Knudsen followed Quislings political life from the beginning until his execution after the war. In the book he tells the exciting story about the man who was highly respected in Norway before the war, how Quisling served as the Minister of Defense for the Farmer's Party, and later how he became the Prime Minister of Norway during World War II.

A 1999 biography of the notorious wartime Norwegian leader, Vidkun Quisling, whose name is still used as a synonym for 'traitor'.

Fascism remains a topic that fascinates both academic and general audiences. This is the first book to look systematically at the leaders of fascism and related movements in the inter-war era. It shows how fascist leaders came to personify their movements and why the Führeprinzip was applied in all fascist organizations. It also explains how fascist leadership was of a very particular kind: It was almost unlimited in political discipline and required complete subordination. The legitimacy was based on a very vague notion of 'the organic unity of the state and the people', giving the leaders competence to rule without accountability to a party organization or state bodies. Thus, we can observe in all fascist parties/movements a practical form of leadership where policies of 'split and rule' were common in absence of principles of representation and opposition feedbacks. The fascist führer was the leader, the party, the ideology - and when in power: the state itself. This book was previously published as a special issue of Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions.

This study is based on research which I conducted in the Netherlands in 1948 and 1949. In addition, I was able to rely on experiences and impressions of the 1944-1946 period, when I was stationed in the Low Countries as a United States Army Military Intelligence Officer. In my description of Dutch purge measures I have attempte~ to be as unbiased a judge as possible; whenever I was unable to arrive at a definite conclusion I con tented myself with describing the opposing points of view. I am quite aware that this attitude of "neutrality" may be criticized, not only by many ex-Resistance men who have become dis gusted with the alleged softness of the purge, but also by many others who appear equally dismayed about its severity. For purposes of comparison, readers who are familiar with action against collaborators in other countries - such as France, Italy, or the Balkans - may note that the Dutch purge was not dominated by considerations of party politics. All Dutchme- employers and workers, Protestants and Catholics, Conservatives and Socialists - had been united in their resistance against the enemy. Consequently, disagreements about purge measures did not follow class, religious, or party lines. The few Dutch Commu nists had never been able to dominate the Resistance; neither were they able to exploit the purge for their purposes. Thus, in Holland problems of collaboration and purge could be studied in their purest form, without consideration of other factors.