That’s the secret that our leftist media does not want the population to realise.

In the 60′s we used to have every fourth person a communist, now that same 25% is the same 25% that votes SDP and the other 70% of us is deluded into thinking we’re dominated by leftists.

And our only options are a government of SDP & Keskusta or SDP and Kokoomus and any talk of a true majority wing government of Keskusta and Kokoomus is evil.

Unfortunately, that 25% dominates journalism and trade unions so they are masters of drumming up their view and making the rest of us fail to realise what we actually are, a rightwing (not nazi) nation.

I think KePu and Kokoomus have improved their relations over the years, but I suspect the liberal wing of Kokoomus has problems with bible thumping – jesusing around wing of KePu and the farmer wing of KePu doesn’t like the wine sipping – cheek kissing EU wing of Kokoomus, who in turn are holding their noses for farmers.

what we actually are, a rightwing (not nazi) nation.

Who elected Halonen?

Swedish parties don’t seem to mind forming these pre-election coalitions, why don’t Finnish parties do this?

I suppose that people that vote “against” something as opposed to “for” something might not vote at all. See, if you are voting FOR Kokoomus AGAINST SDP and Keskusta….thats one thing.. but If you know for sure that you are actually voting for Keskusta/Kokoomus cabinet, you might be discouraged to vote at all.

This also allows the parties to better throw mud against each other. Kokoomus lost the last election because several parlament-representatives went into record saying that even if Kokoomus won, Lipponen would still become the PM. The endresult was that the election became Lipponen vs. Jätteenmäki, taking votes that would otherwise may have gone to Kokoomus.

And afterwards, SDP and Keskusta went and formed a cabinet.. Which makes it very hard to vote against someone in finnish politics. When politics polarize into mano-a-mano battle, neither of the combatants lose, but those who watch in the sidelines.

Well the first difference that comes to mind is that we have three parties of which each can hope to become the biggest one and thus get the right to form the government and nominate the PM. If Kokoomus, for example, became the biggest but had promised to form the government with the Centre, it couldn’t naturally bargain with the SDP: “We liked to form the government with the Centre, but if you promise to this and this, we’ll form it with you”. Kokoomus has, after all, certain things more in common with the SDP than with Keskusta (the EU, agricultural sudsidies, labor market negotiations). The latest Kokoomus-SDP government worked quite well, internally at least.

In Sweden the only hope the right has to become “the biggest” is to unite forces. And even then they didn’t dare to suggest to implement politics much different from that of the SDP.

IN the 80s Kokoomus and Keskusta made a pact to form the government together, though, but even then they kept it secret.

As Tomia rightly says, Socialdemokraterna are such a massive force in Swedish politics that the only way they could be defeated is to take the Alliance action that the right wing parties did in Sweden. Even with their majority between the four parties, the Social Democrats are still the largest single party (despite their worst result since 1928) and have significantly more mandates in the riksdag than the next nearest largest individual party (the moderates). In Finland, we have three parties (SDP, Kesk/Cent. and Kok/Saml.) that are all fairly close to each other in terms of support.

I think it is bad for democratic choice that the two sides are becoming so increasingly polarised. But it is still far from the 2 party style in the USA, where you essentially have two parties who are two sides of the same coin.

As for Finns interest in Sweden’s election. It is the next door country and this is a very significant election in Swedish history. It is the first time that the right has won in a period of strong economy. The Alliance tactic also makes it more comment worthy.

Whilst I agree, the Swedes can sometimes come across as snooty and superior (I remember one Swede saying to me, on learning I was a Swedish speaking Finn, “Thank goodness you speak Nordens Latin and not some other rubbish tongue”, which I found slightly offensive as a Finlander), they were in fact interested in for example our presidential election. There were extra news transmissions late in the evening to give the result (and even in Finnish from SVT Uutiset for the Finnish speaking community in Sweden) of the presidential election. The major newspapers covered it also fairly extensive. Perhaps as an American, having grown up with the mainstream American media’s idea of what consitututes global news coverage, it is hard to believe that there can be interest in a different country’s affairs in a land.

In the 60’s we used to have every fourth person a communist, now that same 25% is the same 25% that votes SDP and the other 70% of us is deluded into thinking we’re dominated by leftists.

If the communist quarter – their vote actually topped out at 23 percent – became SDP voters, what happened to the people who used to vote for SDP? Did they become loyal Coalition supporters?

Your numbers are off, anyway. In the 1960s, about 42-48 percent of the electorate voted for either SDP or the communist Finnish People’s Democratic League. Nowadays about 34-39 percent vote for SDP or the Left Alliance.

Who elected Halonen?

SDP, Left Alliance, most Greens, a considerable amount of Centre supporters (Coalition supporters in 2000), plus a bunch of non-ideological voters – mainly. The first three categories amount to about 40-45 percent of the electorate; the last two provided the rest of her support.

Perhaps as an American, having grown up with the mainstream American media’s idea of what consitututes global news coverage, it is hard to believe that there can be interest in a different country’s affairs in a land.

What do you mean? America has plenty of interest in news of other countries. For instance, there’s lots of reporting about Texas, California, southern Florida…..

By the way, what is Nordens Latin?

Who elected Halonen?

Not me. But I’d say she got the anti-NATO vote. Supposedly, it would have been decided via referendum; but, nonetheless, people decided to show their sentiments early-on by voting for someone who opposes joining—and therefore wouldn’t initiate a referendum in the first place.

She also got the anti-privatization and anti-authoritarian vote, obviously. Generally, I see her more as a protest candidate than someone people really wanted.

Finland doesn’t have a liberal party. Last one Nuorsuomalaiset was buried in 1994.

too bad the world greatest country has a real unemployment close to 17% and a declining per capita GDP

too bad the world greatest country has a real unemployment close to 17% and a declining per capita GDP

Hmmm, no country comes to mind. Ok, let’s hear the answer.

By the way, what is Nordens Latin?

Probably a poor translation on my part; “The Latin of the Nordic countries”… in the opinion of the particular Swede who made that remark to me, that was his rather arrogant opinion of the Swedish language… i.e. the lingua franca, superior to all the other languages in Scandinavia. I suppose I should have pointed out the limited use of Latin these days.

Typical Swedish snobbism. Danes have hard time understanding Swedish, Norwegians have the same love&hate relationship with the Swedes as do Finns. Icelandic isn’t close to Swedish. So basically they’re standing there on their own with the linguivistic question. Of course we are close to them, but Nordic Latin: n’existe pas.

Estonians like Swedes, but it’s because they want to be part of Nordic. They’ve got a long way to go for that..

Centre and the Swedish People’s Party belong to the liberal group in the EU parliament, whereas Coalition’s MEPs are in the conservative group even though some of them are heck of a lot more liberal than some Centre MEPs. These parties aren’t necessarily all that liberal, but they have liberal wings, at least. Then there are the libertarian Liberals with their massive 0.3 percent share of the vote.

Isn’t the lingua franca of the Nordic countries English? Scandinavians might use Swedish among themselves, but if there are native Finnish speakers present, I would guess that English is preferred in most cases.

English it is. Nordic people speak English quite well.

@11 I’ll let you read The Economist and find out for yourself (I’ll give you a hint… it is not Finland)

English as ‘Scandinavianish’ are the lingua francas. I agree it is snobish of what that Swede said, that’s why I used it as an example.

However, often when we are speaking to each other (so long as no Finns are in the group), we just use our own tongues (be it Swedish, Norwegian or Danish). It’s easier enough to understand Norwegian and Danish. Icelanders all have to learn Danish at school. Although of course, sometimes and perhaps increasingly often English.

Actually Boyle, the Danes understand Swedish really quite well. It is more Swedish speakers that have difficulty to understand Danish as their pronounciation is much more shall we say ‘eccentric’ compared to Swedish and also Norwegian.

I should point out my first line should read England AND ‘Scandinavianish’ rather than ‘as’ in my previous post.

Estonians like Swedes, but it’s because they want to be part of Nordic. They’ve got a long way to go for that..

I think the image of Swedes in Estonia is the same as in Finland – but when your land borders Russia and Latvia, Sweden takes on a special golden aura. These things must be looked at in context gentlemen.

We had a nice long conversation about Estonia’s Nordic leanings at my blog … I still give it another 10-15 years before they’re on the council. It will work like this – right-wing governments will become the entrenched majorities in Sweden and Finland, said right-wing governments think the sun shines out of Mart Laar’s asshole, Estonia gets wealthier —->

“Welcome to the sauna, boys. Make yourself at home, and while you’re at it, could you get me another birch branch?”

Here’s the link:

http://palun.blogspot.com/2006/09/only-post-communist-nordic-country.html

By the way, I think that the “English” thing in Scandinavia is annoying. The fun part of going to a foreign country is having to learn some new phrases. Having a bunch of know-it-all Scandinavians reply to your advances in English sucks.

The highlight of my Iceland trip may have been when I had to buy food from an old woman who didn’t speak English and I had to use my guidebook.

When I am abroad, I want to be abroad. Not in some more expensive, larger Epcot Center.

“Americans, especially those like me who support a “3rd-party candidate”, are constantly complaining about the U.S.’s two-party duopoly – they’d love to have Sweden or Finland’s multi-party system.”

For a multi-party system to EVER become realisable in the U.S. (or the U.K. for that matter) the whole idea of electing one candidate per “voting district” would have to be abolished. This utterly un-democratic voting mechanism – common to two of the MOST “snobbish” countries, when it comes to giving others advice about e.g. democracy – is a disgrace.

Now, Phil wants to plant the first seed on the road towards this idiotic system, by suggesting a coalition similar to the one in Sweden also in Finland. We’ll see about the future of the Swedish coalition (I personally do not think it will succeed very well, but that remains to be seen), but I believe that the differences between the supposed coalition parties in Finland are way larger than in Sweden. And many others have already written of other difficulties w.r.t. importing this idea to Finland directly.

I agree with you Thomas. I also don’t think the unity of the Alliance here in Sweden will stay tight for long. Cracks are already appearing on a few minor issues. The Centre Party leader Maud Olofsson has said that the new government should be 50% women, whilst the other three parties say ministers must be chosen on their merit regardless of gender.

The Centre Party is also more clearly in favour of implementing permanently the congestion tax / environment fee in Stockholm than the other three bourgois parties. It will be interesting to see what kind of fudge they come to here in Stockholm on that now that the residents of Stockholm kommun itself have voted yes, but in some of the surrounding municipalities where they had referundums (on the basis that they are affected by what goes on in STockholm) with no votes. The Moderates promised both to go by the vote of Stockholm but also to consider those surrounding municipalities in the pre election period.