Talk:Finnish Anti-Fascist Committee

Change?

Looking at SAFKA's webpage now, it is apparent that some change has taken place. The "new" SAFKA does not list Bäckman and his "hate group" (as this is called on the new SAFKA's webpage) as their members and does not endorse their views. This article should reflect this change; therefore I added an "update" tag. The webpage also claims that SAFKA is now registered. Lebatsnok (talk) 08:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

SWC's supposed approval

Re Zuroff, look at [1]. Apparently, Bäckman wrote a very contorted letter to SWC, got back a form letter condemning Nazism as an ideology, and then performed synthesis to claim in his blog that SWC is supporting him. We'd need either SWC press release or an independent confirmation before claiming SWC is backing Safka regarding the seminar. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:25, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

In specific, Paju writes that Zuroff consulted Mark Rõbak regarding the book and Bäckman-Zuroff discussion, and as a result of discovering the deception, will no longer contact with Bäckman. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Considering that Bäckman's misrepresentation of Zuroff's position -- itself obtained by deception, as documented by Imbi Paju in the above-mentioned article -- may bring disrepute to Efraim Zuroff, an experienced hunter of Nazis and a living person, WP:BLP applies. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Bäckman and University of Helsinki

Reportedly, the University of Helsinki has made a statement asserting Bäckman's political views are his own and not the University's: [2]. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Colchicum's question

Offliner, how did you get here two hours after the article was created? Colchicum (talk) 13:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

External links

As far as I can tell, the Committee's only websites are blogs: Leena Hietanen, Johan Bäckman, collective. Should we link some of them under External links? Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

A blog is a blog is a blog... Well, in this case it may not be. Many organizations use blog-platforms, including Wordpress, for their official web-sites. Some even use the free Blogspot site. This does not however make these sites personal weblogs. Maybe next year we will have companies who's only internet presence is in Facebook — or Second Life. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 09:40, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Tundra Tabloid's overview in English

While this is not itself an WP:RS, Tundra Tabloid has a reasonable overview of the events, in English, at [3]. For understandable reasons, most of the news regarding Safka is in Finnish or Estonian, with occasional Russian and Swedish reports of larger activities. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:54, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

You may want to link to this also: Putin-Jugend in Helsinki. The Finnish-Russian Civic Forum may also be notable in itself. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Is it RS? It looks like a blog. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 04:49, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

It is not signed, so I guess it represents to "official" position of the organization. The Finnish-Russian Civic Forum can hardly be regarded as "pro-Russian", it is definetly "anti-Putin" and possibly "pro-Chechen". It is headed by Heidi Hautala, the target of Bäckmans earlier "attack-book", Finland washed with Anna Politkovskaya's blood. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 03:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

P.S. - The article has been reprinted by La Russophobe: see NASHI in Finland

It may be interesting, but it's irrelevant; blogs are generally not considered RS. Besides' it's not like this is 2007: there's a lot of discussion in mainstream media now regarding Putinist Russia's attempts to use propaganda as a tool of foreign policy. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 07:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

"Commitee" is a publicity stunt

This "Committee" is a project of three persons (Johan Bäckman, Leena Hietanen and Petri Krohn). This is NOT a real organization. This article is under deletion in Finnish Wikipedia [4] and will probably be deleted by 30th March. Background: "Committee" was formed by Bäckman and his blog writings [5][6][7][8]. Bäckman met a couple of same thinking persons (Hietanen, Krohn and later Tammi) and they decided to maximize their media coverage. This "Committee" is nothing more than a publicity stunt. Peltimikko (talk) 19:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. However, we can't discuss the people in their own articles -- none of them is notable enough for that. We used to have an article for Bäckman, and after discussion, it was deleted. The remaining two have even less to their individual names than Bäckman.

Since their collective notability (and quite a bit of news coverage) stems from this publicity stunt, it makes sense to have an article for said stunt -- and since it claims to be an organisation, the most intuitive name for such an article is that organisation's name. However, maybe a better, more descriptive name could be used. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 19:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you User:Peltimikko for uploading most of the images in Commons:Category:Nashi demonstrations. I have difficulty following your logic though. I seems that you either 1) consider the activities of the Committee notable, as you have provided so much media, or 2) you were a participant in the counter-counter demonstrations organized by Suomen Sisu, and would oppose anything the Committee does, making you an involved party. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 19:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

There is no Committee. Only a couple of people who need their daily media coverage. I already started article of Johan Bäckman, maybe the rest of the gang will follow later. Peltimikko (talk) 20:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

But it's the same thing. What do you think other committees are?

As for the article on Bäckman, I don't think it will be able to withstand another AFD. Bäckman might have printed another book, but it's not any less SELFPUB this time.

In Estonia, there is an old man who's published four books. He had to self-publish them, because no publisher would take them seriously. Fascinating bloke. His latest book tells all about how physicists got it wrong, and how the perpetuum mobile should really be made. But his speciality is economics; apparently he's the first person ever to discover that money can not be borrowed. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I almost forgot. Another obsession of his is embezzlement. He's repeatedly claimed that the hyperinflation era of late 1980s meant that commercial banks embezzled the riches that, according to him, Soviet Union invested in Estonia. It seems he had been living very frugally since 1960s and collected hundreds of thousands of roubles to Soviet banks by 1990. I guess everybody here knows what happened to roubles at that time. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 07:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

You're a member of this Committee. Who are you to tell anybody about conflicts of interest? Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 19:48, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

And people had best be quite careful for WP:BLP violations, because I will be watching this page very, very closely. Also, Peltimikko, you realise that Johan Bäckman is totally unsourced? That is unacceptable on a WP:BLP article - that needs to be fixed. --Russavia ^Dialogue 06:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Considering your track record, why do you think it is notable that you'll be reading this interesting page? Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 06:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Well it seems not only does one have to keep an eye on Digwuren for attacking other editors on talk pages, but they also have to keep an eye on his edit summaries too. --Russavia ^Dialogue 06:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

For the record, I present you the Pigcam. The wild hogs and their piglets most often show up around the nightfall. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 07:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

The first pigs of tonight have arrived. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 17:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Based on the concerns mentioned above, I'm expressing my opposition to such a split. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 05:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I oppose such a split too, the individual members are simply not notable enough. The article is about the committee, not the individuals. Martintg (talk) 19:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

"Neo-stalinist"

The committee has not declared itself "neo-stalinist." The neo-stalinism claim is not a fact, but an opinion of one Estonian journalist. Also, it does not "specialize in justifying stalinism" - this again is only an opionion by an Estonian journalist. Offliner (talk) 10:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Have an alternative secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent and independent of the subject that states otherwise? Martintg (talk) 10:59, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

If you prefer to research this matter in an original manner, check out the criteria for Neo-Stalinism. They're pretty simple to understand. Then, compare them against the public positions of the Committee.

The experience could be enlightening. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 11:19, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Basic Wikipedia policy requires that you attribute such claims to their source. So please replace "it is a neo-stalinist organization" with "according to Estonian journalist XY, the organization is neo-stalinist." Offliner (talk) 12:19, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

That's an absurd request. Why "Estonian journalist"? Why not "Blue-eyed baldy"? Why not "Male forgetful news person"? Why not "Whitebread liberal media representative"? All of these classifications violate both WP:NOR and WP:NPOV. As for attribution, we'll always have <ref>. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

It is not an absurd request, it is exactly how attribution is done on WP. I will support Offliner changing it to attribution as required by numerous policies. --Russavia ^Dialogue 07:52, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure some people would just loved to have been able to dismiss Helen Thomas' reporting on Bush as "an old single female journalist writes ...". Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 08:12, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I think you got me wrong: I'm not demanding that you mention that the source is Estonian. Just "according to (name of the journalist)" will do. Although it would be nice to know that the source is Estonian, since Estonia is an involved party in this. In a similar manner in the 2008 South Ossetia war article we always mention if the source is Russian, since Russia was an involved party in the war. But what is not acceptable at all is to just state the neo-stalinism claim as a fact like you currently do, because it is not a generally accepted fact. Offliner (talk) 10:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

The Finnish Antifascist Committee's (SAFKA) position on Backman's "hate group": http://www.antifa.fi/2013/02/stalin-was-gentle-and-sweet.html So it is not just a few Estonian journalists that call this group "neo-stalinist". Anyone who calls Stalin "soft and sweet" etc is, by definition, a neo-stalinist. Lebatsnok (talk) 08:26, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Tammi is not a member

Tammi is not a member of the committee, so please remove his name from the lead. Offliner (talk) 10:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

What is your source for this information? Martintg (talk) 10:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

The cited source clearly says that Tammi is "joined" with the Committee. Do you have any contrary source? Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 11:16, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Which source? Could you provide a citation? I haven't seen any indication that he is a member of the committee, just that he "joined" the group of protesters on that day. Offliner (talk) 12:15, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

What's your source? I'd gladly review it to clean up this misunderstanding. My source is listed in the article. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:32, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Tammi is not a member, and the most of the Finnish media didn't even published his anti-Estonian opinions in "Nashi-demonstration" in March 2009 in Helsinki. Tammi joined very late with his two friends to demonstration. News releases of demonstrations were writen/lead by Bäckman (in the name of Finnish Anti-Fascist Committee) and they were signed by Bäckman, Hietanen and Krohn. ([9] read: MANIFEST OF ANTIFASCISTS IN HELSINKI 23.03.2009) Peltimikko (talk) 19:16, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I removed some speculations of Tammi. Tammi gave couple of interviews, claiming he was a former KGB agent. Nobody have not even taking these talks seriously. At least, I have not seen any articles where someone has actually investigated Tammi's claims. Tammi just wants his 15 minutes of fame (again). Peltimikko (talk) 20:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a source that says Tammi is a wannabe KGB agent? Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I did not find any scientific research of Tammi's claims, for or against (see my earlier comments). But I found some articles. The researcher Piia Latvala who studies Finnish Christian Missions in East-Europe in 70s thought that Tammi's story is possible, but she has has not seen Tammi's name in her sources or interviews ([10] in Finnish). Also, I found that even Tammi's own party comrades did not member him ([11] in Finnish). There is also deep interview of Tammi in english [12]. Lot of different religions and political parties. Peltimikko (talk) 06:35, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Then, we can't say he is not a former KGB agent. NPOV requires us to say that he claims to be one, but the claim is generally considered unreliable. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 07:58, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Tammi is not a member of the committee, and as this is an article on the committee, his views are irrelevant here. It may be relevant however to an article relating to himself or his own organisation. --Russavia ^Dialogue 14:46, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Some Russian language sources

Here are some Russian language sources with translations:

• chas-daily.com, 17.02.2009: Финские антифашисты против шествия легионеров (Finnish ANTIFASCIST march against Legionnaires )
  • Delfi.lv, 17.2.2009: Финские антифашисты против шествия легионеров (Finnish ANTIFASCIST march against Legionnaires)
• informpskov.ru, 17.02.2009: Антифашисты Эстонии и Латвии объединятся с финскими союзниками (Anti-Fascist from Estonia and Latvia, together with Finnish allies)
• tatar-inform, 18.2.2009: Антифашисты Финляндии, Эстонии и Латвии собрались в Риге (Antifascists of Finland, Estonia and Latvia meet in Riga)
• kriminal.lv, 11.3.2009: Финские антифашисты уже высадились (Finnish ANTIFASCIST already landed)
• ITAR-TASS, 12.03.2009: Российский фонд готовит документы, свидетельствующие об участии прибалтийских легионеров в преступлениях нацистов в годы войны (Russian Foundation for preparing documents showing the involvement of the Baltic legionnaires in Nazi crimes during the war)
• Voice of Russia 12.03.2009, Русское Зарубежье. Эстония. Эфир от 12.03.09 (Johan Bäckman interviewed on radio Voice of Russia)
• newspb.ru, 12.03.2009: Финский антифашист: Эстония собирается открыть в Финляндии новый фронт информационной войны против России (Finnish anti-fascist: Estonia is going to open a new front in the Finnish information war against Russia)
• Izvestia, 16.03.09: Глава Антифашистского комитета Финляндии Йохан Бекман: "Власти Эстонии готовят русофобскую акцию в Хельсинки" (The head of the Anti-Fascist Committee, Finland Johan Beckman: "The Estonian authorities are preparing rusofobskuyu campaign in Helsinki")
• vesti.ee 17.3.2009: Йохан Бекман: нацизм - официальная идеология Эстонии (Johan Bäckman: Nazism - the official ideology of Estonia)
• historyfoundation.ru: Антифашисты Финляндии проведут демонстрации 23 марта (Anti-Fascists in Finland will hold a demonstration on 23 March)
• jewish.ru, 20.02.2009: Антифашисты трех стран не допустят марша в честь легионеров СС в Риге (Anti-Fascists of three countries will not allow the march in honor of SS legionaries in Riga)
• Komsomolskaya Pravda, 20.03.2009: Финский антифашистский комитет готовится провести в центре Хельсинки акцию протеста против эстонского фашизма ([13])
• Echo of Moscow, 22.3.2009: В Хельсинки сегодня пройдет семинар о преступлениях коммунизма против эстонского народа, организованный руководством посольства Эстонии. (In Helsinki today held a seminar on crimes of communism against the Estonian people, organized by the leadership of the Embassy of Estonia.)
• kalev.ee: 23.3.2009: Сегодня антифашисты Финляндии проведут демонстрации (Today ANTIFASCIST Finland will hold demonstrations)
• Komsomolskaya Pravda, 23.03.2009: Кто там шагает правой? Левой! Левой! Левой! (Who is it steps right? Left! Left! Left!)
• Komsomolskaya Pravda, 23.03.2009: Финская полиция не ожидает в Хельсинки беспорядков во время проведения акции пророссийского молодежного движения «Наши» (Finnish police did not expect riots in Helsinki at the time of the «Nashi» demonstration)
• gazeta.ru, 23.03.2009: Антифашисты провели митинг в Хельсинки (Anti-Fascists held a rally in Helsinki)
  • oreanda.ru, 23.3.2009: Антифашисты провели митинг в Финляндии (Anti-Fascists held a rally in Finland)
• 21.by, 25.03.2009: Финны защитили СССР от ЭстонииФинны защитили СССР от Эстонии (Finns defended the Soviet Union from Estonia)

Press release

• Nochnoy Dozor: Ночной Дозор поддержит антифашистов Финляндии 12.03.2009 (Night Watch will support the anti-fascists in Finland)

...and Estonian

• Terijoki'laste vaimne liider kuulutab peatseid provokatsioone
• Eesti Ekspress Üheskoos Eesti vastu: antifašist Bäckman ja natsimeelne Teinonen (18.03.2009)
• Eesti Ekspress, 4 April 2009: Pekka Erelt: Ajalugu - Eesti-vastase infosõja relv (History - a weapon in Anti-Estonian Information Warfare)

-- Petri Krohn (talk) 05:14, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Sections

I tend to agree, we need sections. There's a whole lot of tightly attributed text, and without subheadings, it's nearly unreadable. But I'm not yet sure of the appropriate way to chop up the original WallOfText. Let's discuss it here. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 10:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

How many Petri Krohns are out there?

One. He has said it himself, and considering the etymologies of the parts of his name, it's credible. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 15:24, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Is there a reliable source which confirms that he really is who he claims to be? Offliner (talk) 15:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

If the real-life Petri Krohn has said in a reliable source media that he is the Wikipedia editor User:Petri Krohn, then there is of course no problem. But I agree with Colchicum that crosspage redirects are not good. Offliner (talk) 15:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Estonian nationalists violating Wikipedia rules

It is clear that several Estonian nationalists are violating rules while editing this article - these violations have been reported to Wikipedia moderators. Interesting that strange accusations about "KGB-links", similars that are represented by dirt articles by notorious KAPO officer Andres Kahar in Estonian press, are repeated in this article. Abdullah Tammi has only himself claimed he was KGB-agent. There is no evidence about this. Probably Tammi made himself PR in this way. Underlining unexistent neo-nazi or KGB link is typical strategy of KAPO and their aids. This is reported to KAPO as well. Be careful! Follow the rules of WIikipedia! --91.152.84.165 (talk) 19:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

The claims made by the Estonian writers of this aricle are unbelievable. They claim all "publications" of the committee are published by a former KGB-agent. However, the committee has no publications, and there are obviously no sources for such publications. The source is Estonian yellow nespaper, which is very unreliable. Please find better criticism against this organisation, something else than "stalinism" and "neo-nazi" ties, and "KGB-ties". --91.152.84.165 (talk) 19:37, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

The initial version of this article was simply horrible, and even now the article is nowhere near neutrality. But it seems to be getting better now. I hope this continues. Offliner (talk) 20:58, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Allegation of neo-stalinismn

Somebody is always returning claim that Safka is neo-stalinist. This has been only once presented in well-known fascist newspaper in Estonia. That is not enough to say the Safka has been labelled as neo-stalinist in the media. If one fascist says so, it is not enough. Please find more sources from "the media" which show Safka is neo-stalinist. Estonian fascist newspapers are not reliable source. --91.195.247.200 (talk) 17:29, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Why are you against being called "neo-Stalinist", are you ashamed to be associated with Stalin? Perhaps in your heart you really believe Stalin is equal to Hitler and Stalin really did occupy Estonia and the deportations ordered by Stalin were awful crimes, and thus you are ashamed to publicly call yourself "neo-Stalinist", yes? Otherwise you would wear the "neo-Stalinist" tag as a badge of honour and cry from the roof tops: "Yes, we are neo-Stalinist and we are proud of it!" You should be happy and proud a fascist newspaper should call you "neo-Stalinist", but instead you try to hide this away. Why? Martintg (talk) 21:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Given that the claim is only made by a single source, I have removed the category from this article. And Martintg, be aware that WP:BLP applies even on talk page. --Russavia ^Dialogue 03:07, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I think the information on neo-Stalinism should be placed back there as the real Finnish antifascists themselves are calling this group neo-Stalinist. http://www.antifa.fi/2013/02/stalin-was-gentle-and-sweet.html As for calling a newspaper "fascist", you need some arguments to back your wild claim. You have none. Just claiming "fascist!" is not enough. Lebatsnok (talk) 08:35, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Manifests and declarations

Would it be accurate to summarise in /* Manifests and declarations */ that most of the Committee's public statements discuss Estonia, its history, and its right to exist as a state? It seems excessive to just quote all the statements. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 12:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

In popular culture

Eesti Ekspress' Christmas special, lampooning events of the year 2008 in [14], labels Bäckman and Hietanen "Finnish estophile dwarves" and has them sing "We're happy Stalinists". I'm not entirely sure, but I think the song is supposed to use the tune of "Hi ho, hi ho". Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if fair use would allow using one of the cartoons in the article. The Bäckman cartoon is jolly good, the Hietanen cartoon may break WP:BLP. My personal favorite is however the one with the Bäckman hand puppet and the KGB bear, as it shows the true brains behind the committee. (See all three.) -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:27, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Anti-fascist organizations

The Category:Anti-fascist organizations is problematic in this article, as the Committee's understanding of fascism differs considerably from the common understanding. In such contexts, because category members can not be annotated in MediaWiki, the categorisation policy recommends against using categories, and that lists or naviboxes instead. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

There is such a concept as self-identification. If they say that they are anti-fascist, and if there are sources which indicate this is the case, then the category is valid, as much as it "is" for neo-stalinist organisations that you are advocating putting it into based upon a single source. --Russavia ^Dialogue 14:00, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Self-identification is a form of WP:SELFPUB. It's only encyclopædically appropriate if it's backed up by reliable source.

For example, the Discovery Institute claims to be a scientific organisation -- but it would be against WP:FRINGE to accept this self-identification. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 14:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Membership

The currently cited source states, and I translate: "The so-called Finnish Antifascist Committee (SAFKA) consists of three members: Johan Bäckman, Leena Hietanen and Petri Krohn. They are joined by Abdullah (former Risto) Tammi, leader of the not yet created Finnish Islamic Party, who has publically admitted that for decades, he spied on Finnish religious movements as a KGB informant." Considering that the organisation is not officially registered, it does not have an official roster of membership -- we're stuck with what public sources say about its members. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 13:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

In an old revision [15] there was a mention that Safka has 20 members in the organization. I was wondering did the editor mean that almost 20 people have signed the petition "Support group of Johan Bäckman for the European parliament 2009" [16]. Bäckman's opinions are far from the mainstream, and seem not to attract people. Peltimikko (talk) 19:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I consider it plausible he might have found 20 followers. There are millions and millions of people in Finland, after all. Unfortunately, I haven't found any source to support such a claim -- and without a source, we shouldn't be saying that there are 20 followers. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 19:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Here is the list of the SAFKA blog members: [[17]] It contains also rev. Juha Molari, musician and Communist Party Central Committee member Tommi Lievemaa and Vladimir Antonov. The two first are certainly real persons. Nothing seems to be known about Antonov, he is rumoured to be an imaginary person. --88.114.197.51 (talk) 16:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Removal of attribution

In his edits yesterday Digwuren (talk · contribs) has removed attribution from several Estonian "neo-stalinist" style claims. (see [18] [19] [20] [21]) I strongly protest against these edits. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 00:15, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Ofcourse you do. But this is encyclopedia, references are referenced in references section. Suva Чего? 01:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Agree with Krohn, the attributions are important, and should not be removed. Offliner (talk) 19:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

There is an exception, when the holders of the opinion are too diverse or numerous to qualify. In this not a case of a journalist or news agency holding the opinion (it is not an editorial), but a case of the journalist reporting on an opinion held by others. Martintg (talk) 21:02, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

It's not an issue of exception. First of all, stuff like "Ruritanian journalists say ..." is a bad form of "attribution". Second, of these four diffs, two correct mistakes of fact -- for example, as I've discussed above, it's invalid to attribute the whole EE article to Kapo --, and three are misinterpreted. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

These claims are not universally accepted facts, therefore they must be attributed to source. If Suurkask says "many think the organization is neo-stalinist," then you should attribute it as "according to Suurkask, many think the organization is neo-stalinist." Also remember, that Estonian media is not really a neutral third-party source in this. They do not represent the universal view. Offliner (talk) 21:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing your valuable ethnic bias with our readership. Unfortunately, WP:NPOV makes it a wikisin to cherrypick sources based on ethnic biases. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 07:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Is my Google biased?

I started this at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 April 8#Template:Neo-Stalinism in 21st century but I am expanding it here because the search results are directly releted to this article.

Estonian sources are very usefull indeed! If I go to the Finnish language version of Google (www.google.fi) and search for "Eesti Ekspress" – that is for the newspaper Eesti Ekspress – the first link I get is the this: Eestil on fašistlik apartheidivalitsus. Now does this mean we should include Estonia in the {{Apartheid}} template or in the {{Fascism}} template? Or maybe in both? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 17:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

The Estonian version of Google (www.google.ee) does a better job. A search for "Eesti Ekspress" returns the home page of the newspaper as the No 1 result. Eestil on fašistlik apartheidivalitsus drops to result number 2. The opinion piece is almost a year old. I guess Estonians must be really mad by now, if they have been seeing this for the whole year, every time they search for their favorite newspaper.

On Google.com we are somewhat shielded from the "neo-Stalinist" propaganda. You have to click More results from www.ekspress.ee to see this as result number 8.

The relationship to this article is of course that the text has been written by two members of the Committee. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 19:06, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

No, it just means someone has made an effort to manipulate the Google search engine result. This has been common knowledge for years, see this news item from 2005 [22]. People with good skills in this can actually make good money. Martintg (talk) 05:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

It's been a while since I studied search engine algorithms, and I don't know about the trade secret aspects of Google, but couldn't it be that Google is considering controversial topics more valuable, and thus ranking them in the top? After all, if a controversy is discussed on many blogs, it leads to many links directing to the controversial article instead of the newspaper's main page. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 07:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't think Google really cares about controversies. My understanding is that Google has implemented a particular algorithm to rank pages and knowing how the algorithm works one can manipulate the result. Martintg (talk) 01:04, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Tertiary source

We now have a tertiary source on the activities on SAFKA. The Finnish Embassy in Tallinn has issued a media review.

• ""Stalinismi syntyy Suomessa uudelleen"". Mediakatsaukset (in Finnish). Embassy of Finland, Tallinn. April 9, 2009. Retrieved 2009-04-14.

-- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The media review does not handle SAFKA as a organization, actually it doesn't mention a word SAFKA at all. Only Bäckman is mentioned a couple of times. And what concerns the review itself, I don't agree Estonian media opinions, that Finns do not know Soviet deportations from Estonia. The tragedy is well-known historical event (no matter how hard a dozen of "anti-fascists" try to recover USSR). Peltimikko (talk) 20:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Neo-Stalinist or neo-Bolshevists?

It seems that the Estonian press is introducing new neologisms every week. This week Kaitsepolitsei has decided, that SAFKA members are not Neo-Stalinist but neo-Bolshevists. This can even be attributed to a "reliable source"; the EU Information Centre in Estonia, see Bäckman ja Hietanen kandideerivad europarlamenti.

Again, I have no idea what being a neo-Bolshevists implies. All Google can tell me is that Obama's dad was one. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Where is the connection Kaitsepolitsei, you claiming they control EU Information Centre? Didn't know Hietanen was running for the Euro-parliament, I wonder if Petri Krohn will run for the Euro-parliament too? Back on topic, the terms Bolshevism and Stalinism are interchangeable in modern usage, see the footnote 5 in the article Bolshevik: "Leon Trotsky frequently used the terms "Bolshevism" and "Bolshevist" after his exile from the Soviet Union to differentiate between what he saw as true Leninism and the regime within the state and the party which arose under Stalin. However, "Bolshevism" today is commonly associated with the Stalinist regime which existed in the Soviet Union" Martintg (talk) 21:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Leon Trotsky is hardly a modern researcher. In the Soviet jargon Stalinists were people who wanted to restore pre-Khrushchev Thaw state of affairs. Bolshevism was not a wide-spread term but probably meant something positive along then current policies of the Comminist Party. In modern Russian usage Bolshevism is sometimes used a negative term fro any radical reformists being they right-wing or left-wing. In the west AFAIK Stalinism is often just a pejorative term that left-wing or socialist authors (who would never agree to use Communist or Socialist as pejorative) loosely use to characterize politics more radical that their own. Estonian authors might have their own usage. I am personally would rather use the term in the narrow sense: people who consider pre-Khrushchev Thaw Soviet Union as a role model Alex Bakharev (talk) 22:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

According to the Marxist Paul Mattick, Stalinism was as distinct from Bolshevism as Nazism of WW2 was different from Hitler's brown terror of 1933, i.e. identical. [23]. Martintg (talk) 01:22, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Socialist?

Classifying the Committee as socialist implies it has policy ideas about economy or society. I'm not sure this applies; it's more of a like-and-dislike group, a pressure group. Is it appropriate to transfer Putin's socialist views to all pro-Putin groups? Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 03:26, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I attempted to explain their viewpoint as expressed in one of their recent pronouncements. Perhaps I worded it incorrectly in the lead. Do you have any suggestions? Martintg (talk) 03:57, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Not at this time. I just wanted to make sure we represent the sources accurately; and this was a bit surprising, so I asked about it. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 04:35, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Putin is not socialist, though he is etatist. SAFKA can indeed be characterised as a pressure group. --Miacek (t) 12:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Lex SAFKA?

Someone should write an article on the proposed Russian Law on countermeasures against the rehabilitation of Nazism, Nazi criminals and their associates in former republics of the Soviet Union (Russian: «О противодействии реабилитации в новых независимых государствах на территории бывшего Союза ССР нацизма, нацистских преступников и их пособников»). This may have some relationship with the subject of this article. I collected some references here. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Some more references:

• to Criminalize the Rehabilitation of Nazism
• Tackling Neo-Nazi rise in post-Soviet era (Maksim Reva of the the Estonian Night Watch on Russia Today TV)
• WHO ARE CALLED "HEROES" IN LATVIA?, March 19, 2009 (the date of publication in Russian)
• To the Fullest Extent of the Law, russkiymir, 30.03.2009
• Anti-Nazi Bill Targets Ukraine, Baltic States, The Moscow Times, 24 April 2009
• From web site of Konstantin Zatulin, deputy head of the Duma's Committee for CIS Affairs
  • Проект Федерального закона о противодействии реабилитации нацизма (21.04.2009)
  • Google translation: Draft Federal Law on Counteracting rehabilitate Nazism

-- Petri Krohn (talk) 02:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I recall growing up in Sydney, there was a park near the central business district called "the Domain". Every Sunday afternoon several people would literally bring soap boxes, stand on them and make all manner of speeches on all sorts of issues. Crowds would gather to listen, sitting on the park lawns with their picnic lunches in the summer. It was all rather entertaining, particularly if it was some crank standing on the box. Do you have something similar in Helsinki? Martintg (talk) 00:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

The closest thing in Finland we have to the Speakers' Corner in Hyde Park is the blogs section of the on-line newspaper Uusi Suomi at blogit.uusisuomi.fi. Anybody can start a blog. This is the most popular site for campaign blogs for Finnish candidates in the European Parliament election, 2009. For some reason the readers – as well as many of the blogers – only seem to be interested in the activities of SAFKA members. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Must be quite entertaining for many people then. Martintg (talk) 23:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Pecularities of Finnish culture. Finns really like their personal space, and tend to prefer speaking on phone to speaking in person. Some people even speak about business meetings being conducted by two (or sometimes more) people meeting at a public place, shaking hands, exchanging calling cards, then moving slightly apart and calling each other via cellphone. It makes sense they would prefer blogging to public speaking. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 11:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

By the way, a list of public meetings registered with police of Tallinn can be seen at [24]. Among my favourites are the one that seeks to uncover cruelty against plants conducted by vegans, and the man who has registered two weeks of picketing from 00:00 to 24:00, adding that the picket will be carried through while lying on the ground. And apparently, in last November, somebody picketed against a new shape of dumplings. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 20:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

88.194.24.150

I'm a bit concerned by the edits of 88.194.24.150. For example, what sources support calling SAFKA "radical"? As far as I know, their only similarity to classic radicalism is demonstrating pretty much everywhere, and holding unorthodox positions -- but typically, either vigorous defence of funny politics or violence are also required for radicalism. "The group has especially fought against rehabilitation of Nazi war crimes in Estonia and Latvia, being thus labeled as "pro-Putin"." smacks me as non sequitur, and might run awry of the WP:NOR policy. Finally, Mr. Iljaševitš is a resident of Republic of Estonia, which uses Latin alphabet for names of its citizens and residents; it would be pointless and potentially confusing to radically transform his name as the esteemed anonymous has done. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 11:29, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Litigation

I hear SAFKA has sued The Soviet Story in several countries. What are Finnish laws regarding vexatious litigation? Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 19:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Let's put it this way. I personally would be amazed if a Finnish Public Prosecutor started a serious investigation. But on the other hand, I have seen some weird Court decisions (even though Finland is a one of the most anti-corrupted countries in the world [25]), which are against a common sense. Bäckman have set a sue [26], but let's see how far it goes. I have not seen any Finnish media reports of Bäckman's and/or SAFKA's sues, so at least the Finnish media has not taken Bäckman seriously for some time... Peltimikko (talk) 21:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

How does the legal system work over there? Here in Australia if somebody sues someone, and the plaintiff loses the case, the court can order the plaintiff to pay all the costs the defendant incurred in defending themselves. Martintg (talk) 23:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I do not think this is a question of sueing, it is not even an issue for the civil courts. Incitement to ethnic or racial hatred is a crime in Finland. Prosecution is the responsibility of the public prosecutor, in this case the Prosecutor General of Finland. All individuals like SAFKA members can do is file a criminal complaint. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 13:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

It could be argued that the activities of SAFKA constitutes incitement to ethnic or racial hatred against Estonians. We all hate fascists, SAFKA claims the Estonian state is a fascist state, the Estonian state is run by Estonians, therefore the Estonians must be fascist, therefore we must hate Estonians too, according to SAFKA. I'm surprised no one has filed a criminal complaint against Johan Bäckman and other members of this organisation. Perhaps it will be just a matter of time before this happens. Martintg (talk) 20:33, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

A good point, hope such a development is considered by many. A thing western ultraleftists do, is crying the wolf of 'censorship', 'fascist methods' in dealing with the opposition etc. whilst demanding themselves legal actions against their perceived foes. Bäckman is a great example of such proceedings. --Miacek (t) 22:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Since when has criticising the Estonian government been a crime? There is no "incitement to ethnic or racial hatred against Estonians" here - the committee is simply voicing criticism of the Estonian government's policies and of the fact that the Estonians are doing nothing about it. Offliner (talk) 21:33, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

The committee is doing more that just "simply voicing criticism of the Estonian government's policies", I recall the protest action against the publication of a book by a couple of private individuals Imbi Paju and Sofi Oksanen, branding as fascists these people of ethnic Estonian origin. I don't recall these people being members of the Estonian government. Do you hate these two people as a result of the actions of the Finnish Anti-Fascist Committee? Do you feel incited to hate "the criminal apartheid regime of Estonia", and by extension the Estonian people who are "doing nothing about it"? --Martintg (talk) 23:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Wording of the lead

How about changing "The group has especially fought against rehabilitation of Nazi war crimes in Estonia and Latvia" to "the group claims especially to fight..." It could probably be sourced to their writings somewhere, but seems trivial? Also, you reverted all my other improvements as well, without explanation. Offliner (talk) 01:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Object to this suggestion since the basic statement is factually incorrect, as there hasn't been any "rehabilitation of Nazi war crimes in Estonia and Latvia". --Martintg (talk) 04:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

No pasarán. Every Tom, Dick and Harry can claim to hunt ghosts that only they can see, but this is not sufficient basis to classify them as ghost hunters in an encyclopædia. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 08:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The connection to Tammi is indeed only "alleged." His only connection is that he took part in the same protest with SAFKA (for his own reasons.) He is not a member, and there is no proof of any further connections between them. There is also no reliable source confirming that he is a "former KGB affiliate." The only "proof" is that he claims so himself. Offliner (talk) 01:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

If someone confesses their affiliation, what more proof do you need? --Martintg (talk) 04:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I need a confirmation from a reliable source. Tammi isn't one. We can mention that he claims to be a former KGB informant, but the current formulation is wrong. It is not a generally accepted view that worked for the KGB. Maybe we should divide the chapter into two: "Alleged links with former KGB affiliates" and "Alleged links with people who claim to be former KGB affiliates." Offliner (talk) 05:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, we could say "KGB informant wannabe", but this is arguably not encyclopædic wording. So, how about "self-admitted KGB informant". Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 06:17, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Tammi claimed to be a KGB informant while he was a member for the Finnish neo-Nazis. Ofcourse if Offliner is claiming that Tammi wasn't a KGB informant, that would mean Tammi really was a full blooded neo-Nazi. Neo-Nazi or KGB informant, take your pick. Interesting company SAFKA keeps. --Martintg (talk) 06:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Or maybe all neo-Nazis in Finland are KGB informants trying to figure out who the real neo-Nazis are. Something like the Wobblies in Paranoia (role-playing game). Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 08:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

"Self-proclaimed former KGB-informant" would sound good to me. Offliner (talk) 16:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The articles appears to present a tendentious and misleading representation of the original sources. I will therefore tag it as NPOV. Please note that Google translate is available to assist in reading the original sources. The Four Deuces (talk) 00:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Notability?

The notability of this article was questioned by an anonymous IP-editor from Finland with zero edits — no doubt guided here by the shock value of today's Sunday edition of Finland national newspaper Helsingin Sanomat.

The paper was in fact quite interesting; the main "news", covering two thirds of the front page and two pages in the Sunday "features"-section was a report on the visit of one member of the committee, Johan Bäckman to the Lake Seliger youth camp in Russia. Most shocking was of course the fact that Helsingin Sanomat broke the apartheid like ban on reporting on the activities of committee members imposed by — none other than the Finnish staff of the Information Ministry of the Islamic Caucasus Emirate, known locally as Kavkaz Center.

As to the notability question itself, important insight can be gained from the ANNUAL REVIEW of the SECURITY POLICE OF THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA for 2009. (I cannot find a link to this most recent edition, but here is a link to the 2008 review.) From multiple press reports on the review it seems that the Estonian Security Police (KaPo) now consider the Finnish Anti-Fascist Committee as the number one threat to Estonian state security. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:47, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

P.S. - In fact the Estonian language review for 2009 has appeared on the web, the PDF file is here. The activities of the Finnish Anti-Fascist Committee are covered on pages 10 and 11, right after the presentation of the rank insignia of of the Security Police. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:18, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I think Helsingin Sanomat and YLE have reported activities of Bäckman quite much, considering that his opinions are very marginal and non-academic (Bäckman is not historian, but criminologist). Furthermore, his political career under a communist party was fiasco. The Sunday report by Helsingin Sanomat (brief overview in web page [27]) considered mostly the youth camp itself and a third page has a brief background of Bäckman and a summary of his summer lecture where Bäckman summarized "there is information war against Russia, Finns are russophobic and apartheid in Estonia". Peltimikko (talk) 06:14, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Ella Pamfilova and Lyudmila Alexeyeva?

It seems that something posted on the SAFKA web site and widely distributed by the Russian media has today led to the resignation of Ella Pamfilova from her post as chairman of the the Civil Society Institution and Human Rights Council of the Russian Federation. I have not yet read any of the Russian language news stories on the resignation, but as I understand it, she resigned as she felt she was not getting the support she needed while trying to protect Lyudmila Alexeyeva from being portrayed as a Nazi. The relevant Google news threads seem to be these two. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:32, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

It seems that the Russian press has now reached the same conclusions as I have, see for example these two articles. I wonder if Heidi Hautala will resign if Johan Bäckman is ever invited to a scout camp in Belgium? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 00:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Nochnoy Dozor is a Russian organization?

I have reverted labelling Nochnoy Dozor (group) as a Russian organisation. According to its article it is is a group of mostly Russophone political activists living in Estonia. The source for the sisterships actually is telling that the leader of Nochnoy Dozor Dmitri Linter was a host for the visit of all those people to Tallinn, Estonia. He lives in Estonia and AFAIK is an Estonian citizen. Quite possibly the group is financially supported from Russia and most of its members are Russophones but I do not think it can be labelled as a group from Russia. If you think it is important to emphasize the relations of the group (as well as all the other "anti-fascist sisters" to Russia (I am not sure it is worth it) it should be done in more correct way Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:11, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I was actually thinking of SAFKA's relationship with Nashi. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 01:49, 14 February 2014 (UTC)