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

Green Politician: "I'm Glad We Never Gained Real Political Power"

The Finnish politician Satu Hassi has served as a minister, a Member of the European Parliament, and the chairperson of the Green League. In other words, she has been one of the most prominent politicians of her generation.

Satu Hassi is known for her work in the Green Party, but as a young student, she was a member of the governing body of the Socialist Student League, the student wing of an extreme leftist and pro-Soviet faction within the Finnish Communist Party. In effect, she was involved in what could be considered the most dangerous political movement in independent Finland—one that, if it had come to power, might have led to Finland becoming part of the Soviet Union.

This group, known as the taistolaiset (after a leading figure in the movement), at its peak held 13 seats in the Finnish Parliament, making it a serious political force that enjoyed strong support from Leonid Brezhnev’s Soviet Union. One of the first political statements made by the student movement run by this faction—which included Hassi as a member—was to endorse the 1968 occupation of Czechoslovakia. That stance arguably says more about the movement’s political character than a thousand words ever could.

* * *

Now retired from active politics, Satu Hassi has returned to the public eye and spoken about her thoughts from that time. According to her, “perhaps we had heard too many wartime hero stories from our fathers and wanted to fight our own heroic war—in this case, against imperialism.”

In her interview, she also admits to having drawn “foolish conclusions” after embracing Marxist-Leninist ideology, and she reflects: “I’m glad we never gained real political power. The taistolaiset were only strong in certain cultural organizations.”

She also acknowledged noticing injustices during visits to the Soviet Union, but chose not to speak about them even with fellow ideologues. Instead, she closed her eyes to the things she didn’t want to see.

Hassi’s confession as a former Member of the European Parliament is interesting in many ways. First, admitting one's own mistakes is relatively rare—but in her case, the value of that admission is diminished by the fact that it came only after she had left politics.

Second, Hassi did not distance herself from totalitarian circles after making her observations. Instead, she joined the Green Party as a standard-bearer of its left wing, which eventually displaced the economically liberal politicians who had initially led the party. In other words, she never truly grasped the societal harm caused by the concentration of political power and centrally planned economies, and remained a supporter of a totalitarian societal model until the end of her political career.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Finnish Youth Are Abandoning the Green Party
Why Does the Political Green-Left Lie, and Why Does It Resonate with the People?
The Green Movement is Withering – And That’s Not a Bad Thing

Daniel Freund demanded a ban to Viktor Orbán

A totalitarian society can be recognized by the fact that those in power disregard agreed-upon rules when the resulting decisions would be unpleasant. This came to my mind when reading about the debate in the European Parliament, where an attempt was made to prevent Hungary from assuming the rotating presidency of the EU.

I understand that Hungary does not represent the mainstream of the EU but rather one of its extreme ends. However, this does not justify the violation of rules; it may justify, at most, a political process to change the system. 

In this case, such a goal could be to place member states in different positions, where the presidency would only apply to a subset of countries. And if such a decision were to be made, it would undoubtedly lead to the disintegration of the EU.

Therefore, the attack by Germany's Green Party member Daniel Freund against Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán should be seen primarily as an expression of totalitarian thinking - or even an echo from Germany 80 years ago. 

Freund demanded a ban on Orbán entering the European Parliament if Hungary were to become the presiding country. Such an initiative is exactly the kind of fanatic ranting that we do not need in the European Parliament. 

Instead, it is necessary to adhere to collectively agreed democratic rules, even when the outcome is not pleasing. Only by acting in this way can the EU remain a democratic community, where all nations and citizens have equal rights.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The European Commission appears unreliable as a decision-maker to the Finns
Fair policy will build a strong Union
Share of EU recovery funds will turn attitudes more negative