Bjørnar Moxnes: Individual Sovereignty Index research profile

Bjørnar Moxnes presents a complex sovereignty profile: a consistent civil libertarian on surveillance, privacy, and emergency powers, paired with a maximalist collectivist on property, taxation, and economic structure. He led Rødt from 2012 to July 2023 (resigning after a shoplifting scandal), was Norway’s most prominent far-left parliamentarian, and remains an MP and Rødt’s foreign policy spokesperson through 2029. His positions combine strong defenses of personal freedom in several domains with an explicit long-term program to abolish private ownership of major means of production. The tensions in his profile—fierce opposition to state surveillance alongside support for massive state economic control—make him one of the most ideologically distinctive figures in Norwegian politics.

Born December 19, 1981, Moxnes holds a sociology degree from the University of Oslo. Under his leadership (2012–2023), Rødt grew from zero parliamentary seats to eight. He was first elected to Stortinget in 2017 and re-elected in 2021 and 2025 (Rødt now holds 9 seats with 5.3%). Marie Sneve Martinussen has led the party since 2023. Rødt’s prinsipprogram explicitly identifies as Marxist, defines its ultimate goal as communism (“yte etter evne, få etter behov”—“from each according to ability, to each according to need”), and states that “a reformist strategy will never lead to a socialist society,” though it qualifies this with commitments to democratic revolution confirmed through referendums and free elections.

Dimension 1: Bodily autonomy and self-determination

Drug policy is Rødt’s strongest area of bodily-autonomy liberalism. Rødt voted for the defeated 2021 Solberg government rusreform (decriminalization of personal drug possession), siding with Høyre, Venstre, SV, MDG, and KrF against the Ap/Sp/FrP majority that killed the bill. At the February–March 2025 landsmøte, Rødt went further by voting to legalize and regulate cannabis sales through a state monopoly model similar to Vinmonopolet. The party supports heroin-assisted treatment, expanded safe injection sites in all major cities, and explicitly opposes narcotics raids in schools. In 2025, Rødt confirmed it would support the new Stortinget compromise on drug reform including low-penalty fines and criminal record expungement. Alcohol policy remains restrictive—Rødt favors maintaining the Vinmonopolet system and even extending it to airport tax-free sales.

COVID-19 and vaccine mandates reveal a nuanced position. Moxnes broadly supported pandemic health measures but focused criticism on class dimensions—demanding better income protection for workers, apprentices, and freelancers. He called domestic lockdowns “completely unreasonable” when paired with inadequate border testing, arguing for consistency rather than opposing restrictions per se. Norway never implemented mandatory vaccination, and no specific Rødt position on vaccine mandates or the koronapass was documented. Rødt published a dedicated “Koronaprogram” in 2020 emphasizing that COVID disproportionately harmed low-income workers and exposed welfare system gaps.

Immigration policy combines generosity on asylum with restriction on labor immigration. Rødt supports receiving more UN quota refugees (reduced from 20,000 to a recommended 5,000 at its 2021 congress), wants state-run asylum centers, withdrawal from both the Schengen Agreement and Dublin Convention, replacement of the UNE appeals board with a regular court, and gender-based persecution recognized as asylum grounds. On labor immigration, a controversial 2021 position requires EEA workers to demonstrate employment under Norwegian collective agreements—Moxnes defended this as anti-social-dumping: “The solidary thing is to ensure everyone working in Norway has Norwegian wages.” Internal critics called this “unsolidary.”

End-of-life self-determination has no official party position. At the 2025 landsmøte, proposals to support a public inquiry into euthanasia were voted down, with the program committee recommending rejection. However, in a 2020 Stortinget vote, Rødt voted in favor of establishing a committee to study euthanasia practices abroad, siding with SV and FrP. This suggests an openness to inquiry without programmatic commitment.

Rødt supports abortion on demand until week 22, introduction of a third legal gender, and full reproductive autonomy. The prinsipprogram affirms “retten til å bestemme over egen seksualitet og reproduksjon” (the right to control one’s own sexuality and reproduction).

Dimension 2: Freedom of expression and intellectual autonomy

On hate speech laws, Rødt supports straffeloven §185 (the “hatparagrafen”) and frames it as a necessary counterpart to free expression. The party’s most visible action was Rødt Oslo’s campaign to revoke SIAN’s (an anti-Islam organization) permission to demonstrate at Tøyen Torg, arguing: “This case is not about ytringsfrihet but about hateful utterances and open racism.” The party’s stated principle: “Freedom of expression is an important right that we in Rødt will be the first to defend. But it’s important to recognize it has limitations in the form of equally important rights.” They argue that permitting hateful speech against minorities effectively silences those minorities. Rødt’s 2025 program includes amending §185’s wording following the 2022 Ytringsfrihetskommisjonen’s recommendations for greater precision, but the direction of reform appears to be clarification rather than liberalization. No direct Moxnes quotes on §185 were found; these positions were primarily articulated by party officials like Oslo chair Siavash Mobasheri.

Notably, in 2012 Moxnes wrote in Aftenposten: “Free speech, freedom of association, free elections, free media, and independent courts that guarantee rule of law for individuals are fundamental for a socialist society.” This represents his personal framing of liberal rights as complementary to, not in tension with, socialist goals.

Press freedom and media policy reflects Rødt’s state-expansionist approach applied to media. The party wants NRK restored as a “nationwide culture and media enterprise that is not market-driven,” increased press subsidies (pressestøtte) expanded to cover online publications and free newspapers, stricter limits on media ownership concentration, and increased funding for local radio. On digital platforms, the 2025 program calls for a national enforceable age limit for social media, stricter platform regulation, a ban on commercial surveillance of children through behavioral advertising, and strengthened reporting mechanisms for hate speech and image-based abuse. The party also wants government bodies to use Norwegian cloud services.

Academic freedom and disinformation regulation are information gaps—no specific Rødt or Moxnes positions on either topic were documented. On blasphemy, Norway abolished its blasphemy law in 2015. Rødt distinguishes between legitimate religious criticism (“an important aspect of democracy and freedom of expression”) and “racism disguised as religion criticism,” which it opposes.

Dimension 3: Property rights and economic freedom

This dimension reveals Rødt’s greatest divergence from individual sovereignty principles. The party’s economic program represents the most comprehensive collectivization agenda in Norwegian parliamentary politics.

Property protection is directly challenged by Rødt’s program. On housing, Moxnes submitted a formal 2019 Stortinget proposal for a “third, non-commercial housing sector” with price-regulated cooperatives (not adopted). Rødt calls for government-mandated maximum rent per square meter, adjusted for standard, age, and location, with sanctions for landlords who violate limits. The party wants a “boligtilsyn” (housing supervisory body), tax deductions for renters equivalent to homeowners’ mortgage interest deductions, increased taxation on secondary homes, and Husbanken restored to a social housing profile. At the principle level, Rødt’s prinsipprogram envisions what Civita’s analysis describes as “a soft abolition of real private property rights over businesses” through combined mechanisms: state acquisitions, favored transitions to worker-owned forms, prohibition on private international ownership transfers, and dramatically increased taxation.

Taxation proposals are among the most aggressive in any Nordic parliament:

Income tax: No increase for those earning under ~700,000 NOK; “much higher” taxes above 2 million NOK (top 1.4%); 2025 alternative budget allocated 14 billion NOK in cuts for earners under 800,000 NOK; historical position included 100% marginal taxation above ~1.5 million NOK
Wealth tax: Reformed with rates of 1.2% (up to 10M NOK), 1.4% (10–100M NOK), and 1.6% (over 100M NOK); removal of all valuation discounts except primary residence; wealth tax to follow citizenship (US-model)
“Dynastiskatt” (inheritance tax): Threshold at 5 million NOK with progressive rates above; explicitly designed to prevent “increasing concentration of power and wealth through generations”; citing that “70 of the 100 richest people in Norway are heirs”
Corporate tax: Increase from 22% back to 27%, phased at 1 percentage point per year
Dividend tax: Increase from 37.8% to 46%; abolish the skjermingsfradrag (sheltering deduction)
Novel proposals: Tax on unrealized capital gains at 25%; VAT on financial services; grunnrentebeskatning (resource rent tax) for aquaculture, wind, and minerals
Total proposed tax increase: 47.9 billion NOK across one Stortinget period (2021 figure)

Business freedom is fundamentally reframed. Rødt wants to establish a new legal company form for worker-managed enterprises, given preferential treatment in public procurement, taxation, and capital access. The party’s signature domestic policy—profittfri velferd (profit-free welfare)—would make it illegal to extract profit from publicly funded welfare services, banning commercial operators in kindergartens, child welfare, and elderly care. Moxnes: “Children in kindergarten, teenagers in child welfare, and a grandmother in elderly care are all vulnerable users of complex welfare services. They are not a customer in a shop.” Rødt also wants to completely ban the staffing/temp agency industry (bemanningsbransjen), making all labor mediation a public function.

Nationalization is extensive. Rødt wants all natural resources publicly owned and full state control of “central infrastructure”—telecom networks, power grids, data centers, internet lines, and banks. Specifically, the party proposes buying out all private shareholders in Equinor, Telenor, Norsk Hydro, Yara, and DNB, then delisting them from the stock exchange (estimated cost ~500 billion NOK). These companies would be subjected to “direct public governance.” All welfare services would operate on a non-profit-only basis.

Labor market positions favor collective power over contract freedom. Rødt wants to strengthen strike rights and abolish compulsory wage arbitration (tvungen lønnsnemnd), which Norway has used over 100 times since 1953, drawing repeated ILO criticism. The party supports political strikes, challenges to the Main Agreement’s peace obligation, full tax deduction for union dues, expanded worker representation on company boards, permanent full-time employment as the legal norm, and full sick pay without cuts. Moxnes: “It is completely fundamental for the Norwegian model that the right to strike is real.”

Trade freedom is curtailed by Rødt’s anti-EU/EEA stance. The party wants to terminate the EEA agreement and replace it with a bilateral trade agreement, citing the 1973 model. Moxnes: “There are no other trade agreements that imply that one party must introduce all the rules that the other party chooses to introduce. The EU binds us to market liberalism that promotes privatization and threatens the Norwegian model.” Rødt was a vocal opponent of TTIP and TISA, and supports strengthened agricultural import protection. The party wants withdrawal from ACER (EU energy agency), regulation of power exports, and opposes new international power cables.

On price controls, Rødt’s most prominent proposal is a maximum electricity price of 35 øre/kWh for households and businesses, with a multi-price system making overconsumption more expensive. Combined with government-mandated maximum rents, this represents direct price control in two major markets. No specific positions on CBDC or central bank reform were found.

Dimension 4: Rule of law and equal treatment

Moxnes’s strongest individual-sovereignty moment came during the March 2020 corona emergency powers debate. He was the first party leader to publicly oppose the government’s original fullmaktslov, which proposed unlimited power to override all Norwegian laws by regulation for six months. His key statement: “Stortinget kan ikke abdisere i en krisetid. Nettopp fordi vi er i en krise, skal vi holde fast ved våre demokratiske prinsipper.” (“Parliament cannot abdicate in a crisis. Precisely because we are in a crisis, we must hold fast to our democratic principles.”) Even Ap leader Støre initially supported the law. After Rødt’s opposition catalyzed broader resistance, the law was dramatically narrowed: limited to 62 specific laws (from unlimited), duration reduced from 6 months to 1 month, and a one-third parliamentary minority could block regulations. Moxnes subsequently opposed extending the koronaloven and attempted to block overly broad crisis regulations, stating: “Rødt opposes the government’s attempt to disable legislation for entire societal sectors. Regulations must be delimited to needs, and needs must be concretely justified.”

Gender quotas and affirmative action: Rødt is a self-described feminist party that practices internal gender quotas (“alternating man and woman” on candidate lists, codified in party statutes since 2007). Rødt voters are among the most pro-quota in Norway. No specific Moxnes quotes on affirmative action were found, but the party’s position clearly supports structural measures including quotas as tools for equality.

Criminal justice reflects a humane-treatment orientation. Rødt opposes “a repressive prison system that threatens the incarcerated person’s health, social situation, and personal integrity,” supports children’s legal protections as guiding principles in youth justice, and calls for better rehabilitation programs. The party opposes lowering the criminal age of responsibility and opposes police centralization and militarization under the politireformen. However, Rødt representative Seher Aydar acknowledged venstresiden has been “too cautious” on consequences for youth crime and proposed fast-track courts for youngest offenders.

The deeper tension lies in Rødt’s prinsipprogram. Critics from Civita and Minerva argue the party’s revolutionary vision—explicitly stating reformism “will never lead to a socialist society”—conflicts with liberal democratic separation of powers and independent institutions. The party’s democracy concept rests on what critics call “ren flertallsmakt” (pure majority power), potentially lacking protections for individuals against collective overreach. However, Rødt’s practical parliamentary behavior (the corona law opposition being the prime example) has consistently defended checks on executive power.

Dimension 5: Freedom of association, assembly, and religion

Religious freedom is articulated through a secular-neutral framework. Rødt’s official position: “The right to choose one’s own faith is a fundamental democratic right” and “The right to criticize religion is equally principally important as religious freedom.” The party works for a religiously neutral public Norway, supports clear church-state separation, wants religious communities treated identically to other voluntary organizations, and wants to replace KRLE (the Christianity-focused school subject) with a neutral philosophy and religion subject. The party notes proudly that while many members are atheists, it also has members affiliated with most world religions.

Political association reflects Rødt’s anti-corporate stance. The party refuses all corporate donations—“Private special interests cannot buy influence over Rødt. That’s why we said no when Petter Stordalen offered us financial support.” Elected officials return a portion of salary to the party (partiskatt), meaning Rødt MPs earn approximately 260,000 NOK less than other parliamentarians in practice. On the restrictive side, Rødt Oslo calls for banning racist and neo-Nazi organizations from leasing municipal facilities and wants such bans written into Oslo’s police regulations.

Civil society versus state is where Rødt diverges from associational freedom norms. Civita’s analysis of party programs found that Rødt lacks any dedicated section on civil society (frivillighet). The party’s defining statement: “Welfare is a public responsibility that must not be shifted onto voluntary organizations.” Rødt and SV are the only parties that explicitly set limits on what civil society should contribute, reflecting a view that the state—not NGOs—should provide core welfare services. The party does support organizations working on food distribution and poverty reduction, and wants civil society to contribute to combating loneliness.

Freedom of assembly and protest is among Rødt’s strongest individual-sovereignty credentials. Moxnes is personally an active protest participant, having held rally speeches at electricity price demonstrations outside Stortinget (January 2022), Fosen Sami wind power protests (February 2023, supporting a Supreme Court ruling against illegal turbines), and Palestine demonstrations at Israel’s embassy. Rødt explicitly defines itself as building a “folkebevegelse” (people’s movement) combining parliamentary and extra-parliamentary activism. Research confirms Rødt, SV, and MDG voters have the strongest engagement in “informal political activities like petition campaigns, demonstrations, and protests.”

Dimension 6: Digital autonomy and information freedom

Surveillance opposition is Rødt’s most consistent individual-sovereignty position. The party has voted against every major Norwegian surveillance expansion over the past 15 years:

Datalagringsdirektivet (DLD, 2011): Voted against, joining a broad coalition (SV, Sp, Venstre, FrP, KrF) that narrowly lost 89–80. The DLD was never implemented after the EU Court of Justice invalidated it in 2014.
E-tjenesteloven (Intelligence Service Law, 2020): Rødt was the only party to vote against the entire law. SV, Venstre, and MDG voted against only chapters 7 and 8 (tilrettelagt innhenting/bulk collection) but supported the rest. The law passed 77–11.
E-komloven (Electronic Communications Law, 2021): Voted against, along with SV and MDG.
PST open-source collection: Rødt explicitly opposed granting PST powers to mass-collect and store open-source internet data.

Moxnes’s Stortinget speech on the E-law (June 2020) argued: “Norway has been in a state of emergency and the Stortinget has had its hands full. At the same time, it has been processing a legislative proposal that entails the most extensive surveillance of the population ever.” He proposed postponing the vote pending ECHR rulings on mass surveillance in Sweden and the UK, and demanded chapters 7 and 8 not take effect until source protection and free expression safeguards were strengthened. In September 2022, when the government allowed E-tjenesten to begin testing the bulk collection system before the hearing period ended, Moxnes demanded answers: “The government must respect human rights. Mass surveillance of citizens is always justified by good intentions. But there is a reason one should be cautious.”

Rødt’s official surveillance platform states: “Rødt er sterke motstandere av omfattende overvåkning” (Rødt is strong opponents of extensive surveillance). Specific commitments include a permanent transparency law (innsynslov), no new surveillance laws harming privacy, stricter data storage laws, sensitive data stored in Norway under public control, and preventing private actors from accessing personal data from internet providers.

Digital sovereignty is where Rødt is assessed as the most ambitious of all Norwegian parties. According to Attac Norge’s analysis, Rødt is “tydeligst i å sette digital suverenitet som et mål” (the clearest in setting digital sovereignty as a goal). Concrete proposals include a state-owned cloud service as basic digital infrastructure, mandatory open-source software in the public sector (abolishing proprietary software), taxing big tech companies, a permanent public IT consultancy service, democratic control over “all infrastructure of significance, whether physical, digital, or financial,” and strengthening Datatilsynet (the Data Protection Authority) as both supervisory body and ombudsman. In May 2025, Rødt formally advocated for a state-owned national cloud service, citing security concerns about dependence on American tech companies.

Information gaps remain on several digital topics. No specific Rødt positions were found on CBDC/digital central bank currency, BankID/digital ID systems, encryption rights, VPN policy, net neutrality, or social credit systems. Rødt’s emphasis on public control of digital infrastructure suggests skepticism toward privately controlled digital identity systems, but this is inference rather than documented position.

Conclusion: the sovereignty paradox at the heart of Rødt

Moxnes’s profile reveals a systematic pattern rather than random inconsistency. On civil liberties where the state surveils or coerces the individual—emergency powers, mass surveillance, data retention, pandemic overreach—he is among Norway’s most liberty-minded parliamentarians. His corona law intervention was arguably the most consequential individual-sovereignty action by any Norwegian politician during the pandemic. On drug policy and protest rights, Rødt trends libertarian.

On economic structure and property, Rødt represents the maximum possible departure from individual sovereignty principles within Norwegian democratic politics—proposing nationalization of major industries, abolition of private welfare provision, electricity and rent price controls, aggressive wealth redistribution, and an explicit long-term goal of eliminating private ownership of means of production.

The connecting thread is Rødt’s left-libertarian conception of freedom: freedom from economic power (bosses, landlords, corporations) is prioritized over freedom from state power, while freedom from state surveillance and coercion of individuals is strongly defended. The prinsipprogram states: “Freedom is every person’s right to make the most important decisions in their own life”—but defines the primary threats to that freedom as economic inequality and private power concentration rather than government authority per se. This creates a coherent internal logic that nonetheless places Rødt in sharply different positions across the six sovereignty dimensions, scoring high on civil-libertarian metrics while scoring very low on economic freedom and property rights metrics.