Finnish politics

I'm not quite sure how declaring your country a sovereign republic is a step towards turning the EU into a federalist... whatever it is that guy said.

We are already a soveirgn republic. Membership in the EU is the new part, should have made that clear.

The federalist devolopment is that membership in the Union is made official in the constitution, amking it harder to leave, and subjecting Finnish laws more to the EU Parliament — which has its downsides, mostly the fact that a cetral governement in Brussels might not understand the special needs of the peripharies of the union.

I would prefer that intead of European Federation it would be European Confederation. It would allow individual states to tailor things to more their needs rather than try endless convince guy in Mediterran that there is god damn cold in North during winter.

NOTE: Above paragraph was a carriacture and does not represent actualy process

Right now, trying to pursue US level of centralized governemtn will only end in flames, we are too different yet too same for such thing to work. It's better to have unified, but loose central governement that deals with foreing policy and security, but leaves room for individual states to run things.

Anyway, it's kinda sad to see how all the time people scream how we are "selling" our independence to EU and how we should break off, not remembering that pretty much our entire farming indrusty relies on EU support, our economy has remained a lot more stable after intrudiction into Euro and all otehr successes. Then again, people only remember failures.

Anyway, here is something I have been wondering for ages: how is that every other party has been claimed to have "broken election promises" but not The Basic Finns? I mean, was their entire election campaing all about Greece? They aren't even in government so how they could even keep all their promises, if they even have them?

edited 15th Sep '11 2:31:00 AM by Mandemo

Well, they voted against the bailouts and refused to enter a government that would support the bailouts.

In another news, Halla-aho was suspended for two weeks.

And There Was Much Rejoicing, atleast some people.

Still, if entire partys entire politics surround single point which gives free card to do anything, there is something wrong

edited 15th Sep '11 6:16:39 AM by Mandemo

*coughcoughpiratepartyinswedencoughcough*

They refused to enter the government because it was the politically smart thing to do, in the sense of gaming the system.

Since they won so many seats and refused to enter government, everybody else had to come to some kind of terms and give up on major points to reach a consensus that'd get us a government - any government - with a safe majority. Thus every party except them lost a lot of confidence, and since your average "True Finn" only buys the evening papers, it looks as if the other parties were the reason the "Finns" aren't in government, when in fact the old three biggest parties all said that the "Finns" should be in government and that more concessions would be made to accommodate them than the other parties would get.

As for the EU issues, if that's the reason they didn't join the government, there's nothing wrong with that; the parties that did support the bailouts still got more votes and more seats than the "Finns" did, so it's not as if the people weren't represented. What happened was what the people voted for. Thing is, both the Left Alliance and the SDP were also against the bailouts, but since there was no way to get a strong majority government without both of us, we had no coise but to give in. If we hadn't, and had insisted on staying out, everyone would have hated us for dodging responsibility.

In fact, if any other party had done what the "Finns" did, they would've been condemned as not willing to take responsibility in a difficult time when the government has to make very unpopular decisions at their own expense. The "Finns" get free pass from responsibility because most of them are on their first term as MP.

For people who follow politics, the game the "Finns" are playing is obvious: they're trying to make everything look as if everyone else is allied against them, and they're constantly coming up with new stunts to pull to keep them in headlines and make the other parties criticise them. People who only read one or two papers a week - or month, and there really exist people like that - see the story that the "Finns" want to play; that the other parties "didn't let them join government" and "they're always criticising every little thing the "Finns" do".

Presidential and Municipal elections will be mainly about the "Finns" playing the persecution card and raising controversy all the time. And again, people who read the papers daily will see the script, and people who only read papers every now and then (or only read the evening papers) will be taken entirely by the narrative that was played out.

edited 21st Jan '14 6:48:30 AM by BestOf

That's an interesting perspective you have Best Of, and you do make some valid points. I don't like the victim game some Finns are trying to play. They ought to have more dignity than that.

Most of the M Ps were against the bailouts before the elections, but somehow we are still doing it. I suppose the bailouts were a big thing for the (leaders of the) National Coalition, who were adamantly in support of them, which resulted in the farce of the negotiotations that we had.

The Finns got a lot of shit from the press and the media because they "couldn't bear responsibility", that is to sell their principles and integrity in exchange for power. The media has been very biased towards the Finns and mocking their supporters for years now, so I do not understand your argument of the media favouring the Finns.

The presidential elections are a non-issue to me, as the president is only a figurehead and I hope that Niinistö gets the job. The municipal elections are way more important with prospect of changing the power balance of the city councils as the support for the Centre party continues to decline.

If you look around the net, you can see how The Basic Finns are always complaining how they are perspecuted or how there is some sort of conspiracy against them.

I told from the beging that it's all a game for them. Right now, there will be some sort of shit storm, no matter what. Either Greece falls and we get hit by depression, or we pay up and peopel complain how we should keep to ourselfs.

Basicly, no matter what happens, those in government whotry to fix situation are blamed for all problems and if The Basic Finns manage to get into next government, they can reap the benefits that will only start appearing then.

Also, as far I remember SDP was against unconditional bailout. They were ok if a certain... assurances(?) were acquired which are now the hot potato in EU.

For some reason it's "trendy" to be isolationist and xenophobic right now, which is inverse of decade ago. That is what I believe to be main reason for their rise to power, not their political agenda. That and people wanting to stir up political field without second tought.

I jsut fear that our dealings with Greece, if they cause problems to EU later, will cause problems to us when others start to beat us politically for not being team player.

Yeah, the SDP said before the election that they'd only accept the Greece aid pack if there's some guarantee that we won't lose our investment, which in retrospect was really goddamn stupid.

They probably only invented that so that they had the door open to degotiations in a government that was going to go to Greece; and if the elections were not in favour of supporting Greece, the SDP would have a road that led there, too. So they left both options open, with reservations.

As for the press being against the "Finns", well, they're treated exactly as every other party is. Remember the flak that Vanhanen got for the RAY affair? He had to resign for it? And before that, he was hounded by the press for private affairs, which is where I draw the line (I'm glad he got what was coming for him the the public affairs, but his private life should've been left alone.)

And who was Prime Minister before Vanhanen? Anneli Jäätteenmäki, that's who. Did the press put pressure on her for her actions in office and before the 2003 election? Yes, so much that she cracked and resigned a broken woman. And it was the right thing for the press to do: catch politicians when they lie, cheat, steal or act otherwise immorally.

Which includes purposefully making offensive statements for no other purpose than to get people talking about you in pubs.

The treatment the "Finns" get is no different than what the other parties get; but because of the huge victory in the election, they're extra important right now.

The press don't exactly favour them, but they purposefully play it as part of their PR game.

I believe this Svenska Dagbladet piece says it best, emphasis mine.

When someone constnatly keeps saying somethign stupid and just says "sorry", I believe he lacks abbility to judge his actions needed for politician.

Also, reason why the Basic Finns keep popping up in media is that they provide so easy source of stories. Halla-aho and Hakkarainen and others pretty much scream "LOOK AT US!".

edited 15th Sep '11 8:45:52 AM by Mandemo

Exactly.

http://yle.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/2011/09/perussuomalaiset_opiskelijoiden_suosikki_2874698.html

It seems that the Finns are the most popular party among students. At first I was surprised by the headline but then I realised that the those studying in vocational schools are also counted among students.

It seems like the Finns are the party most favoured by the working class.

That's because the working Left's vote is split between them, the SDP and us. Whereas the working-class right-wingers split their vote between the Coalition and "Finns".

I wish the article had bit more detailed stats. It's 15% them, 11% for both Coalition and Greens, and 47% undecided.

I'm curious what exactly are these "coservative values" they represent, that students idenitify with/what are apparently "on the rise".

Well, the Finns are the only party to be openly and unashamedly on the side of finnish people instead of rooting for the (failed) social experiment of multiculturalism and a sovereign Finland instead of increasing transferring of power to Brussels. Some people find that appealing.

Iäm sorry but what? Only party on the peoples side?

Ever tought that ot everyone likes them? I, for personally, am for international co-operation and wouldn't mind seeing EU to turn actual nation, altough such matter must be handled with care.

Finland is more than just a border on a map. Finland is it's people.

Multiculturalism isn't "a social experiment", it's a reality of the globalized world. We can't put up a wall on our borders and kick everyone of wrong colour out and keep them out, lest we turn into North Korea. And I'm Finnish, The Finns certainly don't represent my needs.

edited 17th Sep '11 5:09:00 AM by JethroQWalrustitty

Oh, the North Korea argument again. Most immigration critics have never ever said that all the darkies ought to be kicked out or refused to enter this country.

Because mutliculturalism is just that. having different kinds of people in a country, and allowing them to be themselves within the constraints of the law. There's no further agenda, except maybe programs to try integrate them better in the society to avoid ghettoization. Which is what most PS voters oppose, they don't want "forced multiculturalism" on their living areas, schools or workplaces, and then complain how immigrants don't integrate.

Ressurecting this old thread, to talk aboout the upcoming presidential elections.

As the candidates stand right now, Pekka Haavisto is my candidate. No, not because he's gay, though that is a plus. Because he's an experienced diplomant and peace negotiotor, a veteran of the Green Movement (he was at Koijärvi), and he's much more pleasant as a person and a politician than my next pick, Lipponen.

Still waiting to see what my party will do. We didn't have a candiadate last time around, but then we supported Halonen. I don't think Arhinmäki wants to run, and Claes Andersson is a bit old, and preobably not that interested.

Unless we wield a candidate, my vote will be for Lipponen. He's probably not going to make it to the second round (which will, or so it currently seems, be between Soini and Niinistö) but if he does get there or if it's a close call, I'd like to be able to say that I did my part in giving a decent (though not perfect) guy a shot, or even just that I tried by best at preventing much worse guys from getting there.

As for the second round, if it goes as it looks, I'll be torn between the lesser evil (Niinistö) and an empty ticket. An empty ticket is better than a protest vote because those aren't counted the same way.

edited 21st Jan '14 6:48:51 AM by BestOf

Niininstö for me. I was first wondering between Lipponen and Niinistö, but I decided to play for sure and decided to pick Niinistö since I don't want to see Soini anywhere near presidential position, no matter how little power it has.

Of course, I might change my opinion depending on how they run their campaings.

Also, Best Of, altough I understand your reasoning and agree on certain level, allow me to present possible reason to vote for Niininstö: Like you said, he is smaller evil and thus I assume you rather had him than Soini. Therefor, it's better to vote and slightly guarantee Niinistös victory than vote empty, leave Niinistö without that vote and let Soini closer to victory.

Of course this bad for democracy but... I think Soini is even worse.

edited 28th Oct '11 4:59:07 AM by Mandemo

I don't know anything about candidates, or even if I can vote when elections are, but if I could vote, I would vote Niinistö since didn't he cut the money politicians used for luxury flights? Also, even if he were bad choice, presidents don't really have any power anymore.(which is why I'd rather have the position to stop to exist)

Of course, if I have bad reasons, I'd like to get informed of it o-o Good thing that I probably can't vote...

edited 28th Oct '11 5:33:51 AM by SpookyMask

In Finland the President has little actual power, so I'll treat it basically as a poll asking what direction we want Finland to go. At the moment I'll vote for Pekka Haavisto, or Arhinmäki if he would deside to run. And if (optimistic, as always) he doesn't ge through I'll vote for Lipponen, if he does. Between Soini and Niinistö I'll vote blank. That shows there's the will to vote, but not support for the candidate, the statistics won't tell people "these votes weren't actually for X, but against Y.