Pro Karelia ry
ANTIFASCISTS AND THE DISMANTLING OF WAR GUILT
- Finnish mentality is still hijacked
- Fascistic antifascism seeks to prevent change
- Antifascist always labels the opponent as fascist
- Is there any difference between fascists and antifascists?
- Do fascists and antifascists seek for an advice from Russia?
- The innocence of Finland is the penultimate reason for dismantling
- The grounds behind dismantling are beyond reasonable doubt
- Dismantling of the burden of guilt is the ultimate goal
Finnish mentality is still hijacked
The official position of Finland has been to recall the guilt of war for more than sixty years. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the sphere of fear against Soviet Union weakened, but still seems to remain in the circles of Finnish politicians.
Indeed, these politicians still seem to be afraid of initiating those actions by which the aggressions perpetrated towards Finland and the Finns during the last wars could finally be dismantled.
Finland, in a manner, has been victimizing itself and has thus remained in a vacuum of guilt obeying to the principle feature of the Stockholm Syndrome, with the difference that “the mind hijackers” of Finland have been primarily self-absorbed, created and maintained.
The war guilt existing in Finland is a plain domestic matter since the laws, the charges brought before the courts and the trials held over these charges were of a domestic origin. The verdicts given by the Finnish courts may only be dismantled by those courts. Consequense being that in practice the political rehabilitations, restorations of honor or any other political liturgies have no meaning at all.
Fascistic antifascism seeks to prevent change
When the politicians have overcome the worst of their fears, the people willing to prevent for a new chance come in a form of individuals calling themselves as antifascists. They are a small but loud group of people who seek guidance in particular from Russia and Baltic countries.
Behind the rhetorhics of these groups one may see the simplest of the KGB lessons: Whatever action you oppose, label it as fascistic and name the people working for this given aim as fascists.
The superfluous use of these rhethorics is actually leading into an inflation of the term. There is a story of a behavior of a Russian child which sheds light on the issue. When the child is in a store, and doesn’t get whatever he happens to want, he throws himself on the floor of the market and yells from the bottom of his lungs: “Momma is a fascist!”
Antifascist always labels the opponent as fascist
The simplicity if this method is brilliant and its success can be great on an occasion. Stalin used this method in his war rhetoric’s. After Germany had attacked Poland, as described in the secret minutes of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, a few weeks after the Soviet Union intervened, just to give the final stab of death, Stalin claimed that he just came to rescue Poland from the fascists.
When the Soviet Union started the Winter War by attacking Finland, it was expelled from the League of Nations. The Soviet Union zealously tried to appeal that it only attacked against the Finnish White Fascists. This tomfoolery no longer was accepted by the League of Nations.
Is there any difference between fascists and antifascists?
What is the difference between a fascist and an antifascist? The methods seem to be identical. Both of them approve the lessons of Stalin and Hitler. They both seem to act according to the Loyola Principle which explains that the ends justify the means.
It is not often when one gets to hear so profound twisting of the truth as recently prompted by a certain tabloid docent and a doctor of theology who just recently has earned his academic degree.
Recently summons have been reached in twisting the truth with the publications of certain tabloids referring to a doctor of theology who recently earned his academic degree.
According to a KGB principle particular to the KGB, both rerer to e.g. Pro Karelia as a fascistic group, and with a voice of degree in theological sciences even as far as a sect of hatred.
When the turth provides no grounds for an assault, you have to create your own excuses and falsify and misinterpret documents. And the most simple way to attack, is to name the target of the attack as a fascist.
Do fascists and antifascists seek for an advice from Russia?
The most unfortunate thing in the action of these fascistic antifascists is that they try to involve Russia in all the aspects of their actions. The writer and director of the documentary The Soviet Story, >Edvins Snore says that a common factor for both neo-nazis and antifascists is a fluent skill in the Russian language and frequent trips to Russia. Is it, after all, Russia, where you have to get your guidance?
Mixing Russia to all questionable activity creates Russia unfortunately a very bad imago, and interferes with all her aspirations of attempts of a moral resurrection.
Ties to Russia scare several Finnish politicians, and therefore many duck and keep their silence. Being afraid of upsetting Russia, many are in consequence afraid to bring forth the issue of war guilt. One should bear in mind, however, the matter of dismantling war guilt sentences is not in the hands of the antifascists, or fascists, even if both the parties would seek for guidance from Russia. The matter is solely in Finnish hands.
The innocence of Finland is the penultimate reason for dismantling
There are strong grounds for dismantling the war guilt. The whole issue of Finland being guilty to the war is a setting of forced peace where the leading role was in domestic hands, as a piece of a politcal conspiracy.
Then present Secretary of Justice, Urho Kekkonen, was the puppet master of this activity alongisde with Hertta Kuusinen. One must not forget, however, that when all is said and done, it was the Soviet Union lead by Stalin that was the real culprit to the war by trying to invade Finland.
The most important reason for dismantling is that Finland was not guilty of the war. As far as the verdicts go, one can summarize that there are but two rulings by the Supreme Court and one ruling by the Chancelor of Justice. They all end up in the same conclusion. The law of war guilt was uncontitutional, retrospective form of ruling. The war crimes tribunal was unconstitutional as well.
Moreover, at least two of the members of the tribunal had a conflict of interest given that they were public enemies of e.g. Väinö Tanner. The defense had no free hand to maneuver because for instance it was forbidden to refer to the Winter War which was a totally absurd demand.
The grounds behind dismantling are beyond reasonable doubt
The grounds for dismantling war guilt, therefore, exist to the fullest degree. It all comes down to the political will which is required to gain the momentum for dismantling.
The Secretary of Justice, Tuija Brax, has launched a two-person task force to study the issue of war guilt. In between the lines of the statements by the group members derived from various interviews there has emerged a concept that the group is actually in the search of some sort of liturgics trickery to avoid the war guilt issue rather than to actually dismantle it.
If this should be true, then the work of the task force is in vain, and the reputation of the Department of Justice will suffer a shameful inflation. After all, in this case the task force is not seeking for justice but to find means to defend the fears of the politicians.
It is necessary in Finland to examine the true responsibility of the political leaders and the justice departments in neglecting one more issue. One most sort out how severe negligences have been committed by neglecting the violations of justice committed to several persons, and leaving them unsettled.
Dismantling of the burden of guilt is the ultimate goal
Dismantling of war guilt has many-fold effects. The most important of them is the dismantling of the burden of a wrong guilt. One who is deemed guilty has lesser degrees of freedom to act. Finns are a submissive nation, burdened in addition to false war guilt, with equally unnecessary russofobia.
This is a fertile ground for the dissemination of hatred and abhorrence by the antifascists and fascists to increase fear. One does not have the courage to bring forth one’s own agenda and to set oneself against immorality. The more the people hold their silence, and bow to arrogance and immorality, the stronger they become and the stronger become the claims proposed by those forces.
It is the time for the Finnish citizens to grow a mental back-bone. But before that, Finnish politicians have to do that as well, and start to pursue back the Finns’ legitimate rights in a solid co-operation with all the constructive domestic and foreign parties.
For additional information, please contact: Veikko Saksi
^ Takaisin ylös Lisää artikkeleita kirjoittajalta Artikkeli-arkisto