Finland still has conscription, meaning (nearly) all men have to serve in the army for a period of 6-12 months. Those who refuse armed service must complete 12 months of "civilian service". This civilian service has no function related in any way to the defence forces; it is solely a punishment for those who refuse to serve in the armed forces. Refusal to complete civilian service results in a prison sentence equivalent to half of the remaining service time.
I've refused, and will shortly be receiving a four-month prison sentence.
**
Of course, in Finland, not everyone gets drafted. People living in the demilitarized Ahvenanmaa Islands or belonging to the Jehovah's Witnesses religious cult are exempt from service. Similarly, of course, all women are exempt.
Think about that for a moment. If I belonged to a particular religious cult, I wouldn't have to go to prison. Or, indeed, if I had different genitals. This blatant inequality alone is reason enough for me to refuse to participate in the system. It's unbelievable to me that in a 21st century Nordic country, your gender gives you an exemption from service. But this is part of the reality of gender equality in Finland.
**
I'm not refusing service because I'm an antimilitarist as such. I'm a pacifist, yes, and I consider myself an antimilitarist, at least in the sense that I'm strongly opposed to the political ideology of militarism. But I have nothing against the existence of the Finnish army; in fact, I'm positively in favor of it.
I principally oppose conscription because I'm a libertarian. I don't believe the State has any right to force me to serve in the military. Conscription is nothing but forced labor, and that has no place in a free country.
I also oppose conscription because I'm a feminist. I believe firmly in equality in life and especially in equality before the law. However, this summer I'm going to prison because of my gender. If I was a woman and didn't want to serve in the army, I wouldn't have to; because I'm a man and don't want to serve in the army, I'm going to prison.
Also, I'm going to prison because I'm an atheist, more or less. At least in the sense that if I was a Jehovah's Witness, then I wouldn't have to serve. I'm not, so I do.
The blatant inequality of the Finnish conscription system is so abhorrent to me that I can't participate in a system that forces some citizens to serve in the army, but exempts others because of their gender or religion. And for that, I'm going to prison this fall.
**
For additional information, there is a rather poor article on Conscription in Finland on Wikipedia. There's more information at the Union of Conscientious Objectors' website. Note that I'm not a member, nor do I intent to become one.
I'll receive my sentence at the end of June, and will post updates as I know what happens next. Obviously my blog will be on a rather long hiatus this fall because of this. I'll likely be starting my jail term in late June or August, but I don't know that yet.
To be honest, I'm not exactly looking forward to four months in prison. Of course, I'm getting off relatively easily; 70 years ago conscientious objectors in Finland were murdered by the Finnish army. But still, it's not a decision I've made lightly.
However, I firmly believe that conscription is one of the most unjust, tyrannical and simply unacceptable human rights violations taking place in Northern Europe today. I'd like to finish off with a quote from the Anti-Conscription Manifesto of 1926, signed by such renowned communists as Albert Einstein and Bertrand Russell, among others.
(feminists should take especial note of the penultimate sentence)
It is our belief that conscript armies, with their large corps of professional officers, are a grave menace to peace. Conscription involves the degradation of human personality, and the destruction of liberty. Barrack life, military drill, blind obedience to commands, however unjust and foolish they may be, and deliberate training for slaughter undermine respect for the individual, for democracy and human life.
It is debasing human dignity to force men to give up their life, or to inflict death against their will, or without conviction as to the justice of their action. The State which thinks itself entitled to force its citizens to go to war will never pay proper regard to the value and happiness of their lives in peace. Moreover, by conscription the militarist spirit of aggressiveness is implanted in the whole male population at the most impressionable age. By training for war men come to consider war as unavoidable and even desirable.
I will rather go to prison than in any way give my assent to this system.
8 comments:
You are a hero!
Please check out www.draftresistance.org!
Please send us an address where we can write to you!
We should set up a Libertarian Party of Finland!
We should set up a Libertarian Party of Finland!
---
Uh, there is a problem. Michael is in my (possibly flawed) opinion definitely exceptional among Finnish libertarians, because the bulk of those who called themselves libertarians in Finland happily joined the ranks of the racist "anti-immigration" movement during the last few years.
I am not a Libertarian myself, but while admitting that genuine libertarianism would do this country good, I tend to think that if a Libertarian Party were set up in this country, it would end up being infested with intellectual neo-Nazis looking for a way to mainstream their ideology. This is simply the dynamics of Finnish politics, much as I lament it. I have pointed this out to Michael at several occasions.
BTW, I might be excused to stray a little off the topic here and point out to Michael that I blogged about intellectual property rights some days ago - he might want to comment. The entry is called Piraattien aika.
Thanks, Scott!
However, the problem Panu refers to is real. To put it politely, the majority of Finnish vocal libertarians are, at best, paleolibertarians, at worst collectivist racists who support only economic libertarianism. My theory is that this is largely because of the massive revival of right-wing politics in Finland after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of Finlandization.
As for pirates, certainly a man is entitled to advertise his own blog. For Finnish readers, the article in question is here, and is good. I've been meaning to comment on it, but I'm more or less on vacation for the last month or so of the summer that I'm getting before I go to jail, so I haven't gotten aronud to it yet. I'll try to! Like I said, it was a good text, and I basically agree with your conclusion.
Michael Halila:
My theory is that this is largely because of the massive revival of right-wing politics in Finland after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of Finlandization.
Even if I mostly disagree with you on the issue, I think it would be very valuable for you to analyze and write about why Finnish Libertarians are often anti-immigration (especially on your Finnish blog). This is a topic that has puzzled me a lot too since Finland is, as far as I know, the only country in the world where the majority of libertarians are anti-immigration. For example in Sweden, Germany and US (whose libertarian circles I know quite well) the overwhelming majority is pro-immigration often even if they would subscribe to other conservative-leaning opinions such as Ron Paulism, Christianity or anti-gay marriage.
As a curious person I have often thought that the main two reason for the anti-immigration (note, not anti-immigrant) sentiment among Finnish Libertarians would come from two facts:
1) Few libertarian books have been translated to Finnish and due to censorship the libertarian philosophy never got a real foothold (or was forgotten) in Finland until the end of the Soviet Union and at that point the influence came via the internet, especially via the paleo-conservative/paleo-libertarian alliance and its anti-immigration stance. A proof of that in my experience is that most Finnish libertarians know who the relatively unknown Hans Hoppe is, but surprisingly few people seem to know about the famous Ayn Rand.
2) From early on the super vocal libertarians of the late 1990's early 2000's (such as Ellilä) have had the chance to influence the thinking of the current vocal libertarians via discussion forums, blogs, online magazines, news etc. and since many of these super vocals where extremely anti-immigration the meme quickly spread and now naturaly continues spreding via the current vocals.
In any case, I'm looking forward to a possible post about this subject if you ever consider it worthwhile to write one.
I agree with Scott - You are a hero!
Thanks!
Lasse, I do have a theory. I'll try to write a post on it before they take me away...
Few libertarian books have been translated to Finnish and due to censorship the libertarian philosophy never got a real foothold (or was forgotten) in Finland
Oh come on. The only censorship worth mentioning was the censorship of perceivedly anti-Soviet writings by Soviet dissidents, and even that censorship wasn't quite tight, because there were right-wing organizations behind the scenes which lobbied and financially contributed to the publication of, say, Solzhenitsyn's books.
In my opinion, the reason why libertarian literature wasn't published in Finland is that our traditional right wing is authoritarian and conservative. Much libertarian thought would have struck them as almost Communist. So, for those right wing circles which helped make Solzhenitsyn available in Finnish, there was no incentive for them to disseminate libertarian thought in this country. There were quite happy with their nationalist, authoritarian "old time religion" and found it good enough for themselves.
Post a Comment