-nationalism, the use of Nazi insignia, and – not least – brutal political, linguistic, cultural and religious suppression in Ukraine? Why do the Norwegian media not demand accountability for the vast sums of money we send to that most hideously corrupt of countries?

And who, in the end, is to blame for the total destruction – soon almost to the last Ukrainian – of Ukraine? Kto vinovat? Russia? Ukraine? or the NATO countries?

Oljefondet

15.08.2026 /

På en måte – ja, på nesten alle måter – er vi grenseløst heldige som ikke bor i USA. Men på én måte er vi mindre heldige, mener jeg: Jeg mistenker det er prosentvis flere USAnere enn nordmenn som skjønner at systemet til syvende og sist ikke er designet for å tjene “vanlige folk”. Hør bare på Tucker Carlson.

I Norge sier vi at vi tross alt har det veldig godt sammenlignet med folk i nesten alle andre land. Og det er jo sant. Men vi har mer eller mindre det samme systemet som “land det er naturlig å sammenligne oss med”, med små variasjoner. Se bare på hva som skjer i Finland – samme system, men uten olje. Vi har altså oljen, som tillater hode-over-vann-inntekter for de aller fleste, i tillegg til 479 milliardærer. Den får vi bruke 3 % av hvert år, over statsbudsjettet.

Forleden siterte Pål Steigan respektfullt Nicolai Tangen, tro det eller ei: “Oljefondet kan forsvinne”, advarer Tangen visstnok, og hvem har bedre forutsetning enn nettopp han til å gi en slik advarsel.

Med tanke på at vi muligens kan miste fremtidens sparepenger, lurer Pål Steigan på om vi har brukt dem på best mulig måte. Det vi har gjort er å nyte tanken på alle pengene som stadig tikker inn på vår felles norske konto i form av renteinntekter. Vi er, i praksis, “rentenister”, mener Steigan. Hvis ikke jeg har misforstått helt fundamentalt, var både Adam Smith og Karl Marx beinharde motstandere av rentenister, som de begge anså som parasitter, som “reap where they never sowed” (A. Smith). Steigan skriver:

Et mye fattigere Norge investerte i jernbanen og vannkrafta. De investeringene har ikke gått tapt på over 100 år. Hvorfor kunne ikke et mye rikere Norge ha gjort noe liknende?
…
Norge har underinvestert i egen produktivitet, forskning, boligbygging og grønn omstilling…

Så sant, så sant. Veldig fornuftig artikkel fra Pål Steigan! En vekker. Er vi som Onkel Skrue, en som bare “sitter på” pengebingen?

Det er mange som advarer nå, kanskje ikke om oljefondet, men om den økonomiske livskraften i hele den politiske Vesten, altså systemet som er fullstendig avhengig av USA og den USAnske dollaren (den såkalte “reservevalutaen”). Økonomene Warwick Powell og Radikha Dessai analyserer her hvorfor USA sakker akterut på alle fronter i forhold til Kina, og hvorfor AI-boblen vil måtte sprekke før eller siden – selv om den ganske sikkert vil holdes gående med kunstig åndedrett “i hvert fall til mellomvalget 4. november” (som de sier ca. 30 minutter ut i samtalen).

Det er en ganske så inngående analyse. De forklarer hvordan USAs “venture capital” (risikokapital) fungerer. “Venture Capital” er en form for privat egenkapitalfinansiering som tilbys av selskaper eller fond til oppstartsbedrifter, selskaper i tidlig fase og fremvoksende selskaper som anses å ha “vekstpotensial”. Det høres flott ut, men nettresultatet er at de store bare blir større på bekostning av talløse små men ofte kreative idéskapere. De forklarer også hvordan Kina, til forskjell fra USA, har satset massivt på menneskelig kapital (bl.a. utdanning) og prioriterer samfunnsnyttige områder.

Med kunstig åndedrett mener de at kursen på aksjene til Sillicon Valley-bedriftene (ikke minst “the Magnificent 7”) fortsatt er påfallende høy til tross for at tusenvis av bedriftenes ansatte er blitt sagt opp både i 2025 og 2026. Bedriftene har satset uhemmet på AI, hvor de muligens vil bli utkonkurrert av kinesiske bedrifter; jf. Kimi K3, i forhold til Claud. Dessuten krever AI-boblen datalagringssentre, som krever enormt mye energi, og vi har for tiden en voksende energikrise.

Hvorfor er kursen fortsatt høy? Fordi man snakker den opp. Fordi man “tror på” bobler – det ligger i selve definisjonen av en “boble”. Også fordi Mag 7 aksjer tradisjonelt sett har vært ansett som “trygge”. Dessuten fordi de etablerte mediene, som liksom skal sørge for å informere oss, jo eies av konsernene (og/eller staten) som ønsker å holde aksjemarkedet oppe. Alle konsern ønsker å holde akskjemarkedet oppe. Går den ene ned, faller de andre som dominoer, og ikke bare innen samme bransje. Det finnes de som frykter at aksjemarkedet vil kollapse innen så godt som alle bransjer.

Mange Sillicon Valley selskap produserer faktisk saker og ting vi antakelig vil fortsette å ønske å kjøpe, så selskapene blir neppe verdiløse over natten. Det er spekulasjonen som kan kollapse – pyramidespill, pengespill, altså aksjemarkedet.

Nå er det så at mange har, i lengre tid, spådd at aksjemarkedet vil kollapse . En av dem er finansanalytikeren Sean Foo (US stocks are off the rails). Det har ikke kollapset enda, det er så, men man kan lære mye av Sean Foo.

Men berører aksjemarkedet vanlige nordmenn?

Ja, det tror jeg. Rent bortsett fra at mange småsparere plasserer sparepengene sine i aksjer, så har Oljefondet investert 946 milliarder dollar i amerikanske aksjer: NOK 8 952 217 830 992, Det tilsvarer 39 % av fondets totale verdi.

Men så er det i tillegg dette med USAs gjeld. Den har nå nådd 40 billioner USD. (“40 trillion”). Renteutgiftene alene utgjør ca. 22 % av landets totale inntekter, eller rundt 3 milliarder pr dag! Det amerikanske finansdepartementet må derfor låne ytterligere 155 milliarder pr måned.

I tillegg til å låne begynte USA i 2025 å opprette nye penger. Det kalles kvantitativ lettelse (QE). Dette tynner i praksis ut verdien av hver dollar (devaluering) og medfører inflasjon. Det er vel og merke ikke første gangen USA iverksetter QE.

Et annet ord for “gjeld” i denne sammenhengen er obligasjoner. Statsobligasjoner kjøpes av USAs egne borgere og av Gulf-statene (det var betingelsen for at de kunne jekke opp prisen på olje på 1970-tallet og det er opphavet til uttrykket Petrodollar). Også andre stater og deres borgere “investerer” i USAnske obligasjoner.

Da jeg gikk på skolen lærte jeg at “statsobligasjoner” var sikker investering, til forskjell fra aksjekjøp. Bedrifter kunne gå konkurs, det gjorde ikke stater. (Jeg tror nok ikke lærebøkene hadde fått med seg hva som skjedde med europeiske statsobligasjoner etter verdenskrigene. Det var det Piketty, som lærte meg.)

På 2010-tallet var ca. 45% av USAnske statsobligasjoner eid av utlendinger. Land etter land selger nå unna disse statsobligasjonene og nå eies kun en tredel av utlendinger. Med god grunn. Andelen som eies av utlendinger eies dessuten i økende grad av privatpersoner; altså ikke av stater. Foreløpig har ikke Europa solgt unna. (Vi har sett at Trump nylig truet Europa til å investere mer i USA.)

Oljefondet har investert NOK 3 033 427 772 312 i USAnske obligasjoner (statsobligasjoner og også obligasjoner utstedt av bedrifter), et beløp som tilsvarer 13,2 % av oljefondet. De pengene vil vi garantert aldri se igjen.

Dessuten mister nå obligasjonene oljefondet en gang kjøpte verdi, visstnok ca. 2% per måned, bl.a. pga av QE, men også pga. generelt synkende tillit til den USAnske valutaen. Det er jo helt klart at USA aldri vil kunne tilbakebetale sin gjeld, knapt nok betjene den, og det er grenser for hvor lenge landet vil finne investorer som er villige til å gi lån.

Når man inkluderer aksjer, obligasjoner og eiendom, er rundt 52,9 % av oljefondet investert i USA.

Så et helt annet spørsmål: Hva skjer med krona om dollaren rett og slett kollapser? JEG ANER IKKE!

Krona er jo ikke sikret med gull, som tilfellet var før 1971, men heller ikke med dollar. Jeg tror det er av uvurderlig betydning at vi har vår egen valuta, at vi ikke er med i Eurosonen, for eksempel. Mange formuer vil sikkert bli borte i dragsuget, men om våre myndigheter ikke lar seg presse av USA/EU, skal Ola og Kari kunne skånes fra nød. Og særlig hvis oljefondet på forhånd har investert i nyttige langsiktige resssurser – ikke datalagrindssentre – vil Norge snart komme seg på beina igjen.

Dollaren er verdens “reservevaluta”, har vært det siden Bretton Woods avtalen i 1944, da landet USA var sterkt som grunnfjellet. Men nå er det ikke lenger noe grunnfjell under dollaren, bare kvikkleire. Vi bør ta det innover oss. Jeg anbefaler igjen Pål Steigans vekker, “Nicolai Tangen: «Oljefondet kan forsvinne, og det er mer sannsynlig enn vi liker å tro“.

“Finans” er et felt de færreste av oss liker å berøre, men finans-verdenen er mektig, dessverre, og det er viktig at flere enn økonomer (som oftest er betalt nettopp av finans-folkene) våger å ha meninger om finans-emner. Oljefondet tilhører oss, det norske folket, og det ville være fint om vi mente noe om hvordan det brukes.

« Older posts

© 2026 Pelshval

Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑