Finnish general praised the Ukrainian air strike

The Ukrainians successfully struck the Russian airfield located near the Estonian border. As a result, several heavy Russian cargo planes were destroyed.

Russians have previously relocated a large number of their strategic bombers near the Finnish border. There they are situated much farther from Ukraine than the field targeted in this attack. Following the recent strike, it is apparent that Russia will be moving more of its air force equipment even farther from Ukraine.

Consequently, their use of air power in the ongoing war in Ukraine becomes increasingly challenging. This, in turn, improves the conditions for Ukrainian soldiers defending their homeland.

According to Finnish military expert, general Pekka Toveri, the attack will compel Russia to significantly enhance its resources for safeguarding targets such as airports, defense industries, and even Saint Petersburg. This, too, will ease Ukrainian warfare efforts in the future as the relocated troops are diminished from the Russian forces fighting against them.

From the perspective of President Vladimir Putin's army, the attack witnessed now is unfortunate in that its defense is faltering in the southern fronts, where Ukraine has made clear advances in recent days and seems to be on the verge of a breakthrough. Thus, what lies ahead is likely a shift from the almost stagnant trench warfare to a more mobile battle once again.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is French military history repeating itself in Ukraine?
Victims of Russian leaders
Russian standard of tanks

Is French military history repeating itself in Ukraine?

Based on yesterday's news, Ukraine has managed to break through Russia's strongest defensive line in the Zaporiizhia region. This news is likely to warm the hearts of most Western people, but at the same time, it raises concerns for many about whether the Russian defense line might still be too long and heavily fortified for the Ukrainians.

As an example of this, Emil Kastehelmi, known for his strategic maps, expressed his concern about the situation's development. According to him, "Ukraine might still be able to push forward with a village or two, but a too narrow attack corridor could expose their flanks to a difficult and threatening situation."

Naturally, I don't have more information about the war situation from my living room, nor do I possess a crystal ball that shows the future. However, I do know quite a bit about the past, and that's why I decided to share a piece of information with you, dear readers.

Let's go back to the year 1940 in France. It trusted its fortification chain known as the Maginot Line along the German border after World War I. To the Gauls' dismay, the Germans bypassed the line from the north and didn't stay to fight for control of it; instead, they advanced straight to Paris.

Thus, the heavily fortified Maginot Line proved to be rather useless. Or rather, it became detrimental by tying the French forces to its positions - effectively removing them from the decisive battles of the western front in 1940.

So, in this article, I ask: what prevents the Ukrainians from repeating the same maneuver the Germans did in 1940? In the current situation, they could pour their reserves into the emerging gap and bypass the Russian fortifications, advancing deep behind Russian lines and ultimately reaching the Black Sea coast, cutting off the northern supply route that runs along the coastline.

If, at the same time, the Ukrainians manage to keep the Kerch Strait bridge at least partially impassable with missiles and drone strikes, a massive cauldron would form in Southern Ukraine. Russian forces - or at least their motivation - would likely be insufficient to break this encirclement. On the contrary, with supply lines severed, surrender might become a thought for several Russian soldiers and units.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
Victims of Russian leaders
A Finnish military professor predicted the possibilities of Ukraine's counterattack

Attitudes towards immigrants are not becoming more positive in Western countries

If you follow the European media, one could imagine that racism in Europe - and thus also in Finland - would be terrible, yet gradually disappearing. Therefore, it was interesting to read a study that examined changes related to race and ethnic discrimination in hiring practices across six European and North American countries.

These countries were Canada, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and the United States. The data included all available discrimination assessments from 90 recruitment experiments conducted in various fields, covering over 170,000 job applications.

However, the time periods covered in the study varied by country: for instance, experiments conducted in the United Kingdom spanned from 1969 to 2017, while in Germany, the study only included the years 1994 to 2017. Discrimination trends were analyzed in relation to four groups with different origins: Black, Asian, Latino, and individuals from the Middle East or North Africa.

The results obtained by the researchers indicated that observed discrimination during recruitment has either remained the same or slightly increased in most countries and origin groups. Three specific changes were particularly notable. The first change was an increase in recruitment discrimination against individuals from the Middle East and North Africa, from the 1990s to the 2000s. The second significant finding was a reduction in discrimination in France, but only from extremely high levels to "only" high levels. The third change was that discrimination had increased over time in the Netherlands.

All of this suggests that the often stated claim of decreasing discrimination due to increased interactions with immigrants is not true. On the contrary, discrimination had not decreased in the past decades in five out of the six Western countries examined in the study - and most likely not in Finland either.

This raises the question of why it often appears that attitudes towards immigrants in Finland are most positive in large immigrant-rich cities, according to surveys, and more negative in rural areas where immigrants are scarcely present. Is this a case of urban residents simply misleading surveyors, or perhaps their conformity, the tendency to adapt to others' opinions - or at least perceived opinions?

Such perception might be due, especially, to the way our press tends to report on anything related to immigration in an overly positive light and, on the other hand, remain silent about its negative aspects. Additionally, the rural population might be influenced by the fact that there are hardly any immigrants there, so there hasn't been much interest or need to pay attention to press propaganda. The pressure to conform - or to lie in survey studies - hasn't arisen nearly to the same extent as it has among city dwellers.

On the other hand, recruitment is an action that measures people's real attitudes, and there's no room for conformity, as the success of the company or hiring leadership directly depends on the hired individual. Therefore, it is a much more reliable gauge of people's attitudes towards immigrants compared to survey studies.

The original blog in Finnish:
Suhtautuminen maahanmuuttajiin ei ole muuttumassa positiivisemmaksi länsimaissa

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
"Woke" pushes American science academies to favor women in their membership selections
Racism or self-preservation instinct?
People with Middle Eastern and North African inheritance identify themselves as non-Whites

A white family does not represent real Londoners

The "woke" culture originating from the United States annoys many people. Nevertheless, its influence is immense, as anyone who follows yesterday's main news broadcast noticed when our taxpayer-funded media reported on a dance video being filmed in Helsinki, Finland.

The dance video was based on a Korean song, and almost all of the approximately one hundred young participants had skin tones that were either of Finnish or East Asian appearance. However, the reporter from Yle (Finnish Broadcasting Company) had chosen to interview a girl of evidently African origin (presumably biracial) as the first interviewee.

This could, of course, be mere coincidence, but the phenomenon is far too common in Finnish society (where more than 90 percent are white Europeans)  for it not to be deliberate – as everyone could deduce for themselves, such as from the skin tones of people appearing in clothing advertisements (example). Behind this likely lies the enormous pressure caused by the "woke" culture on people in Western societies.

One consequence of this pressure seems to be some sort of self-deprecation among European individuals. An astonishing example of this was reported by some of the smaller newspapers, which conveyed a claim written on the London Mayor's website stating that a white family "does not represent real Londoners." Therefore, it was deemed inappropriate for city branding.

The caption was allegedly posted on the website accidentally. This might be believed by all those who wish to, but in my view, such an explanation is not plausible. In my opinion, the text has undoubtedly been written deliberately and added to the website either with or without the mayor's permission.

In either case, the caption clearly displays content that belittles the European native population under the influence of woke culture—potentially even containing racist undertones towards us. Especially when the name of the London Mayor is Sadiq Khan and his roots trace back to Pakistan.

The power of woke culture is also indicated by the fact that neither Yle nor the biggest private newspaper - Helsingin Sanomat - has published any news concerning the London Mayor, despite the fact that it was already available for reading in Etelä-Suomen Sanomat two day ago.

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Valkoihoinen perhe ei edusta todellisia lontoolaisia

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
"Woke" pushes American science academies to favor women in their membership selections
Finnish journalist called for British Prime Minister´s head to be placed on London bridge to dry
China is betting on scientific excellence

History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future

This is the sixteenth - and last - part of a blog post series where I go through the most significant periods of Finnish history. In the fifteenth post, I described how Finland managed to navigate towards the Western world after World War II, under the shadow of the so-called Paasikivi-Kekkonen line of Finlandization policy. At the same time, the education level of the youth increased significantly, but it also gave rise to an extreme leftist student movement, which lost its momentum due to the rise in living standards and emigration.

In the next phase, 1980s Finland headed towards an unprecedented economic boom. The driving force behind it was the liberalization of monetary policy, which allowed banks to trade foreign currencies and grant foreign currency loans to companies that did not have income billed in foreign currencies. However, the Finnish mark was still politically regulated, meaning its value was not left to the market forces to decide.

This contradiction laid the groundwork for the exceptional depth of the 1990s recession in Finland. As a result of the liberalization of foreign currency loans, money flooded into the markets, mainly directed towards the domestic market. At the same time, the policy of strong mark choked export companies, and expectations of a politically-forbidden devaluation raised domestic interest rates.

Therefore, the Finnish mark was pegged to the euro's predecessor, the ECU, at an excessively high rate. Eventually, the entire structure collapsed, many banks went bankrupt, and particularly domestic market companies collapsed under their excessively expensive foreign currency loans after forced devaluation, the state debt exploded, the competitiveness of export companies decreased, unemployment rates skyrocketed, and indebted people lost their future by going bankrupt.

As a result of all this, the mark was eventually allowed to float, which led to a rapid improvement in the competitiveness of export companies. As a result, the Finnish economy became dominated by large companies and subcontractors of extremely successful Nokia. At the same time, Finnish large companies began to internationalize rapidly.

The depth of the recession was also influenced by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the same time, which led to the collapse of trade with the East. As a result, Finnish politicians missed the opportunity to join the Western military alliance, NATO, like the former members of the Warsaw Pact and the Baltic states that had broken away from the Soviet Union, because it would have confirmed the suspicions of Finland's decades-long Finlandization. However, Finland did join the European Union in 1995, even though it was considered a completely unrealistic goal in 1991.

After the Great Depression, the Finnish economy became more neoliberal, as evidenced by the blurring of the relationship between employers and employees through option arrangements linked to company profits. This weakened the relative position of wage earners, and high unemployment did not allow for active action by workers to eliminate it.

This concludes the series of articles based mostly on Professor Heikki Ylikangas's work, where the destruction of Nokia, Finland's defense policy orientation toward the West, and the events that followed were left unaddressed. However, I wish to make few comments related to them.

* * *

One of the most significant measures during the recession was investing in Finnish education. This led to unprecedented expertise in the country, which enabled Nokia mobile phones to rise to a unique position in Finnish economic history. At its best, it was the world's clear market leader in its field, with about 40 percent market share and an even greater share of the profits, but it made two disastrous mistakes.

Firstly, Nokia lost its innovativeness, probably as a result of flawed personnel policies. This was caused by the company's product development based on internal competition, which resulted in an unhealthy competition within the company that directed people's attention to thwarting the product development of competing groups.

Secondly, the company's almost dominant position in the market led to maximizing profits by minimizing costs. As a result, Nokia's products were manufactured in low-wage countries, from which they eventually recruited product development labor without realizing that the difference in living standards between developed and developing countries is also based on factual reasons.

With Nokia's downfall, the flagship of Finnish economy was lost, and large corporations based on "green gold" (i.e. forestry) returned to be the backbone of the economy. However, Nokia's skilled workforce did not disappear, but rather dispersed to benefit multiple Finnish companies.

At the same time, Finland has lost some of its independence to Brussels through the EU integration process, and has had to finance less productive countries in times of crisis. On the other hand, the development of information technology has led to a decline in paper consumption, which has revitalized the product development of the forest industry companies.

At this point, the harsh truth is that the Finnish economy has not yet regained the international position it had during Nokia's heyday. Moreover, the EU's restrictions on the use of forests for economic purposes may not be conducive to its future, if implemented.

In terms of foreign policy, Russia's attack on Ukraine exposed the hollowness of neutrality policy, and Finland quickly became part of the Western defense alliance NATO. This decision will ensure the country's military security well into the future, but may also lead to more frequent entanglements in international conflicts and damage relations with its large eastern neighbor.

Perhaps the biggest change in Finnish society, however, has occurred as a result of the international migration wave from developing countries to western countries. As a result of this and the declining birth rate of the native population, the quality of Finland's population base will change significantly from what it was before - and not all of the consequences of this fundamental change can be anticipated at this point. In any case, it is already clear that a poorly integratable population group has emerged in the country, which, growing faster than the native population, will change the basic structure of Finnish society as a whole.

Finally, in recent years, Finland has had a left-wing government, during which the state budget has been patched with debt to create permanent fixed expenses. As a result, Finland's public finances appear to be aligning with Southern European weak and indebted countries in the coming years, rather than the traditional Nordic benchmark. At the same time, the population has become increasingly divided between political right and left, so the near-future prospects for the country's economy seem quite challenging at this moment.

Throughout their history, however, Finns have demonstrated significant resilience in being able to set aside their internal disagreements and work together in a way that has allowed them to address and resolve issues that have arisen. For that reason, the future of Finland is likely brighter than one could deduce from the current situation.

The original blog post in Finnish:
Nousun ja tuhon kautta uudenlaiseen tulevaisuuteen

All the blog posts in this series:
History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?
History of Finland II: From a hinterland of the Union into a modern state
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history
History of Finland V: The pursuit of economic profit saved the country
History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility
History of Finland VII: The dictator of the era of Enlightenment promoted capitalist economy
History of Finland VIII: Joining of Finland to Russia led to an increase in crime
History of Finland IX: Enlightended dictator initiated economic growth
History of Finland X: The birth of Finnish identity
History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future

"Woke" pushes American science academies to favor women in their membership selections

Recently in Finland, there has been a lot of discussion about racism, but the media has not forgotten about feminism either. The latter also concerns education, where attention has been given to, among other things, the low percentage of women in the highest level of education in the field of technology. This is despite the fact that their proportion among all university students is clearly greater than that of men.

One ongoing topic in this discussion has been the gender distribution of university professors, which still leans towards men. However, it is likely just a matter of time before the gender distribution of students also becomes evident in the composition among our country's professors.

In this sense, it was interesting to note that the membership of the American science academies, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (AAAS), has undergone significant changes. Over the past two decades, many women have joined this group of top researchers, which was previously almost exclusively composed of men. In recent years, women have made up about 40% of the new members in both academies.

In a recently published study, the merits of researchers in psychology, mathematics, and economics were compared to each other, and the change in the likelihood of women being elected to NAS and AAAS membership from the 1960s to the present day was analyzed.

According to the collected data, in the early years of the study period, women had fewer opportunities to be selected as members compared to men with similar qualifications. However, by the 1990s, the selection process in both academies had become roughly gender-neutral based on publications and citations.

Nevertheless, the development didn't stop at a gender-neutral situation, as might have been assumed. Over the past two decades, a trend of favoring women has emerged and strengthened in all three fields. Currently, women are three to fifteen times more likely than men with equivalent publication and citation records to be elected as members of AAAS and NAS.

In other words, the recognition and status of female researchers have fundamentally changed, at least in the USA, leading to men becoming a discriminated gender in science, with their merits receiving less recognition compared to women, at least within the scientific community's own structures.

The authors of the study in question speculated that this might be due to the fear that women would receive less recognition for their work and thus find it more difficult to get their publications into top-tier scientific journals. To compensate for this, science academies would engage in positive discrimination towards them.

In other words, this would reflect the influence of the prevailing "woke" culture in the USA, with the fear of increasingly strong societal pressures manifesting in the selection of academy members. Consequently, this would have led to significant discrimination against men.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Discrimination against women?
A young woman skiing in a swimsuit caused a controversy among women
China is betting on scientific excellence

History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine

This is the fifteenth part of a blog series in which I go through the most significant phases of Finnish history. In the fourteenth post, I described how Finland became involved in the Second World War due to a treaty between Stalin's Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany as well as the naivety of the Cajander government, and how Finland managed to navigate its way out of a losing war without foreign occupation, thanks to military brilliance and President Risto Ryti's personal responsibility.

After the peace treaty, Finland was in a new situation. On the one hand, there was the threat of a far-left revolution, and on the other hand, there was the fear of the Eastern superpower. In addition, a large part of the population had to be resettled.

The sense of national unity during the war ensured the successful resettlement of the Karelian population, which was unique internationally. The creation of the welfare state prevented the growth of the extreme left-wing support base and thus led to the gradual disappearance of the danger of revolution.

At the same time, the portion of the population whose livelihood in the countryside disappeared in a changing world emerged as labor for the rising industry in the cities. This, in turn, supported the rise of private economy partly due to the hiring of new urban populations and partly due to income transfers. In addition, the surplus of people coming from the countryside - which Finnish industry was not able to integrate into the economy development fast enough - disappeared across the Baltic Sea, boosting the rise of Swedish industry instead of radicalizing at home.

In foreign policy, the guideline was to act according to the interests of the Soviet Union, forced by the aftermath of the wars. In practice, there were no other good options. President J.K. Paasikivi was chosen as the leader of this ideology, and his successor U.K. Kekkonen continued it - hence the name Paasikivi-Kekkonen line.

These presidents, often considered as great men, were favored by the leaders of the Soviet Union, and their favor allowed for the preservation of domestic political independence. During the latter's tenure, Finland was even able to take a step towards the West by joining as an external member of the EEC.

However, entry into the economic community required an extremely undemocratic solution in Finland, namely Kekkonen's election to a third term through a state of emergency that bypassed citizens' democratic rights. However, this was apparently necessary because only in this way could the rulers of Moscow be convinced of the continuity of Finland's foreign policy after certain Social Democrats - including Erkki Tuomioja - had tried to torpedo Finland's western orientation by leaking secret information about negotiations between Kekkonen and the Soviet leadership in Zavidovo.

Kekkonen's time also saw a huge increase in people's level of education. The offspring of the previous generation's educated elite were expected to achieve or even surpass their parents' achievements, but at the same time, the descendants of the common people also embarked on the path of education, both from rural areas and urban centers.

However, these opportunities for advancement for student youth were overshadowed by cutbacks in higher education, which left the future of young students unclear. This uncertainty about the future of the offspring of the old elite led to radicalization, in which support was sought from the working class in much the same way as the Fennomans sought support from peasants in the late 19th century.

The construction of the welfare state after the wars had taken the revolutionary edge off the traditional labor movement, which, despite provocation from the student movement, aimed, like other European communists, to improve the workers' position through democratic means. The fanatically radical student movement, ended up in the arms of Soviet communism and lost its credibility, resulting in the entire leftist revolution eventually dying out.

According to Professor Heikki Ylikangas, the radical student movement was essentially a tool for its leaders to seek power. They were the offspring of the best-performing parents of the previous generation and would eventually inherit their position - albeit only after a change in ideological sign, as demonstrated, for example, by Björn Wahlroos, who became one of the richest men in the country.

The significance of the student movement was mainly in its support to President Urho Kekkonen, who utilized it skillfully, and at the same time started a slight shift towards leftism across the entire political spectrum - including the previously very conservative National Coalition Party. However, these effects were relatively short-lived, although the student movement may still have some significance as a conscious or unconscious role model for later radical movements.

The original blog post in Finnish:
Paasikiven-Kekkosen linja

All the blog posts in this series:
History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?
History of Finland II: From a hinterland of the Union into a modern state
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history
History of Finland V: The pursuit of economic profit saved the country
History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility
History of Finland VII: The dictator of the era of Enlightenment promoted capitalist economy
History of Finland VIII: Joining of Finland to Russia led to an increase in crime
History of Finland IX: Enlightended dictator initiated economic growth
History of Finland X: The birth of Finnish identity
History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future

History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic

This is the fourteenth part of a blog post series where I go through the significant events in Finnish history. In the thirteenth post, I described how Finland managed to develop again through peaceful democratic means after the rise of the extreme right-wing following the civil war initiated by the old Social Democratic Party.

As my esteemed reader well remembers, this development was interrupted by World War II. For Finland, the most significant chain of events occurred already before the Winter War.

I'm referring to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact between Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union, in which Finland was defined as part of the Soviet Union's sphere of influence. As a result, the Kremlin offered our country a trade-off, in which we would give up areas on the Karelian Isthmus and Hanko, seen as important for the security of Leningrad, but would receive land in East Karelia in return.

Finland refused the trade mainly because the government believed that the Soviet Union was just bluffing. Not even the fact that Hitler's closest confidant - Marshal Hermann Göring - advised Finland to accept the offer, hinting that our country would get its losses back with interest during the coming major war. In the Baltic countries, Göring's similar speeches were believed and they agreed to Moscow's demands, which later, in a changed situation, led to the occupation of these countries.

As a result of Finland's stubbornness, Russia began to threaten our country through its media and moved its troops to the border. Since these methods did not make the Cajander government yield, Stalin also staged the shelling in Mainila and denounced the non-aggression treaty between the countries.

Even these measures did not change the Finnish government's position because it could not believe in an attack, at least not without an ultimatum or a threat to start a war. Moscow, on the other hand, could not give such a declaration because it would have been contrary to the propaganda image it created of the Soviet Union as a peace-loving state.

Therefore, the Soviet army eventually crossed the border, citing the shots fired at Mainila. This surprised the Finnish government, which believed in the impossibility of war, and it fell. After that, a new government tried to agree on a territorial exchange with Stalin. However, it was already too late, as Stalin was only discussing with the puppet government led by Otto Wille Kuusinen that he had established.

During the Winter War, the Finns remembered Göring's offer, which led to Finland's submission to the harsh peace terms of the Winter War, despite the still unbeaten army and military assistance offered - although not given - by England and France. However, the latter made Stalin begin negotiations with Finland.

At this point, the Finnish leadership had assessed that Germany would win the upcoming great war, at least against Russia, and that Finland would get its losses back with interest. This view was based mainly on the fact that Russia had also suffered a defeat during the First World War against Germany, which later lost the war.

Thus, our country was drawn into the Continuation War, in which the objectives were set clearly beyond the borders of 1939. Finland became dependent on Germany for both energy and food self-sufficiency. As a side note, it should be mentioned that the extradition of some Jews to the Nazis was done because Germany required it as a condition for grain deliveries.

In Finland, it was understood no later than 1942 that Germany would not win the war. This led to peace enquiries, during which Stalin was proposed to withdraw to the borders prior to the Winter War, which, of course, did not suit to the Generalissimo, who demanded the peace borders of the Winter War. This was not accepted, so Stalin agreed on future borders with other allies at the Tehran Conference in 1943, receiving in return permission to retain the Baltic states - that had previously "voluntarily" joined the Soviet Union - as his own after the war.

Thus, Finland's fate was left to weapons, and the solution proved to be the breaking of the front in the battles of June 9-10. After that, President Risto Ryti made his famous personal agreement with Hitler to receive military support, and the Commander-in-Chief transferred troops from Olonets Karelia, where the Soviet war machine was once again stopped - primarily due to the technically superior artillery fire of the Finns.

After this, a peace process was initiated as the Soviet Union needed its soldiers in the race to Berlin. Finland got its post-Winter War borders with Petsamo reduced and exchange of Hanko peninsula to the Porkkala peninsula closer to Helsinki. Additionally, Finland committed to clearing Lapland of German troops and paying heavy war reparations.

The war marked the end of the era of the first republic, often referred to as White Finland. During this time, the society that was extremely divided after the Civil War had gradually and especially during the Winter War, grown into a unified state, where the old aristocracy had been ousted and the working class had taken its place.

It was a world of peasants, businessmen, higher civil servants, and the intelligentsia, where even working-class families had dreams of social advancement by sending their children to study and thus pursue success in society. In other words, this was the foundation for poor Finland's development into one of the world's best places to live.

The original blog post in Finnish:
Suomen ensimmäisen tasavallan loppu

All the blog posts in this series:
History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?
History of Finland II: From a hinterland of the Union into a modern state
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history
History of Finland V: The pursuit of economic profit saved the country
History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility
History of Finland VII: The dictator of the era of Enlightenment promoted capitalist economy
History of Finland VIII: Joining of Finland to Russia led to an increase in crime
History of Finland IX: Enlightended dictator initiated economic growth
History of Finland X: The birth of Finnish identity
History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future

Victims of Russian leaders

According to the BBC, Russians are reportedly buying cheap apartments from Ukrainians in the captured city of Mariupol. However, the news does not specify who the sellers are.

Based on recent military events (example and another), it's evident that the city won't remain under Russian control for long, and the Ukrainian army will eventually take over, sooner or later. This means that those who have purchased property in Mariupol will inevitably lose their investments, sooner or later.

Both Ukrainians and even Russia's leadership, including Vladimir Putin, are aware of all of this. However, it seems that this information hasn't been conveyed to the Russian populace seeking inexpensive housing in prime locations.

The question arises whether this implies that the sellers are either the Russian government or the leadership of the Russian military, or individuals close to them. Thus, could this be the final cashing in for these entities before the ultimate downfall of their "special operation"? A scheme in which the victims are the misled citizens of their own country?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Should Putin´s regime be overthrown by supporting Russian opposition?
Russian standard of tanks
Incapable of learning but capable of genocide

Will Finland have the first openly homosexual president?

In Finland, a new president will be elected in the beginning of next year. One of the main candidates is Pekka Haavisto (Greens), who, while serving as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, even broke Finnish laws to bring terrorists from the Al-Hol camps to Finland.

It remains to be seen whether this fact will affect his success in the election. And if it does, then in which direction.

Haavisto has a strong support base among the political left and the sexual minorities. Thanks to this, he gained over 37 percent of the support in the 2012 presidential elections, in which the outgoing president Sauli Niinistö was elected as the head of state of Finland.

In the upcoming elections, Haavisto is currently the frontrunner, but it remains to be seen whether the situation changes once the election campaigns pick up pace. If he gets elected, he would become Finland's first openly homosexual head of state. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Veronmaksajan lasku on 20 000 euroa per islamisti + muut kulut (In Finnish, but readable by e.g. Google translator: The taxpayer's bill is 20,000 euros per Islamist + additional expenses)
Haaviston lain vastaisesti vaihtama virkamies otti vastuun terrorismista - mutta se kuuluu silti Marinin kabinetille (In Finnish, but readable by e.g. Google translator: The official changed by Haavisto against the law took responsibility for terrorism - yet it still falls under Marin's cabinet)

Are we going to allow ISIS women to ride on their children? 

History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion

This is the thirteenth part of a blog post series where I go through the most significant stages of Finnish history. In the twelfth post, I described how Finland gained democracy after its independence and the Civil War, characterized by an exceptionally strong executive power.

Like many other European countries, Finland also experienced attempts by the far right to seize power in the 1920s and 1930s. This movement emerged as a reaction to the active activities of communist groups supported by the Soviet Union that were channeled into trade unions and resulted in continuous strikes.

Initially, these strikes were attempted to be suppressed with strikebreakers, which were mainly collected from Southern Ostrobothnia. When this did not work, the right-wing became increasingly radicalized and formed the violent Lapua Movement, which targeted communists and those believed to be sympathetic to them.

Finnish right-wing radicalism was strongest in the region of South Ostrobothnia, as the region had traditionally adopted a more active attitude towards economic activity through tar burning and other pre-capitalist activities, but the landless population that generally created instability had left - inspired by the same activity - to seek their fortune in America. Thus, the population of South Ostrobothnia was wealthy and economically unusually equal.

As a result, the people who remained in the region adopted a more conservative attitude towards world events than the rest of the country. In the 1920s, this even took on some far-right characteristics: particularly Italian Benito Mussolini was admired.

However, there were only a few openly fascist people in South Ostrobothnia. In addition, the majority of the population remained on the side of legality, which had a decisive impact on later events in 1932.

The support for the far-right first rose all over Finland but turned quickly to decline after representatives of the Lapua Movement mistakenly abducted the former President Kaarlo Juho Ståhlberg and his wife on October 15, 1930. At the same time, the core of the far-right movement radicalized further, and in February-March 1932, they rebelled against the lawful authority in Mäntsälä, South Finland.

The rebellion was stopped by a speech by President Pehr Evind Svinhufvud, emphasizing the importance of legal proceedings for the whole nation, and the Lapua members, who attempted to recruit people from the countryside, failed to gather support in Mäntsälä. As a result, the entire movement was banned, and the Patriotic People's Movement, that emerged from its ruins never became a significant political force.

Thus, Finland returned to being a law-abiding and peaceful democracy, with the Social Democrats and the Agrarian League, who had distanced themselves from the far-left, being its guarantors. The Agrarian League's peasant supporters had already refused to join the far-right's bandwagon earlier. As a result, the grip of the far-left and the far-right, which had created successive pressures at the beginning of Finland's independence, loosened, and the country could be developed through peaceful politics towards a better future.

The original blog post in Finnish:
Äärioikeiston kapina

All the blog posts in this series:
History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?
History of Finland II: From a hinterland of the Union into a modern state
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history
History of Finland V: The pursuit of economic profit saved the country
History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility
History of Finland VII: The dictator of the era of Enlightenment promoted capitalist economy
History of Finland VIII: Joining of Finland to Russia led to an increase in crime
History of Finland IX: Enlightended dictator initiated economic growth
History of Finland X: The birth of Finnish identity
History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future