Thoughts on Modern Finnish Nationalism & Political Ideals

[wilpuri]

I wrote this some time ago and published it on my blog. I was reminded of it when reading thoughts in a similar vein on another nationalist Finnish blog, and I thought it might be a welcome contribution to forum such as Stirpes.

I realize my writing can be a little cryptic to someone unfamiliar with myself and my ideas, as I mostly just write for myself. So if you have questions or wish for me to clarify something, just say the word.


Thoughts on Modern Finnish Nationalism & Political Ideals

Finland has been and still is, although to an ever diminishing degree, somewhat isolated from the European social, economic, cultural and political development. Much can be said about the location on the periphery of what can be considered Western Europe, but this isolation is also very much because of historical and cultural reasons. The post-war status of Finland as a Neutral democracy next to the Soviet Union has done much to shape the national mind-set, which already by nature is conservative and cautious of change.


Finnish nationalism is also therefore somewhat different from other modern European movements, as it has developed in different circumstances in isolation from many trends prevalent in the rest of Europe. All this must be taken into account when discussing the topic of Finnish nationalism.


Nationalism in general is a very broad term and it can mean several, often contradicting, things. The great question within any nationalist movement or ideology is how it deals with two fundamental issues: traditionalism and the ’social question’. Historically Finnish nationalism has been conservative (naturally) and reactionary for the most part, essentially a bourgeoise-shaped ideology. When we look at any historical movement associated with nationalism, we can see that there are often two wings: the traditionalist and the socialist, and its not uncommon for these two wings to find themselves in something of a conflict within the movement. Historical examples are plentiful, from the Spanish Falange to the Italian Fascists.


In order for a nationalist movement to be successful and true to itself, it needs to fill a couple of requirements. It has to be open to all members of the nation, it must avoid becoming a lever of power or an ideology of the upper class, for example. This means that it has to reconcile between the traditional and the social aspect, it must act as a synthesis between the past and the present. We nationalists see ourselves as the natural next link in the chain of generations. We are the sons and daughters of our fathers and mothers, with our roots deep in our own native earth, and we wish to cherish our heritage, culture, history and traditions. While we derive our identity from the long past of our nation, we must at the same time continue our work in the present. A successful nationalist movement must be able to address contemporary social issues from a nationalist perspective. Here it is most important not to confuse, or equate, nation with state - the nation cannot be sacrificed for the interests of the state. It is rather the state that simply houses the nation, in an ideal world. So when I talk of a nationalist perspective, I mean that the well-being of the nation as whole should be our guiding objective.


I think that Finnish nationalists would do well to look for inspiration from other European movements, their ideology and their tactics, and to see how well they might fit into a Finnish context. Finnish nationalists should also draw inspiration from the Finnish tradition in formulating their stance on various issues. For example, the Nordic welfare state, which in Sweden has been known as the Folkhemmet, the People’s Home, is a clear source of inspiration when formulating the nationalist perspective on social policy. The early Nordic social democratic tradition also has many interesting figures, which have recognized the strength national unity (=homogenity) provides a small nation. It is with the nationalist perspective in mind that we should look for these sources of inspiration. Of course, we should not seek a ready formulated plan of action from the past, but rather, we should seek the ideal. Being inspired by the Spanish Anarcho-Syndicalists of the 1930’s or Portugal’s National Syndicalists of the same period does not mean adopting their manifestos word by word, but rather sharing their ideal, their spirit and their objectives. The realization will have to be adapted to suit the circumstances of the present, with the future in mind.


Unfortunately, the Finnish nationalist current, in its entire diversity, is rather over-focused on one issue, namely the immigration issue. It is a popular topic, where the nationalists are on familiar turf and know their game. However, I’m afraid it does not do the job of bringing the more complete, or let’s say multi-faceted, version of the nationalist perspective into the open. Focusing on one issue leaves other nationalist strong points completely out of the debate and out of the popular consciousness. People can agree with individual nationalist stances on immigration policy, and adopt them as opinions into their world view, but there they remain isolated from the greater nationalist context. What we need is a nationalist movement that tackles more diverse issues facing Finnish society today, and does it from a Finnish nationalist perspective. The most prominent and respectable Finnish nationalist movement today, Suomen Sisu, seems to be more of an open think-thank with only the most general of guidelines that limit or filter its membership - and this is good, when you want to have diverse opinions and much debate within the nationalist scene - but not very good for actually engaging the surrounding society politically with a clear sense of direction. In order to paraphrase, the problem of the Finnish nationalist current is that it fails to bring up the more complete nationalist alternative, largerly because that alternative is far from complete, perhaps partially due to over-emphasis on a single issue.


Actual nationalist activity in Finland is limited and occurs on a small scale, but there has clearly been a surge of activity, much of it in the form of online projects, in recent years. My hope is that soon enough, a small clique of similar-minded and resourcefull individuals will decide to take the next step and create a determined nationalist movement. This optimistic hope is much in line with the common policy of “someone should do something” prevalent in such a small and unorganized nationalist network, but the fact is that the right people have to get together before anything can start happening.


Perhaps things need to get worse for people to start getting more active?


Hardly. There will never be some mass awakening from the present state of hypnosis, and waiting for the mass to ‘become aware’ is unrealistic when the alternative is not as readily available as it could be. The first job would be to create that alternative and make it available. This does not require a large organization with unlimited resources, since its function would be to simply act as an information outlet, more or less. Several similar initiatives are underway as near by as in Sweden. Such a simple thing as a regularily published newsletter could have a tremendous impact in bringing isolated nationalists from around the country around the same table. It is most important to get people together and start pushing in the same direction, to launch small projects, forge contacts, to create a stronger network which would one day form a political alternative for many Finns dissatisfied with the present state of affairs and the direction we’re headed.

[Menydh]

A quick comment on something that it calls my attention everytime I hear it. This is not only concerned with Finland.

I think that Finnish nationalists would do well to look for inspiration from other European movements, their ideology and their tactics, and to see how well they might fit into a Finnish context.

Let's be realistic. I would not suggest anyone to inspire in movements which have so far proved unable to provide an intelligent ideological evolution and a valid political alternative, and which some have moved unashamedly from failure to absolute compromise.

[wilpuri]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

A quick comment on something that it calls my attention everytime I hear it. This is not only concerned with Finland.Let's be realistic. I would not suggest anyone to inspire in movements which have so far proved unable to provide an intelligent ideological evolution and a valid political alternative, and which some have moved unashamedly from failure to absolute compromise.

Do you mean that Finns should not look beyond their borders for inspiration and ideas because those ideas have proved a failure, or?

[Menydh]

I made it clear that it was not concerned only with Finland. It concerns all other countries.

I don't know if it is also necessary to mention that I'm referring to the present time. I'm not talking of ideologies or movements of the past, which would only (or mostly) be interesting here as an historical analysis.

Ideas (ideology) have stagnated. At best, some have produced new ideas which are little more than a replay of old ideas with not so well applied cosmetic changes. Or mere reformulations.

Strategy (politics) is running parallel to the above.

What I'm saying is that we all need to set ourselves free of all ballast from the past. Both from decades ago and from the immediate past. And avoid any new ballasts from being added.

The situation is everywhere bad enough to have obtained results, with the minimum effort and without compromising. This has not happened.

And, seen the state of things, we should also thing many years ahead of us. It is very stupid to stagnate until things have changed, and then try to make a quick move to save the moment, dropping then all included one's principles because they are now perceived as a ballast.

[Gnist]

Originally Posted by wilpuri

For example, the Nordic welfare state, which in Sweden has been known as the Folkhemmet, the People’s Home, is a clear source of inspiration when formulating the nationalist perspective on social policy. The early Nordic social democratic tradition also has many interesting figures, which have recognized the strength national unity (=homogenity) provides a small nation. It is with the nationalist perspective in mind that we should look for these sources of inspiration. Of course, we should not seek a ready formulated plan of action from the past, but rather, we should seek the ideal.

I find it surprising that "folkhemmet" appears so often also abroad in nationalist circles, as something supposedly positive, sometimes along with upholding Swedish social democrats as role-models, making it truly absurd. I want to stress the importance here of taking a closer look at the history of the so-called worker's movement and social democracy. Begin with Sweden, why not, that makes a good example since social democracy has been succesful in achieving their goals in Sweden like nowhere else. But after that you may also want to take a look at social democracy in a broader context. For this, I can recommend a volume written by Svante Nordin, Filosofernas krig, which is about the first world war and all the ideologies on stage at that time. It's in no way confined to commenting on social democracy, but like no other work I read it puts the rise of social democracy in context with other institutions, ideas, movements and trends.

Now for some comments on Swedish social democracy, "Folkhemmet", "homogenuity" etc. I think it will eventually become clear to anyone studying the history of the worker's movement and social democracy in Sweden as well as elsewhere in Europe, that it was from the very beginning conceived as a classical marxist movement with internationalist notions of identity and solidarity that will never be compatible with ethnic nationalism of any sort. "Folkhemmet", "homogenuity" and other concepts that they liked to flash about were always adopted because they knew that it was an effective way to gain votes. The very idea of folkhemmet wasn't even a social democratic concept originally, but one they stole from västgöten Rudolf Kjellén of Högerpartiet (The Right Wing Party). See this article, according to which Kjellén also founded the scientific discipline of geopolitics: Rudolf Kjellén - Wikipedia, den fria encyklopedin

"Homogenuity" was another fancy word that social democrats liked to flash about, but it was only idle talk, since with one arm they embraced "homogenuity", while at the same time they introduced mass immigration. Go further up in time, and you will find the social democratic slogan To be Swedish is to be social democrat ("Att vara svensk är att vara socialdemokrat"). Basically nothing changed during that time as far as the "ideals" - if any - of social democracy are concerned.

It just got worse the longer they pursued their internationalist agenda, even to a point where they made a mess of political life in Sweden in toto. All the other parties adapted to social democratic standards in a desperate attempt to break their reign, only to lose most of what their opposition was about. I will take this opportunity to remind you that the opposed Högerpartiet, now Moderaterna, cleansed their party of a declining nationalist faction no earlier than under their present chairman, statsminister Fredrik Reinfeldt. That cleansing took place during a period of time after the 2002 election. The disastrous political climate was a fact long before that, created by the social democrats with support of the people, since most people were unable to distinguish between what social democrats said, and what they did in practice.

In closing, I don't see any good reaon whatsoever to get inspired by social democracy.