Finnish Branch of Extinction Rebellion Faces Possible Ban

Finnish Member of Parliament Kaisa Garedew (Finns Party) considers the citizens' initiative to ban Elokapina a very welcome proposal. She justified her view by stating that Elokapina - the Finnish branch of Extinction Rebellion - has caused all kinds of difficulties and costs to society in recent years: blocking Helsinki's main street, defacing the valuable pillars of the Parliament House, engaging in civil disobedience, and wasting the resources of the judiciary and the police. Additionally, a member of the movement has publicly fantasized about assassinating Minister of Finance Riikka Purra (Finns Party).

Last October, the National Police Board announced that it was considering filing a lawsuit to dissolve Elokapina and was currently gathering evidence for the case. Thus, the citizens' initiative can also be seen as supporting police actions.

MP Garedew also pointed out—at the very least, justifiably—that "if Elokapina were truly more interested in the environment than in spectacles involving illegal actions, it would leave innocent Finns alone and focus its efforts on countries that genuinely destroy nature and whose pollution levels are a real problem."

It remains to be seen whether Elokapina's activities will be banned in Finland. Nevertheless, I am glad that the operations of activist organizations that function by destroying private and public property and disrupting people's lives are now being questioned. Such organizations are unnecessary in a country with a functioning democracy, where all people already have freedom of speech and the right to peaceful protest.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Criminal Attack Against Finnish Democracy
Why Were Violent Protests Acceptable for George Floyd but Not for the UK Child Murders?
Challenges of democracy: Reflections on political violence and rhetoric in Finnish politics

Trump’s Tariff Weapon Worked, but Will Finland’s Development Aid Strategy Succeed?

The leftist government of Colombia decided not to accept undocumented immigrants deported by the United States. As a result, President Donald Trump threatened the country with tariff increases: first to 25 percent and later to 50 percent.

This strategy worked, and Colombia's President Gustavo Petro reversed his decision, agreeing to accept its citizens. It remains to be seen whether any other country will refuse to take back its citizens if the U.S. deports them.

At the moment, however, it seems clear that Trump will not back down on this issue. The scope of the challenge is enormous, as millions or even tens of millions of people currently live and work in the U.S. doing low-wage jobs after arriving from developing countries in search of a higher standard of living.

This means that many individuals and businesses depend on undocumented labor. The big question, therefore, is how this labor will be replaced—if it is even possible. And if it is not, what will follow?

* * *

Finland also has a significant number of immigrants. Among them, those who have primarily arrived as refugees from North Africa and the Middle East have both struggled with employment and committed a disproportionately high number of crimes. In contrast, e.g. Ukrainians, Russians, Indians, Chinese, and Vietnamese are considered desirable and legal labor.

This is likely one reason why Finland is tightening the criteria for humanitarian immigration and aiming to remove undocumented individuals as well as foreign nationals who have committed crimes. As a small country, Finland does not have access to Trump’s “tariff weapon,” but by cutting development aid to uncooperative countries, it hopes to achieve the same result.

It remains to be seen, however, whether this “development aid weapon” will be as effective as Trump’s “tariff weapon.” Or will Finland have to develop additional measures before it can rid itself of unwanted individuals from developing countries?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Greenland's Future: A Battleground of Global Powers?
Finnish Immigration Policy Aims to Maximize Benefits and Minimize Drawbacks
Finland Suspends Development Cooperation with Somalia

Citizen Journalism, Free Speech, and EU Challenges

The text above is my thought that "As long as a society has a true freedom of speech it cannot be completely rotten. However, all totally rotten societies are lacking the true freedom of speech."

The text is placed there because Finns seem to have significant difficulties in accepting freedom of speech. The most recent example of this was provided by the Finnish Green Party, which has decided to leave the social media platform known as X.

According to the party, societal discussion on X is no longer relevant due to the systematic hate speech, conspiracy theories, and disinformation spreading on the platform. They are correct in that all three undeniably occur frequently on X. However, they are wrong in claiming that societal discussion is no longer relevant on that platform, as it has been conducted specifically, explicitly, and practically only there.

Sure, the world is full of social media platforms, but it is precisely on X where open societal discussion has taken place. And it is precisely there where anyone could directly comment on anyone else's posts and provide reasoning. Of course, this often happens in an inappropriate manner, but in my view, both political extremes have been especially guilty of this.

If the Finnish Greens and the broader political left leave X, there is a risk that societal discussion will revert to a time when each ideological group had its own insular forum, making fruitful dialogue—or achieving mutual understanding—practically impossible. And it might not be possible in the future either, not even in the utopian world of the Greens. 

* * *

This relates to the perspective of Finnish Commissioner Henna Virkkunen, who has stated that the EU can impose significant fines and penalties on X if the platform does not meet the Union's requirements. According to her, "In Europe, everyone has freedom of speech and opinion. However, X has a specific obligation, derived from our laws, to assess and mitigate systemic risks related to our electoral systems and public discourse."

Virkkunen's comment arose after X conducted an interview with Alice Weidel, the vice-chair of Germany's second most popular party, the AfD. However, under EU legislation, platforms are required to ensure that certain political views are not favored over others. In other words, the commissioner would like to compel X to also interview representatives of other German parties.

It remains to be seen whether Elon Musk will comply with such demands—or if he will allow others to organize similar interviews on their own, which could then be featured on X. From the perspective of freedom of speech, it would be beneficial if this were possible—after all, Musk himself has emphasized that X is a platform for citizen journalism, where everyone can create their own content.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Criticism from the Left Brought a Small Association’s Independence Day March into the Spotlight
Freedom of Speech in Danger
Finnish MEPs Saramo and Tynkkynen Engage in Social Media Clash Over Ukraine Support

Mediterranean Taxi Service is Coming to an End

I just noticed information on social media indicating that Doctors Without Borders has decided to end its Mediterranean operations. The organization’s activities have essentially involved taxi-like operations, transporting people from the southern Mediterranean to EU territory instead of taking them to the nearest port on the African side. This has encouraged Africans and Arabs to attempt crossing the Mediterranean in unseaworthy boats, leading to thousands of unnecessary deaths.

The organization is funded through various fundraising efforts, where its activities are described as rescue operations. These appeals attract well-meaning people who want to support the cause without understanding its fundamental nature as a business.

According to the message thread reporting on the cessation of the Mediterranean taxi operations, “We have been forced to discontinue our activities with the rescue ship Geo Barents. Italian legislation and policies have made it impossible to continue in their current form.”

Unfortunately, the organization does not appear to be giving up and simultaneously announced that “We will return to the Mediterranean as soon as possible.” However, one can only hope that Italy and the rest of the EU maintain their now proven approach and ensure the final burial of Doctors Without Borders’ business described here.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Fall of Germany’s Government Could Open the EU’s Path to a Better Future
Change of immigration policy and development cooperation
175 happy winners

Russian Strategy to Take Control Over the USA and the World Has Succeeded Shockingly Well So Far

Two days ago, Walmart, the world’s largest retailer, rolled back its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies, joining a growing list of major corporations that have done the same after facing criticism from conservative activists. Even before this, companies such as Ford, Harley-Davidson, Lowe’s, and Tractor Supply had already taken similar steps.

This reminded me of a strategy described in the recent book by Finnish top communication professionals Markku Mantila and Jouni Mölsä, which the Russians have allegedly used to influence Western nations. According to them, a Russian defector, Yuri Bezmenov, revealed back in 1984 that the Soviet Union’s goal was to alter the perception of reality in the United States to the extent that its population would no longer be able to draw rational conclusions about the reality surrounding them.

The first stage of this strategy was demoralization, which involved steering students toward Marxist-Leninist thinking. According to Bezmenov, this phase was already complete 40 years ago. 

In the next stage, lasting about 20 years and referred to as destabilization, the Russians’ aim was (in Bezmenov's time, "would be") to increase disagreements between different groups in the United States. As examples of destabilizing themes, he mentioned homosexuality as well as women’s and children’s rights—translated into today’s language, themes that have gained traction in recent years through DEI policies.

The third stage in the Russian strategy is the crisis phase, in which citizens look for saviors by demanding strong leaders and governments, while expressing their discontent with societal chaos.

According to Bezmenov's ideas from 40 years ago, the Russians’ ultimate goal is "normalization", which refers to a situation similar to what happened after the Prague Spring in 1968, when Czechoslovakia was ruled by a puppet government installed by the Soviet Union, subordinate to Moscow and receiving its instructions from there.

All of this is detailed in Mantila and Mölsä’s book. From my perspective, it seems that the Russians have shockingly succeeded in achieving the goals of the first two phases. However, it remains to be seen what the collapse of corporations and, subsequently, DEI policies will lead to.

In this matter, ordinary Americans play a decisive role. Will the resistance faced by DEI deepen societal polarization, eventually leading to the crisis Bezmenov described? Or is this merely part of an ideological shift, one that is leaving DEI policies behind and, in doing so, discarding Russia’s long-term objectives into the trash bin of history?

Finally, I conclude that it would be beneficial for American (and Western) politicians to equip their citizens with the means to counter Russian hybrid influence. In this regard, it is particularly important to ensure a strong foundation of basic knowledge through quality education, the reliability of the political system, the adherence of information channels to facts rather than fostering political discord, and the media literacy of citizens. 

Strengthening social cohesion and fostering a sense of community could also play a vital role in making societies more resilient to external manipulation. And cooperation between Western nations is equally crucial, as countering hybrid threats often requires a unified response and shared strategies.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin Set a Goal — Failure Would Be an Embarrassment
Swedish TV Did Not Learn Anything From the Riots in the UK
Defending National Security: Finland's Response to Hybrid Warfare

Finns are backing the government making difficult decisions

The problem commonly associated with democracies is that when the government has to make unpleasant decisions for public finances, voters tend to shift their support to the opposing parties. Thus, there is a temptation for leaders not to make economically sound decisions while in power.

In this sense, the situation in Finland is interesting. The right-wing government that came to power last summer has planned labor market reforms, cuts to public services, and reductions in income taxes to balance the state budget, which was heavily indebted during the previous government's term, and to revitalize economy.

These plans have resulted in widespread and ongoing political strikes opposing the reforms. Both trade unions and green-leftist parties are behind these strikes, and even according to citizen surveys, the protests have public support.

However, what makes the situation interesting is that in polls measuring party support, the government's popularity has not declined; instead, it is clearly on the rise. Based on this, it seems that Finns understand that their country's public finances are indeed in need of correction. Therefore, rather than abandoning the parties in power, they are actually shifting towards supporting them.

This bodes well for Finland's future, but of course, only if the ongoing changes by the government lead to results and the public remains supportive for long enough for the economy to turn back towards growth.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Correct minister, ridiculous facts
The people long for strict economic policy
Reducing taxes, enhancing export and paying the governmental debt

Desperate cry of Russians

The war between Russia and Ukraine is currently in an interesting phase. Russia has managed to advance on some fronts, but at the same time, it has suffered a significant loss of personnel.

According to a recent Finnish assessment, Russia has suffered tens of thousands of casualties, including both dead and wounded, on the Andrivka front, along with a substantial loss of military equipment. In addition to this, Ukrainians have successfully destroyed a large warship and five fighter jets.

At the same time, the Putin government is definitively losing credibility among Russian citizens, as only one in four Russians now believes in the news reported by media under its control. In contrast, Ukrainians' belief in the victory of their country remains high.

In this situation, Russia's large-scale missile attack on Ukrainian civilian targets is better understood as a sign of desperation rather than a show of strength. Therefore, it is even more crucial for Western countries to continue their military support to Ukraine so that the war achieves an inevitable outcome where Russia is forced to withdraw from Ukrainian soil, and its current administration is ousted through some form of coup.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish general praised the Ukrainian air strike
Is French military history repeating itself in Ukraine?
Victims of Russian leaders

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

The people long for strict economic policy

Finland is a politically unique state. It is a stable democracy with nearly ten parties in its Parliament, which necessitates the involvement of multiple parties in forming the Government.

This system has led to relatively consistent politics, with abrupt policy changes being rare. However, such a change might be on the horizon in the ongoing Government negotiations, where instead of the previous left-leaning majority Government led by Sanna Marin, a program is being formed by political right-wing parties.

In this process, the parties do not populistically pander to the people or promise to distribute tax funds to various beneficiaries. Instead, the negotiators agree that the public finances need to be adjusted by as much as 10 percent of the state's entire budget—and they certainly don't hide it. One could imagine that the support for these parties would be plummeting among the public!

However, that is not the case, as indicated by the party support survey published today. According to the survey, the combined support for the parties involved in the government negotiations has actually seen a significant increase: the support for the two largest parties, the National Coalition Party and the Finns Party, has risen by a total of 1.5 percentage points, or almost four percent, compared to the elections a couple of months ago.

All of this reflects the dissatisfaction that Finns feel towards the left-wing government led by Sanna Marin, which they believe has brought Finland's public finances to the brink of disaster. It also provides assurance to the negotiators that the citizens have confidence in their firm economic approach.

Previous thoughts on the same topic: 
The Guardian misleads its readers
Elections in Finland enlight journalistic views
Reducing taxes, enhancing export and paying the governmental debt