To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.

1974 in Norway

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Events in the year 1974 in Norway.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/2
    131 452
    274 675
  • ✪ What is Norway's Prison System Like?
  • ✪ The Norwegian Rocket Incident of 1995


This exploration was made possible by Skillshare, a community with over 25,000 classes to keep you learning. Starting in 2015, mainstream news outlets began running indignant headlines. The basic point: a criminal in Norway was living in a prison cell with far too lavish conditions. And this wasn’t just any criminal. This prisoner had taken the lives of 77 people and injured over 300 more in Oslo, Norway’s capital city, and on a nearby island. I won’t state the perpetrator’s name, and I’ll obscure his face in this video. Source one in the description has information about a memorial building for some of the victims (1). Suffice it to say this was an extraordinarily dangerous prisoner, one who had caused much suffering, and one deserving of punishment. That’s why news outlets ran often sarcastic and sensationalist headlines pointing out what they saw as the luxurious lifestyle he was afforded in his Norwegian prison cell: he had a treadmill, a computer, video games, a TV. And it wasn’t merely one cell, but three attached together for extra space. And after all the scars he left on Norwegian society, and all the amenities he was provided, he and his lawyers had the audacity to claim the conditions of his sentence were ‘violating his human rights’ (2). The Xbox and daytime television weren’t enough; Norwegian authorities needed to do more; a lower court even agreed before being overturned on appeal (3). And so it’s easy to see why this was a slam-dunk series of headlines for editors: a terrible crime, ‘softy’ European justice, and a dangerous criminal complaining in front of a judge about plasticware and cold prison coffee (4). But Norway’s public and many family members left behind didn’t call for harsher punishment (5). In fact, inside of Norway it continues to be standard practice to simply ignore this man and leave his handling to the professionals of the criminal justice system. Which leads us to the big question: why? Why does Norway treat prisoners, even the worst among them, in this way (and often far better)? The conditions of this man’s imprisonment open the door to a better understanding of Norway’s prison system, a system which can seem radically forgiving, even to those on the inside. This is the story of a nation which looks at the bigger picture, even when the world watches with exasperation. Norway’s prisons are often characterized as the ‘nicest’ and ‘most humane’ in the world (6). Visitors and journalists familiar with more punitive systems are usually struck by the open feel, integration with nature, and open spaces where prison staff and inmates comingle. But it hasn’t always been like this. In the late 1800’s Norway’s prisons followed a model of isolation, what you could call the ‘water, bunk, and bible method’. Prisoners lived in solitary cells as a means of introspection, to contemplate their sin and to examine their relationship with God (7). They would be subject to regular visits from a priest for discussions of the soul, and their religious knowledge would be measured upon admittance and release. While ineffective, the Lutheran brand of justice planted some seeds for the future. First, because crime was seen as sin, and sin was a shared vice of all humans, the inmates were not seen as separate from society at-large; rather, they were souls in need of redemption. Second, daily visitations and regular contact with clergy made priests a sort of rudimentary social worker. The first half of the 20th century saw major shifts in the conditions and infrastructure of prison life in Norway. The first ‘prison colonies’, ‘camp-like’ shared facilities, appeared in 1912 (7). Church attendance was no longer compulsory, and prison staff started looking at mental health rather than inmate piety. But the mindset of the system was still punitive. Inmates were seen as deficient citizens, and their rights were curtailed accordingly. A couple things started to change this mindset. The first was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948. Its first article read: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” While most nations dismissed the declaration as unenforceable, it was taken seriously in Norway over the next 70 years (9). And with that in the background, a more radical series of groups in Scandinavia sought the abolition of prison generally. In the 60’s in Sweden, the National Swedish Association for Penal Reform, or KRUM, in Denmark it was The Association for a Humane Penal Policy, KRIM, and in Norway it was the Norwegian Association for Penal Reform, KROM. KRUM, KRIM, and KROM sought short-term goals of ending pre-trial detention, ending the imprisonment of minors, and ending the control of post sent in and out of prison (10). The reform movement also placed the concept of prison ‘normalization’ on the table. Inmates weren’t deficient, said the reformers, they were equal parts of society, temporarily removed, yet destined to return to the outside world. Therefore, they were ‘equal in dignity and rights’ just like those outside the prison walls. But it wasn’t until decades later that elected officials began to take action on these principles. Saddled with increasing incarceration rates in the 80’s and 90’s, the government published a series of white papers proposing a major overhaul of the prison system. The first in 1997 was called “A Paradigm Shift”, and proposed changes for prison staff. Guards were not only there for security, like digging through prisoner cells or breaking up fights; they were social workers as well, educated with a two-year specialized degree in law, human rights, criminology, psychology, and ethics. Their role wasn’t only to make sure prisoners served ‘time for the crime’, but also responsible for preventing future crime, lowering the recidivism rate, the percentage of inmates who reoffend after finishing their sentence. Like the priests in the 1800’s caring for the future of the soul, the guard-social worker hybrid would care for the future of the person. And like the priests who saw prisoners as just another sinner among many, the government was moving towards seeing prisoners as just another human being among many. A 2008 white paper entitled, “Punishment that works, less crime, safer society” went further. The entire purpose of the prison system, it claimed, was the rehabilitation and reintegration of inmates. The government was now using the language of reform, calling for a ‘principle of normality’ that would punish criminals with the restriction of liberty, but absolutely nothing more (12). No inmate would live in conditions more restricted than necessary for the good of wider society, and life inside prison would resemble life outside prison as much as possible. The Norwegian prison system of today is a culmination of these 150 years of reform. Norway’s incarceration rate is 72 people out every 100,000 in the population. That’s roughly a tenth of US rate, which imprisons 716 for every 100,000 (5). There are a total of around 3,500 prisoners in Norway spread over 64 prisons. If you’re doing the math, that’s only about 50 prisoners per prison. Norway’s Correctional Service keeps this number low so that inmate families and friends can easily visit, believing this assists reintegration into society (12). In contrast to American prisons, which typically use a static security system, with guards centralized inside wings of cells, a typical Norwegian prison is dynamic, laid out more like a campus. Rather than efficiency, the purpose is normalization. Prisoners ‘commute’ so to speak, from activity to activity: cooking, hair cut, religious services, visitation, recreation. The idea is to feel as much like everyday life as possible. And there are as many prison staffers as inmates (12). Across the system, the staff to prisoner ratio is roughly one to one, assuring that each incarcerated person has a main contact in the prison staff to help with addiction problems, career development, counseling, conflict management, and stress management (9). Rather than hunkering down in a guard booth, staff are required to comingle with the inmates to develop personal relationships. The Norwegians have found that these interactions, more than any other measure, help to keep all inmates and staff safe and secure. Inmates receive assistance finding work, and are entitled to the full income from their labor. If they had a job before their conviction, they often continue to attend with regular leave from prison. If unqualified for work in a field, they have a right to an education. Rather than a diploma with a prison name on it, inmates receive accreditation from a local institution. Prisoners are entitled to regular phone calls and visitation with family. There are no glass walls like in the movies; inmates and their loved ones get private rooms. If prisoners have children, they can apply for additional visitation time. Cells in Norway’s prisons are more like mini apartments. It’s normal for inmates to have a private bath and a mini fridge, common spaces for activities like music and art, fully equipped kitchens (sharp knives and all) to practice culinary skills, outdoor spaces to explore and relax, spots for fishing, sunbathing, sports, and other recreation. In most prisons inmates can move freely, and even have the key to their own room. The principles of rehabilitation and normalization put into practice create something completely different in Norwegian corrections. Every American journalist who visits has remarked in their article, without fail, that Norway’s prisons left them ‘doubting whether they were prisons at all’. Of course, they are. The incarcerated’s freedom of movement has been restricted, and in Norway, that’s considered sufficient. But let’s be honest, this leaves a lot of people questioning whether justice is being served. Many might accept the idea of a common criminal living in relaxed prison conditions, but what about violent inmates? Why should a man whose victims number in the hundreds be afforded a computer, treadmill, and television? And the most common answer to this objection is the results. Norway expends around 90,000 per inmate, triple that of the United States. But for this elevated cost and focus on reintegration they enjoy the lowest recidivism rate in Scandinavia and the wider western world: 20% reoffend and go back to prison after their release (12). For comparison, the recidivism rate in the United States is roughly 68% (13). You can call it soft, they say, but the tactics stop people from committing more crime. Norwegians can put it in more individualistic terms too. It’s a ‘good neighbor’ policy. The vast majority of those who go to prison will re emerge again into society. Who would you rather have as a neighbor? Someone who’s been through a punitive system-punished harshly, or someone who’s encountered restorative social work and normalizing conditions? If you’d rather have a rehabilitated neighbor, the argument goes, congratulations, you’ve found a selfish reason to support a humane prison system. And that’s usually where most analysis ends. A journalist tacs on a fawning headline about the humanity of the system; the Norwegian correctional services links to a study about their low recidivism rate on their website, law and order types roll their eyes. But a deeper analysis calls into question the rosiness of the picture. There’s a glaring problem when comparing the recidivism rate, the rate of reoffenders, between the US and Norway: they aren’t measured the same way. In fact, there’s no standard metric or definition for reporting the percentage of criminals who go on to reoffend (14). How many years after release is recidivism measured? Are all convicted criminals counted, or only ones who have spent time in an actual prison? What crimes are societies imprisoning people for? Is the measurement done on a local, state, or national level? Do parole violations count as recidivism? These variables alone could cause inconsistent numbers. For our case: the US bases the number on the percentage of freed inmates who are rearrested. Norway bases the number on the percentage of freed inmates who are reincarcerated. The statistics represent totally different things. If you compare the USA and Norway on the same basis, on the percentage of freed inmates who are reincarcerated, they’re not that far apart. Norway roughly 25%; the US roughly 27% or 29% (13). If we look at the rearrest rate, Norway approaches 50% compared to the US’s 68% (14,p18). Norway’s still ranks better on both metrics, but the difference narrows. I’ve cited two sources below that detail this further. The point is, upon further examination of the data, we neither find a robust statistical endorsement of treating prisoners better, nor even a conclusive prosecution of America’s punitive system; instead, we find a measurable, modest difference with a lot of ambiguity mixed in. If we want to truly understand Norway’s prison system, we can’t just lean on flashy numbers; we need to ask what the end of the justice system is. In the US, imprisonment is often about justice for individual victims. The end of an American prison is retribution for acts committed against people or the state. It’s individuals held accountable to individuals through the system. In Norway, imprisonment seems to be about justice for society as a whole. Justice is distributive and relative to its holistic effect on all people in the country. Prisoner treatment is not about the satisfaction of grievance, but rather an assessment of how a convicted individual can best reintegrate into the larger social welfare community, not just for their sake, but for everyone’s. To treat even undeniably bad people in accordance with their values, Norway is carrying out a conviction that human rights are a catalyst rather than a hindrance to justice. Taken one step further: human rights are justice. Part of integrating into society is learning how to contribute. That's why Norwegian prisons have top notch educational resources. But you don't need to commit a crime to get top notch education. Whether it’s storytelling, animation, design, photography, or starting a business, Skillshare has more than 25,000 classes to get you started in the new year. Premium membership grants you unlimited access to courses taught by experts, designed to empower you to learn critical skills, and unlock new opportunities right for you and your New Year’s goals. Now, specifically, I want you you join me in Mike Vardy’s class on using ToDoist to increase productivity. ToDoist is a digital task manager I’ve used for a couple years now, and this course helped me to reverse engineer my productivity framework. Annually, Skillshare premium membership is super affordable- less than $10 a month. So join the 7 million creators learning with Skillshare. The first 500 members of this community to use the promo link in the description will get their first 2 months free to try it out. So be one of the first 500 to click the link in the description and get the 2-month risk-free trial. Learn new skills. Do what you love. Try Skillshare today.




  • 2 January – drilling rig "Transocean 3" sinks in the North Sea.
  • 1 February – Lillehammer affair: Five Israeli Mossad agents are sentenced to prison terms for the assassination of Ahmed Bouchiki. The prison terms ranged from two and a half to five years, although all the agents were eventually released within 22 months and deported back to Israel.
  • 15 September – The wreck of the Danish slave ship Fredensborg, which sank during a storm in 1768, is discovered off the coast of Tromøya.
  • 31 October – Parliament rejects a bill on abortion.

Popular culture





Notable births

Notable deaths

Full date unknown

See also


  1. ^ Tvedt, Knut Are. "Anne Beathe Tvinnereim". In Bolstad, Erik (ed.). Store norske leksikon (in Norwegian). Oslo: Norsk nettleksikon. Retrieved 15 August 2018.
  2. ^ Bryhn, Rolf. "Mette Solli". In Bolstad, Erik (ed.). Store norske leksikon (in Norwegian). Oslo: Norsk nettleksikon. Retrieved 21 August 2018.
  3. ^ Helle, Knut (ed.). "Francis Bull". Norsk biografisk leksikon (in Norwegian). Oslo: Kunnskapsforlaget. Retrieved 12 November 2012.
  4. ^ Steenstrup, Bjørn, ed. (1973). "Haneborg Hansen, Halfdan Olaf". Hvem er hvem? (in Norwegian). Oslo: Aschehoug. p. 208. Retrieved 4 September 2016.
  5. ^ Moland, Arnfinn (1995). "Hansen, Halfdan Haneborg". In Dahl; Hjeltnes; Nøkleby; Ringdal; Sørensen (eds.). Norsk krigsleksikon 1940-45 (in Norwegian). Oslo: Cappelen. p. 159. ISBN 82-02-14138-9.
  6. ^ Bryhn, Rolf. "Tormod Normann". In Bolstad, Erik (ed.). Store norske leksikon (in Norwegian). Oslo: Norsk nettleksikon. Retrieved 20 May 2019.

External links

This page was last edited on 21 July 2019, at 03:02
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.