Military Superiority Does Not Guarantee Victory

Nobody cares if a dog bites a man. Consequently, such incidents are not reported in the news, and they certainly do not make headline stories.

It is a different matter if a man bites a dog. That is unexpected and therefore the kind of event that makes headlines.

* * *

This came to mind when virtually all major Finnish media outlets (example, another) reported that Iran's armed forces had succeeded in killing two and wounding four American soldiers. The last time Iran managed to kill an enemy combatant was last March, and over the course of the current war it has reportedly killed a total of fifteen American soldiers.

According to Wikipedia, the Iranians have meanwhile lost 1,221 soldiers. That means the cost of one American soldier amounts to roughly 81 Iranian soldiers. In other words, one American is worth more than eighty Persian Muslims.

This figure can be compared, for example, with the Winter War, during which about five Red Army soldiers were killed or wounded for every Finnish soldier lost. This suggests that the Americans have been about sixteen times more militarily effective against the Iranians this year than the Finns were against the Soviets during the Winter War.

* * *

The essential question, however, is this: if the Finns' fivefold superiority was enough to halt the Red Army's offensive, will the Americans' superiority—sixteen times greater than that achieved by the Finns in the Winter War, amounting to an overall advantage of more than eighty to one—be sufficient to defeat the Iranians?

At the moment, it does not appear so, although the Americans have naturally launched retaliatory strikes in response to these events.

Such strikes, however, do not win wars, nor do they apparently succeed in toppling governments. That would require the deployment of ground forces, which would also mean a substantial increase in American military casualties.

Even President Donald Trump is unlikely to be willing to take that step, as he too remembers the war in Afghanistan, in which 2,328 U.S. soldiers lost their lives. That conflict ended, under pressure from the home front, in the defeat of the Americans—and the Europeans who had supported them.

* * *

Based on the above, it is likely that Trump's war against the Iranians will end in a humiliating defeat for the United States. The greatest victims will be ordinary Iranians, who had hoped to see their government—one guided by medieval values—overthrown. And, of course, people around the world will also suffer if the Strait of Hormuz effectively becomes a trade route controlled by Iran, with transit requiring the payment of tariffs or tolls.

Another significant consequence is that Iranian resistance has demonstrated that American military power may be less formidable than previously believed. This is something that has undoubtedly been noticed in Beijing, which has its own strategic interests in East Asia. For that reason, Taiwan in particular—but Japan as well—has good reason to prepare for the growing assertiveness of Chinese imperial ambitions.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Who Really Rules Iran?
Trump’s War Without Strategy: Why Iran May Come Out Stronger
Escalating Threats—and a Touch of Irony

Ukraine: Putin's Waterloo, China's Opportunity—and Finland's Headache

Putin's three-day "special military operation" has left Russians in dire straits. For example, motorists can obtain fuel only after waiting in long queues, as Ukrainian strikes on the country's oil refineries have significantly reduced Russia's refining capacity. In addition, the war has exacted a staggering human toll in the form of dead and wounded soldiers—leading to speculation that Putin may even be considering a new round of mobilization.

Yet these may not be the most significant consequences of the "special military operation." According to an article published by the Wall Street Journal, China is seeking to turn Russia into something of a vassal state. This would mean a situation in which Russia becomes dependent on China, more closely integrated with it, and increasingly looks to China as a model and a source of modern thinking.

According to the article, the Chinese have therefore been cultivating contacts with Russians whom they believe could rise to positions of influence after Putin. At the same time, they have been slow to accommodate Putin's wishes and have, for example, demanded that any agreement to build the long-discussed gas pipeline from Siberia to China include provisions allowing them to purchase Russian gas at Russia's much lower domestic prices rather than at international market rates.

When one also considers the halt in Russia's military advance—and, in some areas, even its retreat—Ukraine is increasingly emerging as Putin's Waterloo. And China is unlikely to have any qualms about exploiting the situation to the fullest.

* * *

If, as now seems increasingly possible, Russia ends up becoming a Chinese vassal state as a consequence of its war, Finland should finally begin asking what this would mean for Russia's northwestern neighbor. Would growing Chinese influence increase or reduce the security threat that Moscow poses to Finland?

It is, of course, clear that once peace returns, trade across the eastern border is likely to become easier again. But will it resemble the trade that existed before the "special military operation"? Or will it acquire a distinctly Chinese dimension? And if so, would that be beneficial or detrimental to Finland?

I have not noticed experts, civil servants, or politicians giving these questions the attention they deserve. I therefore urge them to do so without delay, so that we can make the most of the opportunities that may emerge while avoiding the pitfalls that lie ahead.

After all, politics is ultimately the art of the possible, where successful anticipation is already half the battle. This has always been especially true of Finland's policy toward its eastern neighbor.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin's Endgame: Deception, Escalation, or Death?
Putin's Growing Crisis in Ukraine and an Uncertain Endgame for Russia
The Taiwan Question: A Conflict That Could Turn Nuclear

The Early Effects of Finland's Tightened Immigration Policy

Finnish immigration policy has led to an increase in sexual and violent crime. A recent example is 29-year-old Munir Suleyman Weyrah, whose sentence was reduced by the Court of Appeal to two years and ten months in prison after the District Court's ruling.

In addition, he was ordered to pay his victim €8,800 in compensation for emotional suffering. The amount is laughable considering that, after the assault, the victim has no longer been able to live in her own home.

Of course, the rape committed by Munir was only one case among many similar ones. Nor do I believe it will change the views of those Finns who have supported previous immigration policies any more than the large number of similar incidents that came before it.

As a result, Munir will undoubtedly have many who follow his example. And Finnish women will continue to "enjoy" forced sexual acts and the small compensation payments that follow from them.

* * *

This will happen despite the fact that Finland's current government has made many changes to immigration-related legislation. Moreover, previous mistakes in immigration policy have also been acknowledged in many other EU countries.

Unfortunately, those decisions are not yet reflected in the asylum statistics. During the past twelve months, the largest groups receiving positive asylum decisions have been 380 Somalis, 301 Afghans, and 140 Iraqis. These figures can be compared with the corresponding statistics from 2023, when the Orpo government took office: asylum was granted to 258 Afghans, 246 Somalis, and 174 Iraqis.

One positive development is that while Finland deported 120 Iraqis, 29 Somalis, and no Afghans in 2023, over the past 12 months deportation decisions have been issued for 214 Iraqis, 40 Somalis, and 26 Afghans. Admittedly, the numbers of deported Somalis and Afghans remain well below the numbers granted asylum, but in the case of Iraqis, the trend has reversed.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Sensible Immigration or Moral Posturing?
Swedish Ministers Condemn Antisemitic Protest Outside Jewish School
Attempted Homicides in Finland Reach Highest Level of the 2000s

Who Really Rules Iran?

The Finnish Broadcasting company Yle has closely followed the funeral of Iran’s dictator, Ali Khamenei. At the same time, it has reported that the new Ayatollah, Mojtaba Khamenei, did not appear at the funeral and has not been seen in public even once.

Messages purportedly issued by Khamenei have, however, been read out in Iran before. In addition, the United States and Israel are said to possess intelligence suggesting that Mojtaba is still alive.

That may, of course, be true—or it may not. What is clear, however, is that a head of state hiding like a rat cannot truly be the one exercising power—not even in Iran. If he remains in hiding, someone else must be wielding authority in his place: someone who does not want their own name mentioned publicly and instead issues orders in Mojtaba’s name.

If, on the other hand, Mojtaba has in fact died, it would be entirely understandable that the real holder of power would not want their own name splashed across the headlines. It would instead be far more advantageous for them to claim that Mojtaba is alive and governing the country from a secret bunker, much like Adolf Hitler was said to be doing in 1945.

* * *

I readily admit that what I have written above contains elements of a conspiracy theory. Time will tell whether Mojtaba returns as Iran’s visible religious leader and head of state once peace finally returns.

For my part, to borrow the late ski jumper Matti Nykänen’s famous expression, I would put the odds at no better than “fifty-sixty.”

Before that, it remains to be seen whether Donald Trump can ultimately disengage from Iran without being seen as having suffered a humiliating defeat.

At the moment, however, it appears that Iran has no intention of giving up either its enriched uranium or its Islamist system of government. Even restoring freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz seems unlikely.

* * *

Since I began with a conspiracy theory, it is perhaps only fitting to end with a dose of hindsight.

Trump and the United States would not be in their current predicament if the U.S. military had continued its extraordinarily successful offensive against Iran in the summer of 2025.

Trump, however, chose not to let it do so. Instead, he halted the offensive, giving Iran time to recover and learn from the experience—which it did. The result was a significant improvement in Iran’s military capabilities and the stalemate now taking shape, in which the Americans can hope, at best, to restore the situation that existed before the offensive began—and perhaps not even that.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Trump’s War Without Strategy: Why Iran May Come Out Stronger
Escalating Threats—and a Touch of Irony
Finnish Ex-Military Chief: U.S. Likely Halted Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program

Putin's Endgame: Deception, Escalation, or Death?

According to Finnish media, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters yesterday evening that Russia had completely captured the Ukrainian city of Kostiantynivka. Meanwhile, the U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW) disputed the claim, stating that while Russian forces have made tactical gains in Kostiantynivka, "the majority of the Russian presence in the town consists of small infiltration groups scattered among Ukrainian positions."

ISW argued that Peskov's exaggerated statements were intended to shape Western media coverage of the war over the weekend, when the United States is celebrating its 250th anniversary. It therefore remains to be seen whether Russia's so-called "special military operation" has genuinely advanced or whether the claims about capturing Kostiantynivka are simply another example of Kremlin propaganda.

* * *

Columnist Lauri Nurmi, for his part, speculated that Vladimir Putin could ultimately meet the same fate as Nicolae Ceaușescu. In doing so, he echoed a point I made some time ago when I argued that Putin would have no political future if Russia were to return from Ukraine having suffered defeat.

Admittedly, it is difficult to follow developments in the war in Ukraine—as the Kostiantynivka case illustrates—because both sides are accompanied by actors spreading disinformation. This is particularly true on social media, where anyone can publish virtually anything.

In any event, it has long been evident that Putin's three-day "special military operation" has fared no better than Stalin's Red Army's planned "two-week march to Helsinki" in 1939. For that reason, it is possible—perhaps even likely—that Putin will eventually have to announce at least a partial mobilization.

The consequences can only be guessed. What is certain, however, is that if compulsory mobilization is implemented, many more Russian families will lose sons, husbands, and fathers. It is difficult to imagine that those affected would thank their country's leader. At the very least, many of them might privately entertain thoughts similar to those expressed by Nurmi—or by myself.

* * *

This may also help explain why the Russian dictator has reportedly been pressuring his Belarusian counterpart to join the war. Such a move could serve two purposes at once: perhaps fewer Russians would be killed in combat, while Ukraine's military position would become more difficult as the front line expanded.

On the other hand, President Alyaksandr Lukashenka undoubtedly understands that Ukrainians would not simply surrender. They would resist with everything they have, increasing the number of Belarusian families mourning fallen relatives.

That, in turn, would heighten the risk of a coup—or at least serious unrest—in a country where dissatisfaction with his rule has existed for years. For that reason, he is likely to continue accommodating Putin in almost every respect except one: sending Belarusian troops across the southern border into Ukraine.

If Putin ultimately succeeds in forcing Belarus into the war, Europe would face a serious test. Would we merely express outrage, or would we take concrete action? Something more substantial than words and continued deliveries of material assistance to Ukraine?

* * *

Adding to these concerns are speculations that the Russian military could launch a strike against Poland via Belarus or Kaliningrad, disguising it as an "accidental" incident. Such scenarios make the overall situation appear even more serious and Europe's security environment increasingly precarious.

The most troubling question is that we do not know how nuclear-armed Russia would respond if it continued to struggle in conventional warfare. Could it resort to its most powerful weapons if its position in Ukraine deteriorated further and Belarus refused to intervene on its behalf?

And what if Polish forces were to destroy a Russian unit that had crossed the border under the guise of a "mistake"? How would Russia respond? And how would Western leaders react?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin's Growing Crisis in Ukraine and an Uncertain Endgame for Russia
Russia's Predicament Awakened the Trolls and Increased the Risk of Nuclear War
Can Ukraine Create Its Own “Winter War Miracle”?

Rain Scald: The Future of a New Sexually Transmitted Disease

The Finnish public broadcaster Yle has reported that a new sexually transmitted infection has begun spreading in Europe. In fact, the disease is one that has long been known to affect horses and cattle: rain scald (also known as dermatophilosis). Previously, it had occurred mainly in people who worked closely with these animals, but it has now started to spread to others as well.

The disease is caused by bacteria and produces scaly skin lesions, raised bumps, and pus-filled blisters on various parts of the body. So far, however, it has responded well to antibiotic treatment, and the situation remains under control.

The infection has not been spreading among people engaging in conventional sexual activity. Rather, according to Yle's report, it "is currently found mainly among men who have visited gay saunas in France, Spain, Germany, and Sweden. Transmission has occurred through sexual contact or other forms of close skin-to-skin contact."

* * *

It remains to be seen whether this emerging disease will develop into a genuine epidemic or remain a passing curiosity. In this regard, bisexual men are likely to play a key role, as they could enable the bacterium to cross the gender barrier from gay men to heterosexual women.

If rain scald does begin to spread more widely, another important question will be whether the pathogen starts adapting to humans. In other words, will genetic changes be selected in bacterial strains that circulate between people, making transmission during sexual contact more efficient than it is today?

Should that happen, the next likely development would be the evolution of antibiotic resistance. As a result, treating the disease would become more difficult than it is at present.

For now, we can only wait and see what the future brings. At present, the only certainty is that abstaining from sex, or having sex exclusively with one faithful partner—and, apparently, also using a physical barrier such as a condom—prevents infection.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finland's COVID-19 policy saved approximately 2,600 people from death
A factory of five billion mosquitoes
Evolution in action

Putin's Growing Crisis in Ukraine and an Uncertain Endgame for Russia

The European Union has finally awakened to the fact that many Ukrainian men are using its refugee policy as a means of avoiding military service. For this reason, the Commission has proposed—according to the Finnish media—that Ukrainian men of military age should no longer be granted temporary protection in the EU.

One can only hope that the proposal will be processed by the EU's bureaucratic apparatus more quickly than, for example, the proposal to abolish changing the clocks. As a result, Ukraine's manpower shortage could be alleviated at a time when the military situation is otherwise turning so favorable for the Ukrainians that even Russian soldiers reportedly admit they are exhausted and wish to warn Putin of a possible "major catastrophe" ahead.

* * *

The emergence of Russian soldiers speaking out, along with the reactions of Crimeans to Ukrainian successes, suggests that the Moscow government has kept its citizens in an information blackout regarding the problems facing the "special military operation." This brings to mind the year 1940, when Finnish censorship ensured that the public had an overly optimistic view of the situation in the Winter War, and as a result, people experienced the outcome of the war as even more unjust than it actually was.

The same problem now confronts Vladimir Putin and his administration. It is genuinely difficult for them to explain to their subjects why the Ukrainians are capable of destroying Russian infrastructure to such an extent that ordinary people no longer even have fuel for their cars.

If and when a rebellious spirit continues to spread among Russian soldiers, the government will face an acute crisis that will further undermine the operational capabilities of the country's military, and consequently weaken its military performance even beyond its current state.

* * *

All of this could have a truly dramatic impact on the ability of Putin's administration to function. At the moment, it seems to be protected by little more than the absence of a credible opposition—a factor that also makes Russia's future difficult to predict.

Consequently, the final outcome of Putin's special military operation could be anything from a palace coup to complete anarchy and even the disintegration of the Russian state. Of course, the first of these scenarios is the most likely, but then again, hardly anyone at the beginning of 1917 predicted that the Bolsheviks would overthrow and murder the Russian Tsar and his family.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Peace in Ukraine Would Be a Risk to Putin
Russia's Predicament Awakened the Trolls and Increased the Risk of Nuclear War
Russia’s Spring Offensive: Gains Unclear, Losses Undeniable

Does Andy Burnham Stand a Chance of Success?

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer resigned yesterday. Various forms of dissatisfaction with him lay behind the decision, but the fundamental problem was likely the collapse in support for the Labour Party. Nor does it help that, at the same time, Reform UK, which has drawn much of its support from concerns over immigration, has become the country's most popular political movement.

Western media outlets (including the BBC, CNN, MTV3 and Yleisradio) have cited a number of reasons for Starmer's resignation, including the rising cost of living for pensioners, plans to cut benefits paid to disabled people, his acceptance of gifts and freebies, Labour's poor performance in recent local elections, the emergence of a credible rival from within his own party, the country's growing debt burden, sluggish economic growth, his intention to appoint Peter Mandelson despite the latter's association with the Epstein scandal, broader structural issues related to healthcare and housing reform, and his lack of charisma as a politician.

It therefore remains to be seen how British politics will develop under a new prime minister. Will the next prime minister – most likely Labour's Andy Burnham – succeed in reviving his party's popularity, or will he go down in history as the last prime minister of an old establishment party?

* * *

According to Wikipedia, Burnham described himself as a socialist in 2010 and emphasised a philosophy he called aspirational socialism, characterised by redistribution, collectivism and internationalism.

Burnham strongly opposes nationalism, which he has described as "an ugly form of politics". As Mayor of Greater Manchester, however, Burnham has pledged to be "tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime".

Politically, Burnham currently places himself – again according to Wikipedia – on the moderate left of the Labour Party. This view is also reflected in several media outlets, including the Financial Times, New Statesman and LabourList.

For my part, I believe that the key to Burnham's success lies in resolving the problems related to immigration and immigrants in the island nation. If he fails to do so, his career at the pinnacle of British politics is also likely to be rather short-lived.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is the EU a Real Player in World Politics—or Just a Paper Tiger?
Just Another Case of Multiculturality in Manchester, UK
When Diversity Beats Doctors: Three UK Healthcare Realities to Make Stalin Envious

Russia's Predicament Awakened the Trolls and Increased the Risk of Nuclear War

Russia has found itself increasingly cornered in its three-day special military operation in recent days. Perhaps the most striking example of this is the destruction of oil industry facilities in the Moscow region—caused primarily by Ukrainian drones, but apparently also by Russian air defense systems themselves.

At the same time, the Ukrainians have extended their attacks as far as the Tyumen oil refinery, located some 2,500 kilometers away. Nor does the plight of the Crimean Peninsula, due to the vulnerability of its supply lines, make President Vladimir Putin's position any easier.

* * *

All of this has led to a counteroffensive by Russian trolls on social media. The strikes on Moscow are claimed to be a hoax, there are assertions that Russia is preparing a new offensive in Ukraine, and there are even threats of nuclear war being triggered by the destruction of the oil industry.

In fact, the outbreak of nuclear war as a consequence of Russia's deteriorating fortunes in the war may be a real threat if Vladimir Putin fears that his position could be endangered by a military defeat. From his perspective, defeat could mean being overthrown or even losing his life.

For this reason, it would be important for Western countries—and especially the United States—to state unequivocally that the use of a Russian nuclear weapon would, under any circumstances, cross the threshold for retaliation directed at wherever intelligence indicates Putin happens to be residing at the time. Hopefully, the fear resulting from such a declaration would be sufficient in all circumstances to keep Russian nuclear weapons on their launch platforms.

* * *

At the same time, it should be emphasized to Russia's dictator that he still has the opportunity to make peace. All that would be required is the withdrawal of his forces from Ukraine and the payment of compensation for the destruction caused by his special military operation.

And that Putin still possesses at least a small measure of common sense. On the other hand, it may be—as I wrote above—that Putin no longer has a future if Russia returns from Ukraine defeated. He is undoubtedly aware of the historical precedent of Russia's defeat in the First World War, which led to the murder of Tsar Nicholas II and his family.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Can Ukraine Create Its Own “Winter War Miracle”?
The Ukrainian Lioness Will Defeat Vladimir Putin’s Army
Russia’s Shadow Fleet Exposes Gaps in International Law

Who Is Interested in the Rights of Nigerien Homosexuals?

According to a recent news report, Niger, located in West Africa, has criminalized same-sex relationships. As a result, people who engage in homosexual activity can be sentenced to up to ten years in prison and fined.

In addition, the law states that attempting to engage in "LGBTQ acts" may be punished in the same way. And that is not all: participating in the activities of organizations representing sexual and gender minorities can also result in an equally severe punishment.

* * *

The reason given for the new law is that same-sex relationships are not in line with the country's social and cultural values. It remains to be seen, therefore, how various European organizations and civil society activists will react to Niger's values and culture.

Will we see rainbow activists demonstrating in the streets of Helsinki, Stockholm, Berlin, or Paris in support of homosexual people in Niger? Will European politicians condemn the actions of Niger's government? Or will Nigeriens themselves rise up against the country's military regime as a result of the decision?

* * *

Personally, I believe that the plight of homosexual people in Niger is of little real interest to Europeans. Neither politicians nor rainbow activists are likely to be motivated to protest over the issue.

For my part, I maintain that a person's sexuality is a private matter and should concern no one other than the individuals involved, provided that it does not involve violence, coercion, or exploitation. This principle applies equally in the European Union and in Niger, and for that reason I wish to express my disapproval of the actions of the country's military government.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
When Free Speech Is Prosecuted: Päivi Räsänen’s Case Explained for Americans
Gender identity and the future of Finnishness
Library Scrubs Queer Creator’s Character from Moomin Exhibit

Can Ukraine Create Its Own “Winter War Miracle”?

Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. As we all know, its success has not been what President Vladimir Putin and his generals had hoped for.

Finnish news media MTV3 published a news report according to which the intelligence service GCHQ has estimated that nearly half a million Russian soldiers have died in Ukraine during the past four-plus years, or roughly 50 months. This means that the Russians have lost an average of nearly 9,800 soldiers per month.

* * *

In Finland, the miracle of the Winter War is still remembered. That war lasted about 3.5 months, and therefore it is interesting to compare Russian losses in Ukraine with the casualties suffered by the Red Army during the winter of 1939–40.

According to Russian sources cited by Wikipedia, either 126,875 or 167,976 Red Army soldiers were killed or went missing during that conflict. These figures amount to approximately 36,000 or 48,000 killed or missing per month.

From this, one may conclude that the Finns who resolutely defended themselves during the Winter War were about 3.6 or 4.8 times more effective than present-day Ukrainians in their fight against an invasion directed from Moscow. This is despite the fact that Ukrainians in the current war have killed roughly 2.5 times as many Russian soldiers as they themselves have lost.

* * *

Of course, my text above may be criticized on the grounds that the Winter War was exceptional in rallying almost all Finns unanimously to defend our country. Therefore, it is useful to calculate the same comparison figures for the Continuation War, that is, the years 1941–44.

According to Wikipedia, during those 39 months approximately 63,204 Finnish soldiers and 201,000 Russian soldiers were killed. After doing the calculations, we see that the Finns managed to kill “only” a little over 5,000 Red Army soldiers per month. The explanation is probably the long trench warfare phase associated with that war, during which the fighting consisted mainly of minor skirmishes.

* * *

Therefore, it is also useful to calculate comparison figures for present-day Ukrainians as well as for the Finns of the Winter War and the Continuation War by dividing the scale of their own losses by the number of dead Russian/Red Army soldiers. For this, we first need the figures for their own casualties: according to Wikipedia articles, these were just under 200,000 in Ukraine, about 26,000 in the Winter War, and slightly over 63,000 in the Continuation War.

When we divide the Muscovites’ casualty figures by those of the Ukrainians or Finns, we arrive at the following comparison ratios. In the war in Ukraine, about 2.5 Russians have died for every fallen Ukrainian. In the Winter War, by contrast, about 5–6.5 Red Army soldiers were killed or went missing for every dead Finn, while in the Continuation War the figure was about 3.2.

* * *

From these figures we can see that the Winter War differs fundamentally from the other two wars under discussion. This suggests that the spirit of the Winter War not only encouraged Finnish soldiers to engage in determined resistance, but also significantly increased their effectiveness compared with the less motivated Finnish army of the Continuation War.

Therefore, it is worth asking — assuming that Russians and Ukrainians are, as fighters, roughly equal to begin with — whether the substantially higher casualties suffered by Putin’s army in the current war can be explained by the low motivation level of its soldiers. And is this phenomenon creating a Ukrainian equivalent of the spirit and miracle of the Winter War: a “spirit of the special military operation” and a “miracle of the special military operation”?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Russia’s Spring Offensive: Gains Unclear, Losses Undeniable
Concern About the Future Is Growing in Russia
The Outbreak of the Continuation War Between Finland and the Soviet Union

Taiwan Can Wait: China’s Bigger Strategic Game

According to the New York Times Iran has agreed to give up its enriched uranium. However, CNN has stated that "Iran has agreed that the same number of ships will pass through the strait in the future as before the war. But that absolutely does not mean that the Strait of Hormuz will reopen in the same way it was before the war."

As a result of these concessions, the war between the USA and Iran would apparently be coming to an end, which would be excellent news for world peace. At the same time, however, it would be an outrageous development especially for Iranian women — but also for ordinary people and young people — who would remain under the rule of a fanatical Muslim regime.

* * *

If the information outlined above is true, it is also clear that there is particular reason for satisfaction in Israel, as the existential nuclear threat posed by Iran would be disappearing. For Americans, meanwhile, what remains is the realization that their military capability was not, after all, what they — and the entire world — had imagined it to be.

This is likely to lead to major changes within the U.S. military in order to remedy the situation, while at the same time opening an opportunity for China to seriously consider advancing its position regarding Taiwan. And in the opinion of many, it may even be surprising that this has not already happened.

* * *

There may of course be many reasons for this, but in my own opinion the most serious possibility is that Xi Jinping may not even intend to resolve the Taiwan question militarily. Conquering the island of Formosa would of course be a historic victory, but at the same time an enormous risk for the Chinese leadership — especially since America’s inability to overthrow the Iranian regime has provided a cautionary example. As has Putin’s army becoming bogged down on the plains of Ukraine.

For this reason, I believe Xi is currently focusing, instead of war, on subordinating Russia into becoming China’s economic vassal and above all a reserve of raw materials. Success in this would provide the Chinese communist leadership with long-term benefits and the opportunity to maintain sustainable economic growth despite the country’s demographic structure becoming more challenging year by year.

* * *

According to the Bank of Finland, China’s population has in recent years begun to decline, and the birth rate has fallen even below the level seen during the country’s one-child policy era: today only about one child is born per woman, which is significantly lower than, for example, in Finland. At the same time, the number of elderly people is growing rapidly.

For this reason, it would be sheer madness to embark on a campaign to conquer Taiwan, where large numbers of young soldiers would certainly die. This despite the fact that China’s expertise in robotics would undoubtedly enable a form of technological warfare similar to that practiced by Ukrainians against the Russian forces that invaded their homeland.

* * *

A war of conquest would also involve an enormous risk that at least part of the Chinese population would turn against Xi’s regime. Therefore, from his perspective, it makes far more sense to secure his own position by focusing on a more constructive foreign policy both in Russia and elsewhere in the world.

In much the same way that the Chinese have turned many African countries into a kind of colony from which China imports materials essential to modern industry — cobalt, lithium, aluminum, copper, rare earth elements, as well as crude oil and agricultural products. At the same time, it exports Chinese weapons and electronics there and builds infrastructure.

* * *

The situation I have described above is simply too favorable for the Chinese — and especially for the country’s autocratic leader — while the examples of the USA and Russia described at the beginning of this article are terrifying enough that China’s leadership is unlikely to embark on an adventure in Taiwan right now.

At the same time, however, it should be noted that if Xi’s — or future communist leaders’ — position were to weaken significantly, the Taiwan issue would certainly emerge as one possible means of reversing such a development: throughout history, wars of aggression have often served as a way for unpopular governments to rally public support through the patriotic fervor created by war.

For the time being, however, this is not the case, and Xi can instead exploit the opportunities created by the failures experienced by Americans and Russians in Iran and Ukraine. And thereby increase — or at least maintain — his own popularity.”

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Taiwan Question: A Conflict That Could Turn Nuclear
What’s Next, Iran?
Venezuela, Antonio Guterres and the Nature of Great Powers

A Brave New World Will Be Born from Today’s Fertility

A recent article discussed changes in the world’s demographic structure. According to it, global population growth is becoming increasingly concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa and parts of South Asia. For example, the fertility rates in the already highly populous countries of Pakistan, Nigeria, and Ethiopia are 3.50, 4.30, and 3.81 respectively.

Even more striking figures can be found in Chad, Somalia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In those countries, women give birth to an average of 5.94, 5.91, and 5.90 children respectively. At the opposite extreme are Macao, Hong Kong, and South Korea, with fertility rates of 0.69, 0.74, and 0.75.

In Finland, the fertility rate was 1.3 children per woman in 2025. Across the entire European Union, the average was 1.34 in 2024, and in North America last year it was 1.59.

In practice, this means that in the world of the future, people will predominantly have genetic and cultural roots in developing countries — above all African ones, but also Asian peoples belonging to the Islamic cultural sphere, as illustrated by the Wikipedia map below.

* * *

The future scenario I have outlined above actually came to mind while I was reading a column by a journalist from Finland’s largest newspaper about the civil war in Sudan. In it, Europeans were criticized for not caring about the Sudanese civil war and its victims.

According to Mykkänen, the Deputy Executive Director of the World Food Programme (WFP), Rania Dagash-Kamara, had spoken at an event held in the Finnish Parliament’s “Little Parliament” building about rapes committed against civilians in Sudan. These acts are carried out by armed men from the various sides in the conflict, and no one seems interested in protecting the victims from sexual violence.

After the event, Member of Parliament Eva Biaudet (Swedish People’s Party) reportedly showed a UNICEF report according to which rape has become a systematically used weapon of war. And it does not affect only women — one third of the victims are boys.

In addition, sixteen of the raped children were under the age of five. Four of them were only one year old.

I repeat: only one year old. In practice, babies! What kind of person rapes babies?

* * *

Based on all this, I was left wondering what kind of world we may have in one or two hundred years’ time — taking into account what I said at the beginning of this text about the genetic and cultural roots of future humanity.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Deep Roots of Violence and Disregard for Human Dignity in History
Can Peace Emerge from Horrific War Crimes?
How to Increase Fertility Rates: A Finnish Solution

The Socially Liberal Left and the Palestinians

I have understood that the Palestinians are particularly favored in the foreign policy views of the socially liberal left because they do not have a state of their own. This would, of course, be an acceptable reason, were it not for the fact that the decision against the creation of an independent Palestinian state was made by the Palestinian leadership itself — twice, in fact.

I have also been under the impression that the socially liberal left especially supports various sexual minorities and the cause of peace. What I have not understood, however, is how the minds of left-leaning people work in such a way that all their different views somehow form a coherent worldview.

This came to mind as I was reading Finnish MTV3 and Ilta-Sanomat articles about a recent report concerning the actions of Palestinian militants on October 7, 2023. According to them, the brutal sexual violence seen in the attack was not random but intentional and coordinated.

* * *

According to the report, the Palestinians used as many as thirteen forms of violence, including rape and gang rape, sexual torture and mutilation, forced nudity, killings involving sexual violence, post-mortem sexual violence, and sexual violence committed in front of family members. Nor was any of this unpleasant for the perpetrators; on the contrary, they openly took pleasure in their actions.

Of course, Palestinian militants also killed Jews without sexual violence. In total, around 1,200 people were killed, and they also took 251 hostages.

* * *

One might imagine that socially liberal leftists, who in their rhetoric support sexual diversity and peace, would condemn behavior of the kind described above and at the very least criticize the people who carried it out. However, this has not happened; instead, the Palestinians’ “achievement” has been openly celebrated in these circles even after the details of the events of October 7 became public knowledge.

This was also the case in Finland during the 2024 Pride parade, which drew as many as 100,000 participants — undoubtedly mostly people who support the socially liberal left. Nor were Palestinian support and flags absent there last year either.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Most Finnish Journalism Students Lean Toward the Ultra-Liberal Far Left
Understanding of European Terrorism by Left-wing and Value-liberal Politicians
Gambling Addiction and the Shadowy Instigator

The Ukrainian Lioness Will Defeat Vladimir Putin’s Army

Happy Finnish Mother’s Day to all mothers!

People say that mothers fight for their children like lionesses. In the same way, the Ukrainians have acted by stretching Vladimir Putin’s three-day “special military operation” into a war that has now lasted for more than four years.

As a result, the Russian army had to settle for a rather modest Victory Day parade yesterday. Unlike in previous years, there were no missiles on display — nor even the T-34 tank designed in the 1930s, which was still present in 2023. Perhaps the last of those is already on its way to Ukraine as well?

* * *

In one respect, however, Vladimir Putin may well be right. In his speech, he stated that the war “is moving toward its conclusion, but it nevertheless remains a serious matter.”

Unfortunately for Putin, the war has reached its culmination point, and his army’s offensive has stalled much like Hitler’s forces at Stalingrad in 1942. Nor does the future appear any brighter for him, because Ukrainian technical ingenuity is set to reverse the course of the war: new drones and missiles are already pounding Russia’s arms and oil industries, while armed robots have begun supporting — and when necessary even replacing — Ukrainian soldiers on the battlefield.

* * *

Many Russians who have supported Putin up to this point have noticed this as well. But for now, fear of failure has reportedly prevented a coup.

This too is familiar from Hitler’s Germany, where the Austrian corporal remained in power so long that he ultimately chose to end his own life. By then, the Red Army had already reached Berlin, meaning Germany’s defeat in the war had been obvious for quite some time.

Putin’s advantage, of course, is that he ultimately has nuclear missiles at his disposal, and fear of them undoubtedly prevents the Ukrainians from attempting to conquer Russian territory. Thus, he cannot end up in a situation similar to Adolf Hitler’s in 1945 — even though such an outcome would undoubtedly be viewed by many as roughly equally positive for humanity as a whole.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Escalating Threats—and a Touch of Irony
Russia’s Spring Offensive: Gains Unclear, Losses Undeniable
Concern About the Future Is Growing in Russia

Neanderthals Mated with Denisovans, Exceeded Modern Human Diversity

Neanderthals and Denisovans were prehistoric humans who interbred to some extent also with members of the human lineage that led to modern humans. In this context, an international research team – Diyendo Massilani and colleagues – has now published the entire genome extracted from DNA isolated from a Neanderthal fossil that lived about 110,000 years ago. This is the first male genome determined from this species.

The Neanderthal man in question had died in Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains, the same location where Denisovans also lived at times. According to the research group’s results, the man belonged to a human group that was more closely related to another Neanderthal found in the same cave, who had lived about 10,000 years earlier, than to his counterparts in Europe or to a Neanderthal from another cave in the Altai Mountains who lived about 80,000 years ago.

The genomes of both Neanderthals from Denisova Cave that have now been sequenced contained genes originating from Denisovans, indicating that the species interbred with each other at least in the Altai region more than 100,000 years ago. This was surprising, because later Neanderthals from the Altai region or from Western Europe show no evidence of such interbreeding.

Based on DNA – specifically the extent of homozygous chromosomal regions – it was also possible to conclude that Neanderthals living in the Altai region 120,000–80,000 years ago lived in smaller and more isolated groups than later European Neanderthals (54,000–40,000 years ago). In addition, the researchers observed that the genome sequences of Neanderthals belonging to these populations differed from each other more than the genomes of the most genetically distant modern human populations (the Mbuti of Central Africa and the Highland Papuans of New Guinea).

* * *

The study I have briefly described above is unlikely to be directly applicable for commercial purposes. Instead, it satisfies our curiosity and fulfills our need for knowledge: the opening up of the ancient world is undeniably fascinating.

Perhaps even more important than curiosity and the desire for knowledge, however, is that as science advances, humanity’s awareness of itself and of the world increases. And over time, this influences the way we see ourselves and the world we live in.

It is, of course, true that this perspective does not affect all people in the world equally: there is a significant difference, for example, in how the Taliban in Afghanistan and secularized Europeans perceive the world. Whereas the former are guided by the writings of a prophet and war leader who lived in the 7th century, the latter make their everyday decisions based on modern scientific knowledge—though usually without explicitly realizing it.

The contribution of paleogenomics—the field represented by the study described above—may not be decisive in this broader picture, but it is not negligible either. Awareness of the lives of our ancient relatives in small, isolated populations, their interbreeding with each other—and with our ancestors—and the extinction of those lineages provides important context for understanding present-day humanity and its peoples.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Surprising Story of Europe’s Hippos
The Historical Merging of Human Groups
American black population more vulnerable to the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2

Vandals of Tampere’s Mannerheim Statue Reveal Their Ignorance

In Tampere, Finland, a statue of Marshal Carl Gustaf Mannerheim—who led the White forces in the Finnish Civil War of 1918 and served as Commander-in-Chief of the Finnish Army during World War II—was erected in 1956. The statue was created by Evert Porila before the Winter War and placed at a location from which Mannerheim himself observed the decisive battles of the Red uprising in 1918. The statue and its surroundings are impressive, and the historical insight behind its placement is excellent. I recommend visiting it to everyone traveling in Finland, as well as to our own citizens.

Iltalehti reported that this statue had—apparently two nights ago—been vandalized with red paint. Writings had been scrawled on the base and side of the statue, which shows poor judgment ability.

* * *

For these vandals, it would be instructive to watch the film “The Eternal Road” (Ikitie), available on the Finnish Broadcasting Company’s Areena service. The film, directed by Antti-Jussi Annala and based on a novel by Antti Tuuri, might help them understand the kind of fate from which the victory of Mannerheim’s White Army spared their grandparents and their ancestors. A “Red Finland” would most likely have been annexed to the Soviet Union, much like Ukraine, which went on to suffer the horrors of the Holodomor.

* * *

Still, every cloud has a silver lining. The Red uprising led to the development of a very strong executive branch within Finland’s democracy—something highly exceptional compared to other European states that gained independence after World War I.

Thanks to its strong executive power, Finland remained a democracy while many other post–World War I democracies—where parliamentary power was emphasized—drifted into right-wing dictatorships. Things were different here under the North Star: communists were banned, and the far-right Lapua Movement remained a historical curiosity.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Politics in Brigitte Bardot’s Obituary on Finland’s Public Broadcaster Yle
Demonstration Demonstrated the Selfishness of the Demonstrators
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war

Trump’s War Without Strategy: Why Iran May Come Out Stronger

I wrote in yesterday’s text that the expansion of Charlemagne’s empire "was possible because Charles was constantly at war and gave his enemies no time to recover." This came to my mind this morning when I read in the newspaper that the negotiations between Donald Trump and Iran’s leadership had come to nothing, because representatives of the latter had left the negotiation site.

However, the Americans had already received a new negotiation proposal, in which, according to Trump, Iran had "offered a lot, but not yet enough." Nor had he yet considered continuing the war.

In my view, this is foolish, because Iran’s tactics seem as if they were designed based on the history of Charlemagne’s empire. As a result—if and when it has survived the initial attack by the United States and Israel—the aim is to prolong the ongoing peace process in order to improve and develop its own military capability.

* * *

Iran’s leadership is undoubtedly encouraged by the fact that although their army was hardly able to defend itself during last summer’s attack by the USA and Israel, it has during the current military operations been able to cause considerable destruction—especially in countries allied with the USA, but also to the U.S. Air Force. This shows that Iran’s Islamist leadership has the ability to enhance the combat capability of its own army and to survive the current attack, if given the opportunity.

It therefore remains to be seen what the final outcome of the war will be. Will it turn out to be the strengthening of Islamist Iran, rather than the rise of a more moderate government or even a democracy?

* * *

That is why it has been sad to observe that Donald Trump clearly does not know world history and its lessons, but embarked on the war recklessly, without preparing for it to become bogged down in the way now seen. If this is the case, the greatest sufferers will be Iranian women, who will be subjected even more tightly to a medieval hell and killed if necessary.

But Iranians will not be the only ones to suffer; global security will also be among the losers. Iran has, after all, been known as the most significant driving force behind Islamic terrorism.

And there is no reason to doubt that it would continue on that path—indeed even more determinedly—if the political leadership of the United States and/or its military proves incapable of carrying its attack through to completion. In other words, the outcome of the war will be exactly what it currently appears to be.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Escalating Threats—and a Touch of Irony
Iran – The End of Theocracy or the Beginning of Civil War?
Donald J. Trump 

The Forgotten Empire That Shaped Modern Europe

I would assume that most people have at least some idea of Ancient Egypt, the Roman Empire, the Arab Caliphates, the British Empire, or Russia/the Soviet Union and their influence on the course of history. However, I suspect that not many are particularly familiar with the medieval Frankish Empire—let alone its significance for modern Europe.

The story of this realm truly begins in the early 8th century, when the Merovingian kings who ruled the Frankish kingdom began to lose their power to local leaders. One such figure was Charles Martel, whose son Pepin the Short inherited his position.

* * *

Pepin was not satisfied with merely holding actual power; he also wanted formal recognition in the form of a royal crown. Being a clever man, he turned to the Pope and asked: “Who is the true king—the one who has the title or the one who holds the power?” The Pope replied that the one who holds real power is the true king.

After this, Pepin deposed the last Merovingian king—who was sent to a monastery—and had himself crowned King of the Franks in 751. The new Pope Stephen II crowned him again in 754, granting him holy anointing, which made his rule religiously legitimate. At the same time, the idea began to develop that a king’s authority comes from God.

* * *

The coronation strengthened the alliance between the Pope and Pepin, which became concrete when the Lombards in Italy threatened Rome, the center of the Church. The Pope had no army of his own, so he made an agreement with Pepin, who would protect him militarily.

In return, the Holy See committed itself to supporting Pepin’s kingship. Pepin therefore invaded and defeated the Lombards and donated the territories he conquered from them to the Pope. Thus, the Papal States were established in central Italy under papal rule.

Pepin also cooperated closely with the Church in other ways: he supported monasteries, strengthened its position, and reformed religious administration. In addition, he waged wars in Aquitaine (modern southwestern France) against rebellious dukes and against Muslims in Umayyad-held territories, capturing, among other places, Narbonne in 759.

* * *

All of this laid the foundation for the future Carolingian great power, even though Pepin divided the kingdom between his sons Charles and Carloman. After the latter died in 771, Charles became the sole King of the Franks, and the wars of conquest began.

First, Charles—now widely known by the epithet “the Great”or "Charlemagne"—launched a war against the Saxons in 772. This was a long and brutal struggle in what is now Germany, motivated both by Charles’s desire to subjugate the Saxons and to spread Christianity. It also included the infamous Massacre of Verden (782), in which thousands of Saxons were executed.

The Lombard kingdom fell in 774 after Charles invaded northern Italy. He captured the capital, Pavia, and assumed the title King of the Lombards. Thus, his realm extended southward close to Rome.

* * *

Charles also fought Muslims along the Iberian frontier in Spain and in the Pyrenees, where he established a buffer zone against the spread of Islam. This is connected to the famous Battle of Roncevaux Pass (778).

It began when the rear guard of Charles’s army, retreating from Spain, was ambushed in the Pyrenees at Roncevaux Pass. Local Basques attacked and almost completely destroyed it. Among the fallen was Charles’s commander Roland. The event was not militarily decisive, but it later gave rise to the famous epic The Song of Roland, in which the attackers were transformed into Muslims and Roland into a heroic figure.

* * *

Charles also expanded his realm eastward against the Avars, advancing as far as the Danube in present-day Hungary. In doing so, he acquired great wealth and strengthened his position.

As a result, Charlemagne’s empire—or its semi-independent vassal states—extended from the Pyrenees in the southwest to the borders of Denmark in the northeast, and from the Balkans to the English Channel. In other words, a vast empire had once again emerged in Europe.

* * *

All of this was possible because Charles was constantly at war and gave his enemies no time to recover. This, in turn, was made possible by his well-organized army, which was based on a feudal system: Charles determined how many and what kind of soldiers each region had to provide. The wealthiest supplied several warriors, while the poorest provided one.

Heavy cavalry was the most important force in the army. It consisted of nobles or wealthy men equipped with swords, spears, shields, and often chain mail. Their military service was tied to land ownership.

The infantry was composed of ordinary men with lighter equipment. They formed the majority but mainly supported the cavalry and participated in sieges.

* * *

Charles also developed battle tactics: campaigns were usually conducted in the summer, and the army was often divided into several groups that attacked from different directions, making defense difficult. He secured his conquests by building fortifications and supplying his army both from stored provisions and from resources taken from local populations.

Soldiers were motivated both by the fact that Charles often led campaigns personally and by the idea of spreading Christianity. Administration was organized by dividing the realm into counties, whose loyalty was overseen by royal inspectors.

All of this led to—and culminated in—his coronation as Emperor in Rome by Pope Leo III in the year 800.

* * *

A description of Charles survives, written by his courtier Einhard. According to it, he was tall and strongly built, about 190 cm in height, fair-haired, and dignified.

He reportedly ate moderately, favored roasted meat, and avoided excessive drinking. He valued learning, attempted to learn writing, spoke Latin, and understood Greek. He bathed in the Roman manner and often invited friends to join him. As a leader, he was both religious and practical, and he valued order and discipline.

* * *

After Charles, the empire was ruled by his son Louis the Pious, who emphasized Christian morality, repentance, and atonement for sins. He even performed public acts of penance and sought to live as an example. In church policy, he supported monasteries and the Church and worked to unify ecclesiastical discipline and monastic life.

Administratively, Louis followed in his father’s footsteps but was a weaker ruler. He did not carry out major conquests, though he defended the realm against rebellions and external threats. For example, he made an agreement with the Viking leader Harald Klak to secure the coastal regions.

* * *

Louis wished to divide the empire among his four sons. However, this did not suit his older sons—Lothair, Louis the German, and Pepin of Aquitaine—who had a different mother than Charles the Bald. As a result, the empire descended into prolonged civil wars, during which Louis himself was even briefly deposed as emperor.

The decisive battle in this power struggle was fought at Fontenoy in 841. It pitted Lothair, the eldest brother who claimed the entire empire, against Louis and Charles the Bald, who joined forces and later affirmed their alliance with the Oaths of Strasbourg (842), sworn in both a Romance vernacular and Old High German.

Both armies consisted of Frankish nobles and their forces, but neither side had a clear tactical advantage, so the outcome was decided in close combat. The battle became extremely bloody and claimed the lives of a large portion of the Frankish nobility, to the extent that it was regarded as a “tragedy of the nation.”

The result was the victory of Charles and Louis, which ultimately led to the Treaty of Verdun. The empire was divided into three parts, two of which gradually evolved into France (Charles’s share) and Germany (Louis’s share). Lothair received Italy and a central strip stretching to the North Sea, as well as the imperial crown, but his realm was eventually overshadowed by the other two and has no clear successor today.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Are We on the Brink of World War III?
Is French military history repeating itself in Ukraine?
Independence day of Finland now and 83 years ago

When Social Media Stops Being Social

A Finnish political media, Verkkouutiset, had drawn attention to the fragmentation of political discussion on social media, resulting from the fact that many people follow only those whose opinions are close to their own. As a result, the term “social media” no longer really describes what it is; rather, it has become a platform for bubble formation or— as it used to be put— a like-minded circle jerk.

An excellent example of this is X, formerly Twitter, where discussion is almost unmoderated. However, there are several ways to shape one’s feed toward such a circle and eventually drift into a so-called rabbit hole, where a person is drawn ever deeper into one type of content.

As a result, the discussions one encounters on social media end up consisting almost entirely of messages representing a single worldview—one whose challenges remain unseen and perhaps even unrecognized.

* * *

It does not necessarily have to be this way, even though X—like, as far as I understand, nearly all social media platforms—uses an algorithm that serves users content based on their past behavior, “inferring” what they want to read.

In addition, everyone can choose whose posts they follow: for many, this means people whose opinions align with their own. But one could just as well follow the entire political spectrum on X, from the far left to the far right, from Nazis to anarchists.

Likewise, those who prefer their own circle can choose to make their posts visible only to selected audiences, excluding those whose views they do not wish to engage with. In doing so, however, they also forgo those people’s comments—and the challenge those comments might pose to their own thinking.

Even this has not been enough for everyone. Politically liberal and left-leaning groups created their own platform, Bluesky, a few years ago. Similarly, U.S. President Donald Trump launched his own platform, Truth Social.

Thus, what was once a platform known for lively political debate among adults has evolved into something where the very “social” nature of social forums can be questioned—something that fosters people raised in rabbit holes, whose worldview grows narrower day by day.

* * *

Blogs are also considered social media, including this one, Thoughts of the Professor, whose subtitle emphasizes the importance of freedom of speech.

As long-time readers know, my own writings are also politically opinionated and express my views on the issues at hand. But that does not mean I would not want to see opinions differing from my own in the discussions following each post—even ones that challenge me radically.

On the contrary, such views are highly welcome, as they offer alternative perspectives and provide material for both myself and my readers to develop our thinking and worldview.

That is why I hope criticism does not disappear from discussions related to Thoughts of the Professor – or its Finnish equivalent, Professorin ajatuksia – but instead evolves into high-quality, serious argumentation. After all, the blog’s original purpose is ultimately to be part of the broader political conversation in our society.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Most Finnish Journalism Students Lean Toward the Ultra-Liberal Far Left
English or Finnish — That’s the Question
Citizen Journalism, Free Speech, and EU Challenges