The fallout from Asle Toje’s Aftenposten article on Norway’s future has dragged on for two solid months, with one pundit after another slinging mud and hurling offensive slurs. Toje’s fought back effectively and has plenty of allies.
But a relentless smear campaign from Norway’s Broadcasting Corp. (NRK)—plastering Toje’s photo on an Epstein piece despite zero evidence of any link—raises serious questions: is our taxpayer-funded broadcaster living up to its duty to enlighten the public, or is it just obsessed with clicks, ideological conformity, and stamping out awkward facts?
Writing in Aftenposten, Petter Bae Brandtzæg asserts—entirely without evidence—that he
sees more and more blatant examples of ChatGPT-speak in the debate sections. The same goes for the debate Asle Toje ignited. Both the infamous ‘Will Norway Survive What’s Coming?’ and Paul M.H. Buvarp’s counter-piece are probably substantially AI-generated.
Resorting to personal attacks to sidetrack the debate? That’s unworthy of the once-respected broadsheet Aftenposten.
Genuine pluralism in Norway demands room in the mainstream press for thinkers like Asle Toje—and his ideas deserve serious engagement, not the treatment reserved for youth-party squabbles.
Outlets such as Document naturally amplify Toje’s take; it’s what we do. Opinion diversity thrives in Norway—social media is full of it. People are alert, discerning, and know reliable sources when they see them.
But among the public-facing liberal elite, the tolerated range of views shrinks dramatically. Toje triggers outrage simply by stating what’s obvious to ordinary folk—unspoken truths voiced with rare elegance.
Speaking plainly isn’t allowed in Norway. The façade must remain pristine. Challenge the idyllic picture of a harmonious, diverse society by highlighting the fraying social bonds that once united us, and you’ll be pilloried.
Toje’s original op-ed, entitled “Will Norway survive what’s coming?”, stated:
Perhaps this is a nation’s real immortality: giving meaning to the time allotted to it. Therefore the state must end its hothouse cultivation of self-obsessed minorities. Fragmentation is no strength. We need measurable requirements for integration and conduct, and incentives for patriotism in culture and education.
Moderate, not rabid
A straightforward, even-tempered take on real issues proved intolerable to the Norwegian commentariat. It spilled over into ad hominem barbs and condemnations, with Aftenposten happily raking in the clicks from Toje’s “provocative” text.
Living in the UK, it all seemed bizarrely over-the-top. Similar arguments appear routinely in The Telegraph, The Spectator, or from voices like Douglas Murray, Rod Liddle, David Starkey, and GB News (which commands big audiences despite outsider status). Toje’s piece was tame by comparison—moderate, not rabid—yet the backlash framed him as extreme.
In most of Europe, let alone Britain, his words wouldn’t have ignited a sustained witch-hunt or media meltdown. Norway’s public sphere is claustrophobically tight. What might have been a proper debate on integration, immigration, and national cohesion turned into character assassination and baseless AI-forgery accusations. Toje says it’s hit his family hard too.
Speaking to Wolfgang Wee (no stranger to media vilification, having been depicted as Putin’s eager puppy in Aftenposten), Toje stressed it’s the orchestrated feel of the whole thing—not isolated jabs—that wears him down: unpleasant, exhausting, and campaign-like.
Toje has heard from people too afraid to back him in public but offering private sympathy. Others share his societal outlook yet shrink from saying so openly—not everyone can face the risk of stepping forward only to be decapitated in the backlash.
That was the last drop
What pushed Toje over the edge was NRK’s attempt to tie him to Epstein. He insists he’s never met or communicated with the man, but he was still hauled into the mess. NRK has since apologised, pulled the image and link—but the harm’s already inflicted. Nettavisen hasn’t amended its piece.
Toje noted how heartening support from figures like Torbjørn Røe Isaksen has been. I add my voice to those backing him—belatedly, perhaps, but that’s logistics, not reluctance. Hans Rustad at Document has penned a heartfelt defence too.
Toje stilte Aftenposten og woke-eliten på en prøve. De strøk!
I’ve met Asle Toje several times, and a more generous, grounded, and level-headed individual is hard to come by. There’s nothing remotely extreme about him—he’s just realistic.
The mainstream media’s criticism, delivered in their strained and spiteful manner, targets more than Toje: it’s aimed at the reality that will inevitably become undeniable, no matter how many furious Aftenposten pieces try to obscure it. He can console himself with that, though I suspect he takes no pleasure in being right about Norway’s grim outlook.