Susanna Koski: “The Youth League of the National Coalition Party has zero tolerance to racism”

by , under Enrique

Susanna Koski is quoted as saying on Helsingin Sanomat that the Youth League of the National Coalition Party that she is president of has zero tolerance to racism. “We don’t accept racism in any form or shape,” she said.  

Kuvankaappaus 2013-9-12 kello 1.23.38Read original story (in Finnish) here.

Right, Koski, you don’t tolerate racism but want to do away with those laws and institutions that protect immigrants and visible minorities from racism.

What kind of society would Finland be if you did away with the Ombudsman for Minorities and laws that govern ethnic agitation?

Your comment sounds like the double-talk that we commonly hear from far right Perussuomalaiset (PS) politicians like Jussi Halla-aho, James Hirvisaari and Timo Soini to justify racism and intolerance in this country.

The reason why you claim to have “zero tolerance to racism” is simply because you are white and have no idea what racism is. Your denials remind me of what happened before the April 2011 elections, which opened the floodgates of intolerance for the racists.

Let me refresh you memory. Back then, National Coalition Party chairman Jyrki Katainen said “debating immigrant issues in this country didn’t make you a racist” and Social Democratic Party (SDP) Economy Minister Jutta Urpilainen’s  infamous maassa maan tatalla (In Rome do as the Romans do) statement.

If you have zero tolerance to racism why are your arguments similar to PS MPs that have been sentenced for ethnic agitation?

We wrote this week:

Some of the proposals put forth by the National Coalition Party’s youth wing are barbaric because they would bolster and reinforce our prejudice, discrimination and outright hostility to people who are different from us.

Isn’t that type of behavior barbaric?


  1. Mark


    You are right to ask:

    What kind of society would Finland be if you did away with the Ombudsman for Minorities and laws that govern ethnic agitation?

    But really, you should try to answer this question too, otherwise, they will simply answer that we will be like the US, the icon of free speech, and they will argue that that is no bad thing. It must be made clear that defamation of groups, much like defamation of individuals leads to ‘victimisation’, loss of status and dignity, and that these are important freedoms that make life good.

    The thing with racist messages being allowed to perpetuate without restrictions throughout society is that it pollutes the public space and it generates an ‘unwanted celebrity’ for people of ethnic minorities, who become public targets of these hate campaigns.

    No-one should have to live in a society where it is possible to put messages into the public domain that suggest that a majority do not consider these persons to be lesser members or unwanted/unwelcome members of that society.

    For anyone who cannot see the harms in this, I ask them, go ahead and repeal all defamation laws while we are at it, and let each and every false accusation and slander float around the public space. When the ‘rubbish’ has turned society into a stink hole, then perhaps they will change their tune.