The state vs. Mikko Ellilä
Outspoken Finnish political activist, Mikko Ellilä, wrote a lengthy blog post a while back (mirror site) sharing his views on African society & culture. Because of that post, he came under investigation from the Finnish police for incitement against a national or religious group. The case went to trial and the proceedings have been documented and translated into English. According to the translator, the verdict will come tomorrow.
Anyone who has read Mikko’s blog posts and comments knows that he writes very openly, and frankly. He’s certainly not afraid to dance around any issues and “political correctness” isn’t in his vocabulary. The blog post in question is textbook racism. However, I don’t believe the state should be prosecuting individuals for speaking their minds and excersizing their right to free speech. If Mikko would have simply “fluffed up” his post instead of being so blunt, I doubt he’d been in the situation he’s in now.
Finland needs an open dialogue on race, and with an open dialogue we’re sometimes going to hear things we’re not going to like - and Mikko’s case, we’re going to hear things we REALLY don’t like. We’re simply not going to end racism by forcefully silencing everyone we don’t agree with.
It’s hard to defend racist rhetoric like this, but situations like this is when defending our natural rights become most important. Soon the Finnish state will blacklist websites based on racism, just as they do with child pornography. If Mikko gives up life as a blogger, I’m sure he’ll be very welcome as a Finnish police officer, he’ll fit right in there - or maybe he could get a job working with our Prime Minister’s father…
Mika Illman [prosecution]: The text under discussion, “Society Consists of People”, has been published on the Internet. In the text, Africans are slandered and insulted. It includes material that is prohibited in section 11 of the penal code and that should therefore not be disseminated. I demand that the text be removed from the Internet. It is indisputable that the text has been disseminated as described in the penal code. What is in dispute is whether the statements included in the text are illegal. This case is not about freedom of opinion. Mr Ellilä is free to hold any opinions that he wishes. However, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits abusing these rights. Freedom of speech may not be misused.
Kari Silvennoinen [defense] [after denying that the text has been disseminated as described in the penal code]: The main issue here is whether the statements in the text are illegal or not. I find it hypocritical of the prosecutor to be “concerned” about freedom of speech while at the same time narrowing it down. The charge is about incitement against an ethnic group, but there is no ethnic group mentioned in the text that would be incited against. The text is an opinion piece and it contains links to articles in which facts supporting the opinions are presented. If the prosecutor wins this case, all provocative writings will have to be censored from the Internet. Thus the case is in the highest degree about freedom of speech.
Loading ...
Phil: “If Mikko would have simply “fluffed up” his post instead of being so blunt, I doubt he’d been in the situation he’s in now.”
In the US, you get arrested from carrying an open bottle of alcohol in a public place. But if you put it in a brown paper bag, then everything is A-OK.
Apparently the same standard is being used here with free speech.
Comment by Kristian — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 1:19 pm
Well, look at all those neo-nazi sites - they’re hosted in the USA for the reason of “freedom of speech”. In Germany or Finland your ass is in the slammer if you try to host some of those sites. The issue here is the “misuse” of the freedom of speech. Ellilä I think deliberately is looking for the boundaries here. Now it seems the prosecutor is acting like from being from the “Ministry of Truth” that dictates what “correct thinking” is. I’d say this thing will definitely go up there with Susan Russunen’s case to the appeals court regardless of the verdict.
Comment by Hank W. — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
Apparently the same standard is being used here with free speech.
Yeah I think so too. I think all too many Finns share the same opinions as he, not to mention many people in the Finnish parliament - the difference is, he’s not afraid to talk about it.
I betcha I could re-write his entire post, “fluff it up” (for lack of better words), and suddenly I’d find a lot of people agreeing with me without the word “racism” being mentioned once.
But stereotyping hundreds of millions of people is just retarded. And blaming race for things instead of SOCIO-ECONOMIC factors is just ignorance. Mikko says we shouldn’t have Africans in Finland because they cost the state more than they give - Well so does Lapland, and Eastern Finland. So let’s just get rid of those people too, right?
Comment by Phil — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 1:29 pm
“I betcha I could re-write his entire post, “fluff it up” (for lack of better words), and suddenly I’d find a lot of people agreeing with me …” Phil
You mean like with a cute picture of a cartoon bunny and bland, non-confrontational statements? Yeah, I bet you could.
Comment by Dave the Revelator — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 2:13 pm
Every person should have the right to make a fool of themselves. There is (or IMO should not be) a law against publicized flawed thinking. The best and perhaps the only cure against illogical conclusions is public exposure and everybody’s freedom to disagree with the publicized opinions of others.
My bet is that if people start to talk about Ellilä, they start to feel unease about their non-vocalized sympathies with him. But at the same time the flawed Finnish immigration policies and racist attitudes come under scrutiny. Of course there is a risk that it is mentally easier to just side with Ellilä and blame everything bad on the Somalis, but as long as we just “kill the messenger” we are not facing the facts. And I do not mean facts about Somalis but facts about Finns.
Comment by Mara — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 2:13 pm
“But stereotyping hundreds of millions of people is just retarded…
…Well so does Lapland, and Eastern Finland. So let’s just get rid of those people too, right?”
- Not to mention majority of the people inside ring I.
Wonder what is the saldo of that Ellilä -guy for the state.
Once in a while you say things that makes sense.
Grains of a blind hen?
I mean, mostly I feel like the blind hen sieving throught internet for rubbish. And a grain sometimes…
Comment by issi — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 2:25 pm
Post his writings on Stormfront. I’m sure they won’t mind. Then tell everyone how to google for it.
Comment by Grand Wizard — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 2:26 pm
Well, then again if this goes through, all the flower-hatted auntie sites that claim “Finns are racists” can be indited for the same kind of “generalization”… can’t have double standards now can we?
Comment by Hank W. — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 2:31 pm
Here’s the blog post that the fuss was all about (with the authorized English translation):
http://uusiviesti.blogspot.com/2007/08/yhteiskunta-koostuu-ihmisist-society.html
Comment by Adelphi — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 2:38 pm
Wow, I wonder what he thinks of that dumbass who ripped an ear off a statue on Easter Island….a shining example of smart white european people?
Comment by hfb — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 3:19 pm
As an example of “fluffing it up”, one might mention this blog post, to which there is a link in the first sentence of Ellilä’s text and which as I understand served as an inspiration for writing it:
http://izrailit.blogspot.com/2006/12/third-world-immigration-and.html
Of course, the writer of that text doesn’t lay any emphasis on race (and would probably disagree with Ellilä’s most racialist arguments) and instead attributes differences between populations to culture, but her basic claim is the same as Ellilä’s: “Finland is a nice place because it is inhabited by the Finns, and Somalia is a bad place because it is inhabited by the Somalis. If all the population of Somalia comes to Finland and brings the Somali culture with them, Finland will become a worse place. Inevitably.” Ellilä says the same thing in other words - “If Africans come to form the majority in a country outside Africa, the country turns African” - and this was one of the very sentences that the prosecutor singled out as being, in his view, “illegal”.
Yet because Vera Izrailit’s text is far less blunt and more diplomatic than Ellilä’s, I don’t think anyone in their right mind would think of filing a charge against that text. Not that I’m suggesting that State Prosecutor Mika Illman and Deputy Chancellor of Justice Mikko Puumalainen would be people in their right mind - and for all I know, if the prosecutor wins this case (and I have a bad feeling about it), it might mean the beginning of a massive purge throughout the Finnish blogosphere.
Comment by Adelphi — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 3:20 pm
about the topic, to me racism is quite close to be a a crime.
hey hank on uranus.fi “censorship” did you mean that Italy is in a mess because of all those foreigners?
What about the mess of a single finn totally ignorant about art and culture abroad?
Comment by x — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 4:29 pm
Phil, let’s get it straight here. You defend this twit Ellilä’s right to publish his “stuff” which may/may not be in the face of the law yet you claim Police actions in accordance with the law as racist and dispicable? Is this a fair summary of your opinion?
This leaves me scratching my head and wondering what is it exactly you’re smoking lately? Can you claim work stress? You seem all set to defend freedom of speech against a racist while opposing his views yet you’re not prepared to defend your own rights in a court of law and back down and accept censorship. At the same time you again make racist references to the Finnish Police force in this post while all the time they are simply enforcing the laws of the land.
Simply astounding. Take a holiday man or stay away from freedom of speech and race issues and get back to issues of economy and favourite movies.
Comment by Punter — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 4:32 pm
Finnish police are racists, but Mikko is an “outspoken political activist”. Lol!
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 4:39 pm
Okay, I didn’t finish the blog entry. Never mind.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 4:40 pm
Could this involve a quest for interpretation of the law? Pleading ignorance to the judicial system of Finland, did the prosecutor simply cherry pick an idiot for the sake of padding his (or her) CV, or did citizens of the state bring this to the attention of authorities?
@1.: Paper bagging an open container of alcohol on the streets of America does not comply with the law, it simply keeps the malt liquor cold. This bit of wisdom came straight from the mouths of the street corner philosophers. I would never ask such an incriminating question of the US police force.
Comment by Ari Sawyer — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 4:48 pm
Could this involve a quest for interpretation of the law? Pleading ignorance to the judicial system of Finland, did the prosecutor simply cherry pick an idiot for the sake of padding his (or her) CV, or did citizens of the state bring this to the attention of authorities?
@1.: Paper bagging an open container of alcohol on the streets of America does not comply with the law, it simply keeps the malt liquor cold.
This bit of wisdom came straight from the mouths of the street corner philosophers. I would never ask such an incriminating question of the US police force.
Comment by Ari Sawyer — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
Maybe the text was a lil’ bit soft, very well ponderate neutral if not even in solidarity with that poor racist and his “kkk=s-tyyliset-vigilantit” victims of all these immigrant conspiracy melting pots and human identity blablahs.
I couldn’t ‘ve understood well the text. Sorry. Maybe hank could be more decise in taking part.
Comment by x — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
Phil: “But stereotyping hundreds of millions of people is just retarded. And blaming race for things instead of SOCIO-ECONOMIC factors is just ignorance.”
Ellilä’s text is, like you said, indeed textbook racism. He is confusing cultural evolution with biology: there is no way the minuscule genetic differences between the “races” he is describing could have caused the cultural, social and economic differences between the people in different regions. Ellilä tries to back up his racism with studies, statistics etc., but this seems to be only in the form of rationalization “after the fact”, trying to validate his own prejudices with cherry-picked factoids or theories. His “scientific proof” is just a smokescreen for bona fide racism.
Comment by Drakon — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 4:57 pm
is this the same finnish police you said “Fucking Outrageous. This is racism at it’s finest. I wonder how many Finns of foreign background have been targeted simply because the color of their skin? “Hey there’s a black guy, let’s get’em!!”
Comment by Daniel — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 5:48 pm
I know it’s possible to speak pretty frankly on race without sounding like a wing nut, cos Obama did it a week or two ago. Check it out.
Comment by F.baube — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 6:28 pm
#17 But then again there are people who can’t figure out cultural evolution, social and economic differences. Its always racism if some foreigner in Finland does not get a job, nothing to do with the fact the person is unschooled because he comes from a country the government puts their money in weapons while the poor people cannot afford schools and kids are put to work so that the family won’t starve.
Comment by Hank W. — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 6:39 pm
I just read over the essay (in english). Jeez, ya get past the libertarianish intro and it immediately turns into an immense steaming pile of crapola. He would have race explain everything from the decline of imperial China to the inability to find a good five-cent cigar. And the comment about circus whips is just gratuitous dickheadedness. This guy sounds about as well-read as your average six-year-old but as opinionated and as grounded in reality as, oh I dunno, your average televangelist? Maybe he can tell us about how white people courageously sallied forth and tamed the dinosaurs.
If he’s going to spout off on race, no wonder he’s drawing fire. Sheesh. Maybe he should stick to a topic he knows something about. Like ketchup maybe?
Comment by F.Baube — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 7:00 pm
hfb:
“Wow, I wonder what he thinks of that dumbass who ripped an ear off a statue on Easter Island….a shining example of smart white european people?”
That is an isolated case which is not to be generalised.
As for Ms. Ellilä, I think that charges against him should be dropped. That sad little wanker has already gotten more publicity than he deserves for a lifetime.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 7:07 pm
As you can’t be piss broke to get to Easter Island this proves rich people cannot afford brains.
Comment by Hank W. — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 7:09 pm
Herostratus wanted to become famous so he burned down one of the seven wonders of the world, the temple of Artemis in Ephesus. How long will a moa ear carry?
Comment by Hank W. — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 7:13 pm
Looks like Finnish courts are being used to silence writers on the internet.
Sad.. You all don’t even have a club Gitmo to send these barbarian writers to. Or even some water to give them a good drink.
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 7:27 pm
You defend this twit Ellilä’s right to publish his “stuff” which may/may not be in the face of the law yet you claim Police actions in accordance with the law as racist and dispicable? Is this a fair summary of your opinion?
There’s a big difference between writing a blog post and an entire police force harassing random black people for years, don’t yah think? I help pay for the policeman’s salary, I feel I have a say in how they treat people
You seem all set to defend freedom of speech against a racist while opposing his views yet you’re not prepared to defend your own rights in a court of law and back down and accept censorship
Wha!? That makes zero sense on multiple levels.
Comment by Phil — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 7:40 pm
There’s a big difference between writing a blog post and an entire police force harassing random black people for years, don’t yah think?
Do you really believe that the entire police force is harassing black people? It seems a rather sensationalist claim.
Comment by Jonas G — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 7:56 pm
BTW our Vanhanen isn’t the only politician with a “problem daddy”.
Viiden viime vuoden aikana Pääsiäissaarten maailmankuuluja patsaita on turmellut neljä ulkomaalaista turistia ja yksi chileläinen, joka oli valtion omaisuudesta vastaavan ministerin isä.
So if you are the minister in charge of state property (and the statues) and your daddy goes to vandalize a moa statue
Comment by Hank W. — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 8:04 pm
The only reason he is prosecuted is that he is white. You don’t have to like, but that’s the fact. Only white people can be racist. The others, well, we are only talking about ethnic conflicts.
You might say “But stereotyping hundreds of millions of people is just retarded”. May be so, but that’s not illegal. At least it’s not when you are talking about white people. I can say when ever I want that all the americans are idiots. I know that you are not all white, but you get the idea.
If you read Elliläs post, you noticed that he is not talking about people but their cultures. There is big difference.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 8:08 pm
Do you really believe that the entire police force is harassing black people?
Seems like Helsinki and Vantaa police are the worst. Fortunately most communities don’t seem to enforce this racist regulations.
Comment by Phil — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 8:41 pm
Phil and others that claim this racism is going on (and harassing black people), I’m still waiting for your examples of it. Certainly by now if it was the problem you claim there would be countless numbers of you with stories. So, where are they??
As for not making sense on multiple levels, why is it you accept compromise in your case (censorship) yet claim so loudly and proudly to support it even in this obviously racist example of free speech? How does this all go together?
It seems lately that whenever you are challenged on a view that you avoid giving an answer and simply come up with a line. Not good enough Phil.
Without a line are you able to answer the above questions?
Comment by Punter — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 8:49 pm
Seems like Helsinki and Vantaa police are the worst. Fortunately most communities don’t seem to enforce this racist regulations.
Interesting. Do you think it helps ethnic cohesiveness/integration by labelling the entire police force as racist? It’s the sort of misrepresentation that can lead to distrust between people (esp immigrants) and the police if it is believed.
How are the regulations surrounding legal residence (i.e. that you need to have Finnish citizenship/Nordic citizenship/EU citizenship/a visa/a residence permit) racist? Surely every single country on earth has such laws. Does the USA just let everyone live there? I doubt it. Such laws are just realistic, it’s just not realistically (and perhaps unfortunately) not possible to let every single person more completely freely around the world. Again, claiming sensationally that Finnish laws regarding residency are racist can not do any good in helping integration. They just do the reverse. Plus, right wing genuine racists will love you for them, as they’ll use them to lend weight to their real racist views of why immigrants shouldn’t be tolerated and Finland should only be for the Finns.
Comment by Jonas G — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 8:52 pm
I wonder if the dude has read http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/ *snerk*
Comment by hfb — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 9:04 pm
You just gotta love it when this Australian twit who honestly thinks that it’s ridiculous to suggest that the Finns could have culture, pretends to be the anti-racism warrior. Lol.
Here’s an article on racism in Finland by the way:
http://svenskfinland.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/racism-is-virtually-non-existent-in-the-military/
Bye.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 9:07 pm
Yeah, don’t let that door hit you on your way out. Let me make it clear that I have not said I’m any anti-racism warrior nor have I said racism doesn’t exist in Finland.
My bitch here is with Phil stating that the Finnish Police are acting in a racist manner by carrying out the law they are sworn to uphold. He suggests that the Police are Nazi like racists implementing some master plan from the higher powers of The State against honest law abiding foreigners. This is simply untrue and as JG states, only helps feed the picture of foreigners here to the real right wing racists.
Perhaps when you learn to read and understand ones posts you might then begin to comment on their opinions and values.
Comment by Punter — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 9:28 pm
So why blacks are better runners and boxers…careful now. Compare that to the PC idea of every human race being absolutely equal intelligentwise.
Comment by tim73 — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 9:45 pm
“Do you really believe that the entire police force is harassing black people?
Seems like Helsinki and Vantaa police are the worst. Fortunately most communities don’t seem to enforce this racist regulations.”
You propably haven’t noticed but you don’t live in USA anymore. There is pretty good chances that any black person is not a citizen of Finland.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 9:51 pm
Fortunately most communities don’t seem to enforce this racist regulations
Thats because the sheriff of Nowheremäki knows all the three foreigners in town, and who would go there to be an “illegal”?
Comment by Hank W. — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 10:03 pm
Anon:
“If you read Elliläs post, you noticed that he is not talking about people but their cultures. ”
Either you haven’t read it or the HJ reading circle needs to brush up its reading comprehension instruction.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 10:41 pm
timmy:
“So why blacks are better runners and boxers…careful now. Compare that to the PC idea of every human race being absolutely equal intelligentwise.”
A running analogy of Ellilä’s arguments would be that white people are incapable of even finishing a marathon. Well, unless they are sparred by a black runner, that is.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 11:44 pm
#42 Frankie “A running analogy of Ellilä’s arguments would be that white people are incapable of even finishing a marathon. Well, unless they are sparred by a black runner, that is.”
Ah, I just looked at myself in the mirror and wish to state this is not the case
(and I don’t think there were any of those coloured fellas chasing either….)
Comment by Punter — Wed, Mar 26th, 2008 @ 11:48 pm
I am getting ready for a posting that will stink up da hood..
Comment by infinndel — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 12:04 am
When you beleive you are right,you are wrong then.
When you stick on Science, you lack morals,simply cause science doesn’t have morals,and this what Ellila lacks, so many finns do.
If you care about this claiming,you lack morals too,cause this is Lemma!!
Comment by mimich — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 12:16 am
I don’t care about this claiming.
I have my morals and values even if I prefer science than superstitions.
Comment by Santaklaus — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 2:56 am
@45,
That’s nonsense. You can be a scientist or trust in science and still be a ethical person with morals. That’s called “humanism”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism_%28life_stance%29
Comment by Åboy — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 12:39 pm
They’re lazy and violent drunks.
I wonder what the authorities would say if somebody squealed on me and my hate mongering that has been going on for years on this blog. Could Phil be in trouble for publicizing it? The law is not clear on that.
But then again incitement against a national group can’t mean the Finns in Finland, I suppose. The case should be taken up somewhere else, where this blog is read. Like here in Boston. Or if this kind of incitement is allowed here, then a less racist place.
Surely you can’t say in public in Britain, for example, that the niggers or Finns are lazy and violent drunks.
Comment by hbf — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 1:17 pm
Surely you can’t say in public in Britain, for example, that the niggers or Finns are lazy and violent drunks.
Yeah, that’s funny considering that it’s true
Comment by Cunter — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 1:28 pm
LOL…someone tries to impersonate me and can’t even manage to get the nick right!
Comment by hfb — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 2:57 pm
Mikko Ellilä was convicted of “incitement of hatered” and ordered to pay “60 day fines” which for the self-proclaimed sosiaalipummi a.k.a. student amounts for 360 euros in fines. The blog text is also “forfeit” as in it should be removed from the blog (*) - once the higher court verdict comes into force, as Ellilä has appealed over the verdict.
(*)Then again, as the Australian administrator of the “Thinker to Thinker” blog where the offending entry was first published at has disabled Mikko Elliläs account, so he cannot add nor remove anything, the end result of the whole case is that the text will with high probability stay there, until maybe the whole archive gets purged.
So that is quite an interesting case of jurisdiction as well.
Comment by Hank W. — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 6:15 pm
3 cheers for the judge
Comment by Punter — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 7:49 pm
i think Ellilä should change his medication,before worse happens!
Comment by mimich — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 8:28 pm
Punter: “3 cheers for the judge”
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
- Martin Niemöller
Comment by Adelphi — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 9:03 pm
Meanwhile in the real world we see what “censorship” and “correct thinking” means:
CAIRO (AFP) - Outspoken Egyptian editor Ibrahim Eissa was sentenced to six months in jail on Wednesday for writing rumours about President Hosni Mubarak’s health. Eissa, editor-in-chief of Al-Dustur, was charged with spreading “false information… damaging the public interest and national stability” and had faced up to three years in prison.Speculation about Mubarak was widely reported in Egypt’s independent press and included reports of his hospitalisation, travel abroad for treatment and even death. At least seven journalists were sentenced in September alone to up to two years in prison on charges ranging from misquoting the justice minister to spreading rumours about 79-year-old Mubarak.
First they came out for the bloggers,
But I wasn’t a blogger.
Comment by Hank W. — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 9:29 pm
Adelphi, nr 54, don’t you think that Ellilä is more closely aligned with the Nazis than the other groups that were persecuted in Nazi Germany. It was after all the Nazis that incited hatred against ethnic (and other) groups and indeed, as we know, went much further than just that. I doubt your eloquent quotation’s author meant people who held Nazi-style viewpoints; rather those who opposed them and were targeted by them.
Freedom of speech absolutely must be defended, and that includes those who misuse it to incite hatred. So, Adelphi, I assume that you would not, in today’s world, advocate that the Nazi’s statements or propaganda films about the Jews would be allowed to be distributed?
Comment by Jonas G — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 9:40 pm
“I doubt your eloquent quotation’s author meant people who held Nazi-style viewpoints; rather those who opposed them and were targeted by them.”
I doubt that too, but I would like to see where exactly Ellilä has presented “Nazi-style viewpoints”.
Comment by Adelphi — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 9:48 pm
Don’t you think claiming strange racial theories are behind why certain societies are more advanced in certain ways is rather a lot like the social Darwinism used by Hitler and the Nazi’s in their arguments that the German/”Ayran race” were the superior masterrace?
Comment by Jonas G — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 9:52 pm
While I don’t agree with Ellilä’s views on “race”, I think I oppose the Minority Ombudsman’s agenda here more. Ellilä’s “colorful” description:
Mikko “Big Brother” Puumalainen has said in numerous press statements and interviews that all opinions that help maintain the current anti-immigrationist political atmosphere in Finland ought to be totally criminalised. In other words, he wants to change the political climate of the country by banning all opinions that are not in line with the politically correct multiculti teletubby view of immigrants.
wants to change the political climate of the country by banning all opinions that are not in line
Thats my beef right there - I remember living in Kekkoslovakia, with “Finlandisierung” and the laws against “endangering relations with a friendly nation” while everyone knew what “the friendly nation” was. So really I oppose this kind of “correct thinking” policies. If there is propaganda that is one thing - but not being able to counter the propaganda… the question is, as always *who* decides what is “right”. Lets say JonasG would be banned from writing his Ahlbäck comments because someone had decided that that all opinions that help maintain the current anti-Sfp political atmosphere in Finland ought to be totally criminalised… now you’d think that was idiotic? Or totally allright, to maintain the with the politically correct view of the “unity” of the Swedish-speakers? Well, I guess then we can well go back banning Donald Duck because he wears no trousers(*).
(*) its an urban legend, I know.
Comment by Hank W. — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 10:07 pm
I don’t think there is anything “strange” about theories concerning differences between races. As far as I know, such theories - at least the theories that Ellilä uses to back up his statements - are based on measurable facts. Could you specify what exactly you find strange about them?
To make things absolutely clear: although the whole theory of there being an “Aryan race” has been shown to be bunk, I don’t think anyone should be forbidden of claiming publicly that not only does the Aryan race exists, but is also superior to all other races. This is a viewpoint that may seem offensive to some, as many viewpoints are apt to do, but that’s the price we have to pay for having freedom of speech at all. This should be seen as distinctive from saying that because of the alleged superiority of this or that race, members of other races should be hunted down and murdered, which I think should, of course, be a punishable offence. But Ellilä has not advocated anything like this.
Comment by Adelphi — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 10:15 pm
Hank, why did your comment nr 59 change after it appeared the first time? It’s hardly fair to Puumalainen to quote a far-right blog (the italic part of your comment) as representative of his viewpoints.
Adelphi, when I read it the other day, I found it strange because it was so clearly full of racism and I found it reminded me exactly to the sort of statements/rhetoric made by the Nazis on race. So, I found it strange because it’s so clearly anachronistic in its views. I found his article a) over-simplistic and b) racist. So, yes, for me it’s a strange view to be giving in the 2000-decade and unacceptable.
Comment by Jonas G — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 10:32 pm
Well why not, who should we quote, some flower-hatted blog oozing milk and honey?
The original quote of Puumalainen is from Aamulehti:
“Erityisesti tulisi puuttua niiden toimintaan, jotka pyrkivät julkisuuden avulla ylläpitämään maahanmuuttovastaista asenneilmastoa.”
Which I think is hardly a fair step from “thought police”…
Tähän tulisi määrätietoisesti kehittää keinoja, esimerkiksi hyödyntämällä kokemuksia lapsipornografian levittämiseen puuttumisesta.
So while Ellilä gets all frothy, I do see a pattern there, and Ellilä makes the same analysis that I have come to. Not quite as colorfully… or should I say “with as kooky a rant”.
Comment by Hank W. — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 10:47 pm
Hank:
“Mikko Ellilä was convicted of “incitement of hatered” and ordered to pay “60 day fines” which for the self-proclaimed sosiaalipummi…”
Indeed, that seems to be a choice profession among libertards.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 10:49 pm
That was one of the highlights of the transcript I couldn’t pass
Comment by Hank W. — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 10:51 pm
It may be a strange view to hold nowadays, but do you really think something should be forbidden for being “strange” at a given age? And if so, how can there be any advancement in science, philosophy and human thought in general? I need hardly remind you that in all ages there have been ideas and thoughts that people have seen as “strange” simply because so few people have held them, and because of the very radicality of these ideas, inquisitions everywhere have always been eager to forbid them. We are seeing the same thing happening right now, before our own eyes.
Comment by Adelphi — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 10:51 pm
I’m still waiting for infinndel to stink up the hood. So far he has only stunk.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 10:52 pm
Well why not, who should we quote, some flower-hatted blog oozing milk and honey?
Preferebly neither ;)! But that option is preferable to someone who holds views approximate to the Nazi regime in 1930s Germany.
Well, considering the post the ombudsman occupies, it’s hardly surprising that he would be interested in developing such methods. I don’t think one should be overly alarmed by such statements. He’s just trying to do his job in the best way he sees fit. And indeed, I have to say, I don’t see why the Police shouldn’t go after such people with the same vigour as they do with child pornographists. It’s after all their job to enforce the law. I’ve seen many cases of clear incitements to hatred of a ethnic group. Before they (as a result) shut it down, you just needed to visit Suomi24.fi’s “Language Politics” discussion board, and you’d probably texts meeting the criteria.
Censorship of the finlandisation type is never going to occur today. The government/parliament would never buy it. Nor would the courts, both Finnish and European.
Comment by Jonas G — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 10:57 pm
No Adelphi, perhaps “strange” is a bad word choice of me in English. Substitute it for “racist” in my original post on this matter (nr 58). For it’s in that context that I mean it.
Comment by Jonas G — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 11:00 pm
I don’t really know why just that one blog entry caught the eye… Just below the blog entry in court (I went there and read it so I’d know what I am talking about) is one on African immigrants that is - if possibly - even more offensive. I don’t know though where you can call a place primitiiviseksi paskaläjäksi and *not* offend anyone. So really just removing this *one* blog entry… really, that verdict is getting close to being a total joke.
Comment by Hank W. — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 11:03 pm
#67 Yes, that suomi24 definitely was a kook central. But using the same methods as expressed here, it seems like you wouldn’t be allowed to have any opinion even unfavorable or godforbid against pakkoruotsi, to get immediately banned. I think thats a bit of a “Kekkoslovakian” way of handling things.
People won’t believe things if they are forced to believe things, then they’ll trumpet the kookiest opinions against just out of spite.
Comment by Hank W. — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 11:11 pm
Jonas G: “No Adelphi, perhaps ’strange’ is a bad word choice of me in English. Substitute it for ‘racist’ in my original post on this matter (nr 58).”
So you think racism (as an opinion) is a crime? Fair enough. However, according to the Finnish law, it is not.
Comment by Adelphi — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 11:13 pm
No, I don’t think racism is a crime in Finnish law. That’s not what he has been convicted of either. My comment 58 makes no mention to refer to whether he has or he has not has commented a crime in any case.
Comment by Jonas G — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 11:25 pm
So do you think he has committed a crime? And if so, what exactly is the crime?
Comment by Adelphi — Thu, Mar 27th, 2008 @ 11:58 pm
Adelphi, google “Mikko Ellilä Jüdische Auswanderungsamt”. Need I say more? “When they came for Nazis”, in deed.
Comment by Pekka Pessi — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 3:27 am
No right can really be absolute even in a liberal democratic society - if only because most rights are actually in some potential conflict with each other. That is why I can’t publish here Phil’s credit card number and pin code (should I know them), even though such a prohibition clearly interferes with my freedom of expression. The same obviously goes with libel too. So, even the freedom of speech is not absolute and we have to find a sensible balance between it and other inalienable liberal rights. This said, it is a very central, very crucial right that is basically the foundation of our free society, so we have to be extremely cautious when interfering with it. This Ellilä person is obviously a sad case quite obsessed by his primitive racial “theories” but I’m not really sure that we should stop him from posting them on the net. Such embarrisingly low level “reasoning” is often the best argument against itself. There is no incitement towards violence against a group of people there (which, btw, is a very reasonable standard to limit the freedom of expression).
Comment by mjr — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 7:49 am
“Censorship of the finlandisation type is never going to occur today.”
But it is. The new Soviet Union is Islam and it’s telling Europeans (and everyone else around the world) very clearly what’s allowed and what isn’t. I’m just wondering when this Wilders dude is going to get it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7317506.stm
Comment by Åboy — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 10:15 am
Really????????
Isn’t racism a CRIME in finland?
what a racist place!!!
;/
Comment by x — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 1:03 pm
<>
Comment by x — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
Censored again. Well, genia, the EU in 2001 banned racism, article 21 of the charter of fundamental rights.
Comment by x — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 1:10 pm
Read the law first and then make your stupid comments.
Comment by Hank W. — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 1:19 pm
I have just watched 3 times,on the internet, the newly released
internet movie by Geert Wilders “Fitna- the Movie”
I have no comment on this film because internut sensor-chip device
now moniters every move I make on FFT…..
I will not even provide the hyperlink to this by now condemned movie.
I am sure all of the inhabitants of FFT can figure out how to find this EXPLOSIVE movie…..
Lets hear what people on FFT have to say after watching that internet
16 minute movie…
Now it is Friday in moonbat Massachusetts,and there will be many types of seething,angered people in the world..
I gots fab broadband and good beer…and it will surely be entertaining on the internut and main stream media today
Comment by infinndel — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
Pekka Pessi: “Adelphi, google ‘Mikko Ellilä Jüdische Auswanderungsamt’.”
I googled the words, but came up with no results at all, so I fail to see your point.
Comment by Adelphi — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 3:32 pm
Pekka Pessi is referring to a debate I had with him on Usenet a couple of years ago. In that debate I claimed that the Nazis tried to make the Jews leave Germany before the war, and that the Holocaust began during the war. This is, of course, common knowledge, and can be found in any history book.
This is a post from the Usenet thread in question:
http://groups.google.com/group/sfnet.keskustelu.politiikka/msg/6c592aea4e20eb20
Money quote:
“Trotz dieser Schwierigkeiten wurden seit der Machtübernahme bis zum Stichtag 31.10.1941 insgesamt rund 537.000 Juden zur Auswanderung gebracht.”
Why Pekka Pessi thinks this discussion is somehow relevant to the court case at hand is totally beyond me.
Comment by Mikko Ellilä — Fri, Mar 28th, 2008 @ 11:27 pm
and you read that comment n 71, whank dumbass.
“So you think racism (as an opinion) is a crime? Fair enough. However, according to the Finnish law, it is not.”
Comment by x — Sat, Mar 29th, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
Well evidently because “racism” as a concept isn’t defined nor mentioned in the criminal code.
Read the law first, dumbass, and then discuss the points of it.
Comment by Hank W. — Sat, Mar 29th, 2008 @ 5:21 pm
tell yer locals to read the lae whankah.
read the comment, emptyhead.
you’re just a bigot racist xenophobe.
Comment by x — Sun, Mar 30th, 2008 @ 1:12 pm
finland is racist, tragicomic.
Comment by x — Sun, Mar 30th, 2008 @ 1:13 pm
x: I presume you’re not Asian, then.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sun, Mar 30th, 2008 @ 4:35 pm
I’m not used to this asian lack of human rights.
Comment by x — Sun, Mar 30th, 2008 @ 5:05 pm
Mikko: You claimed Nazis were trying to make Jew to leave country for Palestine. This is, of course, a text-book Neo-Nazi point-of-view which has nothing to do with the deeds of real Nazis.
I’m pretty familiar with Adolf Eichmann and his personal history, so I knew better. I can read the German documents detailing the bureaucrat reasoning behind genocide well as you - perhaps even better. What was is your rationale for buying the neo-Nazi party line?
I seems to me that you are way too quick to adopt racist point-of-view and way too slow to drop it once it proves contrafactual. There might be several reasons for that kind of behavior, but your being a Nazi and racist is - besides being my personal favorite - most plausible explanation given your fascination of WWII-era Germany.
Comment by Pekka Pessi — Sun, Mar 30th, 2008 @ 11:04 pm
Strawman & red herring.
What you call “a textbook Neo-Nazi point-of-view” is exactly what Jewish holocaust memorial foundations such as Yad Vashem are saying.
“What was your rationale for buying the neo-Nazi party line?”
I have never bought the neo-Nazi party line. Go troll somewhere else.
“I seems to me that you are way too quick to adopt racist point-of-view and way too slow to drop it once it proves contrafactual.”
The fact that in the 1930s the Nazis tried to make the Jews leave Germany is not “a racist point-of-view” and not “contrafactual” at all. It’s true. Check out Yad Vashem or Nizkor or the Simon Wiesenthal Center for more information regarding the holocaust.
“There might be several reasons for that kind of behavior, but your being a Nazi and racist is - besides being my personal favorite - most plausible explanation given your fascination of WWII-era Germany.”
I am not “fascinated” by WWII-era Germany; on the contrary, I have repeatedly said the Nazis were basically communist scumbags and I hate them.
And you call me “a Nazi and a racist” because I believe in information published by Yad Vashem, Nizkor and the Simon Wiesenthal Center. You should go tell them they are anti-Semitic Nazis. I’m sure they would be rather surprised.
Comment by Mikko Ellilä — Mon, Mar 31st, 2008 @ 5:11 pm
What about your blog? Wasn’t it with racist contents? Or now you tell that racist is who notices that you wrote racist things.
Comment by x — Fri, Apr 4th, 2008 @ 11:56 am