Most Finnish Journalism Students Lean Toward the Ultra-Liberal Far Left

Finnish journalist Sanna Ukkola published on social media results from the not-yet officially released Nordic Journalism Students 2025 survey. According to it, among “Finnish journalism students” studying at university, 78 percent vote for left-wing parties (Left Alliance 44%, Greens 20%, Social Democrats 14%).

If—and assuming—the figures reflect reality, the outlook for the future of Finnish journalism is bleak. To understand this, one must note that 64 percent of future journalists support—not just the left in general, but an ultra-liberal far-left in terms of values, namely the Left Alliance and the Greens.

* * *

Of course, it has already been known that the ideological outlook of Finnish journalism students leans politically to the left. However, I had not previously understood the students’ attraction to outright far-left ideology, which has left a rather dark footprint in both Finnish and global history.

It may, of course, be that not all journalism students—and even those who have already graduated—are familiar with the roots of the ideology they support, or they imagine that today’s green-left somehow differs from its historical predecessors. And thus they act more like—borrowing a term attributed to Lenin—“useful idiots,” who believe they are acting morally right, while in reality they are fighting for an Orwellian society.

This is also reflected in the fact that many journalists, instead of striving for impartial journalism, want to steer people’s opinions and change the world in the direction they prefer. For some, the desire to influence public opinion has even been a central reason for becoming a journalist.

This situation is, of course, unfortunate for these students, for the people who read and listen to the results of their work, and for the future of Finnish society. This remains the case despite the fact that, with age, some journalists come to realize they had supported totalitarian ideas and move away from the far-left camp. But unfortunately, only some do.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
When Free Speech Is Prosecuted: Päivi Räsänen’s Case Explained for Americans
Is Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle Using Taxpayer Money to Mislead?
Terrorism Landscape in the EU Contradicts the Narrative Presented by EU Politicians and Media

Cuba’s Crisis and the Lessons of Socialism

In many European countries, relatively little has been reported about events in Cuba, the longest-lasting and strongest communist stronghold in the Western Hemisphere. Therefore, it was interesting that yesterday or today many Finnish media outlets published a news report stating that “a group of protesters vandalized the regional office of the ruling Communist Party during the night leading into Saturday.”

Video footage of the incident could also be found, confirming the statement that “a group broke into the party office, carried furniture out onto the street, and set it on fire.” The police had also fired shots at the scene.

Following the events described above, Cuba’s current dictator, Miguel Díaz-Canel, has announced his willingness to discuss the future of his country with the United States. His counterpart will likely be Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who, as a Cuban émigré, probably has very little sympathy for the difficulties of the country’s communist government.

It therefore remains to be seen whether the situation has finally been reached in which Cuba frees itself from the yoke of communism and its people regain their freedom and the opportunity to raise their miserable standard of living. This would of course be a fine thing, but as the collapse of the European socialist states in the 1990s showed, the outcome could be either success or failure, as illustrated by the figure below showing the economic development of Poland and Moldova.

It remains to be seen, then, what Cuba’s future will look like—and how it will affect the lives and prospects of ordinary Cubans.

Of course, at a time when support for the political green-left is still strong among many European citizens, it would be desirable if the difficulties of Cuban socialism and its possible collapse would also increase understanding of the harmfulness of socialism. Or will there still be a large share of European voters who believe that applying Marx’s ideas leads to something good?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Venezuela, Antonio Guterres and the Nature of Great Powers
Pedro Sánchez Sides with Europe's Fifth Column on Russia
Marx in the Classroom: How Ideological Education Shaped Careers and Values

The original blogpost in Finnish: 
Onko Kuuban kommunistihallinto kaatumassa?

Finnish Immigration Policy Limits Freedom of Expression

According to the national security review published by the Finnish Security Intelligence Service on Tuesday, homeschooling may, in the long run, increase security threats related to the fragmentation of society. This risk is heightened by the fact that it is extremely difficult for authorities to monitor the teaching that takes place in homeschooling and in informal homeschooling institutions.

The parliamentary parties also share concern about these security threats. Their proposed solutions range from more effective oversight of homeschooling to an unambiguous compulsory school attendance requirement, with exceptions granted only for extremely compelling reasons.

It is therefore likely that the next government programme will include more or less radical restrictions on children’s homeschooling. At the same time, this would reduce people’s freedom of choice regarding the upbringing of their children.

In practice, this change is occurring as a result of the immigration policy pursued in Finland, because it has brought both radical Islamism and—partly as a reaction to it, as well as to other forms of “wokeism”—far-right extremism into our society. According to the head of the Finnish Security Intelligence Service, Juha Martelius, these are precisely the kinds of undesirable phenomena that are increasingly being promoted in homeschooling environments.

It remains to be seen, however, how well the negative impact of immigration on people’s freedom will be recognized in Finnish public debate. That is, on the constitutional right which states that “everyone has the right to life, personal liberty, integrity and security.”

The debate about compulsory schooling described above is, of course, only part of this process. It is also connected to, for example, threats and fears related to safety—especially for women but also for young people—as well as restrictions on freedom of speech in accordance with an Orwellian understanding of language.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Jimmie Åkesson Is Sweden’s Most Widely Accepted Politician
On Freedom, Debate, and the Murder of Charlie Kirk
Finally, Honest Reporting on Immigration and Crime

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Maahanmuuttopolitiikka rajoittaa ihmisten valinnanvapautta

Iran – The End of Theocracy or the Beginning of Civil War?

As my esteemed readers know, yesterday the United States and Israel struck Iran, killing a large number of the country’s leaders, beginning with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran, for its part, has launched its own missiles at least toward the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Jordan, Qatar, Syria, Iraq and Bahrain, as well as, of course, Israel. In addition, it has closed the Strait of Hormuz.

Iranians have reacted to the events—at least according to Iranians living in Finland—by celebrating in the streets. Women symbolically with their hair uncovered, and at least some shouting the name of Reza Pahlavi, the current head of the country’s former monarchical dynasty.

On the other hand, social media also contains video material of demonstrations supporting the Iranian government. Based on what I have seen, the crowds at these demonstrations appear to be quite large.

* * *

It remains to be seen, then, how the situation in Iran will develop from here. In this respect, the absolutely central factor is the Iranian army: will it remain loyal to the Islamist regime, or will it shift to the side of those demanding change? Or, as I could well imagine, will it split into two camps that begin to wage a civil war against each other?

In any case, it is clear that neither the United States nor Israel will send their ground forces into Iran. For that reason, the country’s future is still entirely open, and it would not be surprising if it were to continue its existence in a medieval atmosphere in the future as well.

This alternative becomes more likely the longer the people demanding liberation remain without military force—that is, the longer the country’s leadership is given time to recover from its losses.

* * *

In order to clarify the situation, I asked the Gemini AI for the very latest information. It replied that “there have been reports that parts of Iran’s regular army and local security forces have refused to follow orders or have even joined the side of the protesters. Wikipedia sources and news agencies now mention ‘armed civilians’ and ‘police and military defectors’ as part of the ongoing unrest.”

In addition, according to Gemini, “there have been reports of local clashes in the regions of Kurdistan and Baluchistan. In particular, Kurdish groups (such as PJAK and PDKI) have moved from a state of readiness to actively taking up positions in their own areas.” It also stated that “there have been reports within the country of arson attacks and assaults against symbols of the regime as well as local offices of the IRGC.”

I interpret this to mean that it is not yet possible to draw conclusions about Iran’s future. In any case, however, Iranians now have an opportunity to replace their Islamist theocracy with a more civilized form of government—but the window of time for doing so may not be very long.

* * *

Finally, one observation about the possible effects of a change of power on Finnish society. It may well happen that refugees set out from the country toward Europe.

In this sense, it should be understood that these people would not be ordinary Iranians, as such people would rather return to their homeland if conditions there were to normalize. Instead, those who may set out could be Islamists who have served and/or supported the country’s tyrannical regime.

For this reason, Finland should already now state very clearly that it will not grant asylum to potential Iranian refugees in the event of a change of government, but rather that Iran will be regarded as a safe country for all its citizens—and that this assessment will not be altered by possible reports of representatives of the Islamist regime being held accountable for crimes committed over the course of half a century.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
UN Congratulates an Executioner – Credibility in Free Fall
What’s Next, Iran?
Iran at a Crossroads: From Islamist Rule Toward Democracy?

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Vaihtuuko Iranissa valta?