Time To Short Nokia

Turns out Finland doesn’t have free speech. Since that’s the engine of innovation and growth, Finns are headed back to reindeer herding.

Gates of Vienna reports:

Last Friday the Finnish TV network YLE published the following brief news item:

A blogger in Finland has been fined for writing offensive material about Africans.

A court sentenced the 30-year old Espoo resident to a fine for inciting racial hatred. It found that the man’s writings on the Internet constituted illegal propaganda.

The judgment ruled that the man slandered Africans by comparing them to animals. In his defense, the man said that laws governing freedom of speech protected his right to express his opinion.

Inciting racial hatred — hets mot folkgrupp in the Swedish version — is the catchall offense used in Finland to suppress politically incorrect speech.

Consider how modern economies would fare without free speech:

– Suppliers would suppress negative consumer reviews, so free markets would collapse.

– Governments would suppress aggrieved voters, so democracy and hence capitalism would be replaced by Fear State collectivism.

– Scientific criticism would be silenced, so growth of scientific knowledge would stall.

– Without the freedom to dissent from perceived state abuses, people would take up arms.

So without free speech you get what Finland was until 18 years ago – an impoverished communist hellhole.

Shame to see it revert.


3 Responses to Time To Short Nokia

  1. Are you an idiot? says:

    Which part you did not understand? Freedom of speech means that you can say, write and publish whatever you like and there is no censorship of any kind beforehand. Just like it was in this case too. It’s a totally different story to be held accountable if some of the shit you’ve published is e.g. racist. But at this point freedom of speech is not question anymore. Comprende, A-hole?

  2. gandalf says:

    Are you an idiot?

    I assume you’re a lefty, so here’s a thought experiment.

    Obama’s spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright, is a fountain of racist statements – for example:
    If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer.

    Under American law, he was quite free to make this objectionable claim.

    Under Finnish law (and those of many other European countries), he committed a crime. At least in theory.

    In practice, European courts don’t go after hate-speaking powerful minorities, since to do so would carry a high political cost and lead to riots.

    Instead, European states attack individuals like the one in my post, who lack the political firepower to stay free.

    Such injustice is a small part of the cost of suppression of free speech – far bigger part is the undermining of the legitimacy of the state.

    That’s because the man in the street knows perfectly well that the powerful can say what they wish, and the weak (including him) cannot. So the people keep quiet in public while sharing their prejudices in private, and grow ever resentful of the state.

    Eventually that suppressed speech surfaces – as it did in Finland and other communist states – and sweeps them away.

    So states that suppress free speech harm only the weak, and ultimately collapse in chaos.

    As will now be demonstrated.

    Hope this helps.

  3. Interesting article, i have bookmarked your blog for future referrence 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: