The Finnish party system bears a number of singular and conspicuous features that give the whole political life a character of its own. The difference in type from the other Scandinavian countries may be roughly described in terms, say, of Sartori's typology¹: while Denmark, Norway and Sweden are representatives of a clear-cut moderate pluralism, in Finnish party activities there can be discerned at least some traits of an extreme pluralism. In essential parts the differences can be derived from some basic cleavages in society that have gone deeper and retained their extremism longer in Finland than in the neighbouring countries referred to. Such are (1) the conflict between speakers of Finnish and speakers of Swedish, which has indeed increasingly lost its significance as a fundamental dividing factor but upon which there still rests the Swedish People's Party, a grouping representing the minority nationality; (2) the relatively persistent division between the rural and the urban populations that achieved political expression 60 years ago in the founding of the Agrarian Party, which rapidly rose to become one of the biggest parties in the country and which has retained that position ever since; and (3) the class distinction that separates workers from bourgeoisie, which for several decades has found its most accentuated expression in a vigorous communist movement.

The latter conflict in particular has strongly coloured the political life of the country since the early years of the century, when the foundation of a vigorous socialist tradition was laid among the working classes. One of the historical circumstances promoting the rise of the movement was the postponement of economic and social reforms during the struggle that was being waged against the Russian wielders of power. An outstanding problem was the existence of an extensive farming proletariat consisting of farm labourers and tenant farmers. The political crisis that reached its climax in the general strike of 1905 also gave impetus to the spread of socialism to the farming communities, and in 1907 - when general suffrage came into effect - the Social Democratic Party, the socialist grouping of greatest relative strength in Europe, received 37 % of the total vote. The civil war of 1918, in connexion with which nearly 25,000 Reds perished, was a "decisive experience" that determined the political orientation of extensive groups of working people long into the future. Leaders of the rebellion escaping to Russia founded the Finnish Communist Party in 1918, and in 1920 the Left in Finland split into two organizations. During that decade and up to the ban on its activities that was imposed in 1930 the communists received between 10 and 15 % of the total vote. In 1944 the communist movement was again recognized; the Communist Party removed to Finland and the Finnish People's Democratic League was founded as a rallying election organization. Its share of the vote has fluctuated between 20 and 24 % and it has been one of the three biggest parties, the other two being the Agrarians and the Social Democrats. From 1944 to 1948 and since 1966 the party has participated in wide-based coalition governments of the Centre and the Left.

For purposes of comparison in an international sense Finland is consequently suitably representative of a political community tinged by a powerful leftist radicalism. However, comparisons internal to this country may provide a means of testing many hypotheses of comparative research that are concerned with the social basis and the mobilization phenomena of radicalism. Communism has powerful bastions in highly varying economic and social regions, on the one hand in some industrialized and highly developed areas in the south and the west of the country, and on the other in eastern and northern areas that have been backward but are now being rapidly modernized. In the latter regions extensive political activity arose only after the second world war, and it has consequently been possible to subject to analysis also the development processes of radicalism.

In Finland communism has been studied more extensively than have other movements. For the most part, however, this work has been done by individual scholars without any unified co-ordinating programme, with the consequence that the object of study, the approach, the material and the techniques have varied with the direction of individual interest and inclination. The analyses have mostly been concerned with the general historical development of the movement on the one hand and, on the other, with its mass support, i.e., the conditions in which it has been able to mobilize people for political activity. Less attention has been devoted to the ideology of the movement, the attitudes of its supporters, its organization, the structure and behaviour of its elite and the influence of the party upon the decision-making of the political system.

Historical Foundation

Most important among investigations involving an historical approach are the chronologically complementary works of Hannu Soikkanen, Ilkka Hakalehto and John H. Hodgson. The extensive and very sound work of the first-mentioned of these is not directly an investigation of Finnish communism but deals rather with the early vicissitudes of the undivided labour movement and analyses the basis upon which there later grew up a revisionist social democracy and an orthodox Marxism. Its central theme is an analysis of the channels and processes of the dissemination of socialism and the message it bore to its masses of supporters from the turn of the century up to the election of the first unicameral Parliament in 1907. A general theme recurs in the history of Finnish socialism: activity kindles first among working people at the highest level and quickly spreads out from the centre to the periphery with feelings of discontent and social grudge while communications open up and the level of demand rises. In Finland this process was an exceptionally rapid one that is linked up with a deterioration in the systematized outlook of the class society which, due to external factors, occurred within a brief period of time. In the first elections support was greater in the countryside than in the towns, which can be explained by the greater proportion of proletariat in the rural population. There was generally a close correlation between the support for the social democrats and the social structure of the rural population. In farming communities it seems that socialism was given a very narrow connotation, one chiefly concerned with the redistribution of land. In general, too, its ideology was interpreted in most varying fashions in different segments of the working classes.

In the 1920s communism existed in dichotomous form, as an underground and as a public movement. Relying chiefly upon the archives of the security police, Hakalehto has concentrated upon studying the former of these, the underground activities of the banned communist party and their influence upon the public movement. During the whole decade the security police kept a close watch upon the activities of the Communist Party, intervening from time to time therein with arrests and investigations. An essential source was the scheduled situation reports for the information of the authorities, these reports frequently containing party material seized from the communists. By filling in the gaps and making comparisons with published party material Hakalehto was able to produce quite a detailed picture of the objectives, leadership relations, organization work in the communist party and its relations with other organizations. The underground organizational activities were centred largely in the cities

and in the industrial communities of the countryside and the vicinity of the most important industrial towns; by 1927 the party was in contact through its organizations with about one third of the communes in Finland. It is not possible, however, to explain the mass support for the public activity on the basis of the regional spread of the secret organizational network. But regional support for communists in the elections, however, does correlate closely with support for the bourgeoisie. The natural interpretation of this relationship is that the majority and the dominance of the bourgeoisie as experienced in the familiar environment tended to arouse and preserve a revolutionary state of mind. This interpretation and the actual implication of the correlation has been questioned on empirical grounds; and an alternative approach has been made on the basis of a kind of radiation theory that emphasizes the significance of economic and cultural regional centres in the dissemination of communism.² An analysis of the genesis of its mass support is of particular significance insofar as the core areas of communism that tooke shape in the 1920s have in the succeeding decades maintained themselves almost intact.

Hodgson goes on where Hakalehto leaves off: the central theme of his study is the seeking of an explanation in earlier events for the new breakthrough of communism subsequent to the second world war. Most other studies analyzing support for communism have attempted to explain why and in what circumstances the Finnish working population is so radical in attitude as to seek a form of socialism at variance with the Scandinavian form, but Hodgson has adopted a different approach: he accepts the radicalism as it is and seeks in the lines of activity of the parties an explanation of why the masses adhere to any particular organization. His hasic hypothesis is the argument previously put forward regarding certain Central European systems: that the inefficiency and feebleness of social democracy as a working class alternative leads to the reinforcing of communism. Nationalism and the doctrine of the class struggle are regarded especially in Finland as being problems whose reconciling is a source of bewilderment to labour leaders both socialist and communist, and they are employed as basic variables in the analyses of the parties' courses of development. The study converges upon the affirmation "that the strength of Finnish Communism, past as well as present, is in a large measure a reflection of the nature of Finnish Social Democracy". The work is thus almost as much a study of the Social Democratic as of the Communist movement: it focuses upon the parties' internal dissensions over policy and upon people seeking their place in the political labour movement without being able sufficiently to identify themselves with either of its main branches. The leaders who for one reason or another have ended up in "no-man's land" from either side are the persons in whom Hodgson is interested, whose motives and behaviour he attempts to understand and whose choice he regards in his interpretation as being decisive.

Mass Support

A description and an explanation of the mass support for communism is part of Finnish election research. This work has chiefly employed ecological material based on regional units, which has been treated either by the methods of the traditional French "election sociology" or through the facilities provided by newer statistical investigation methods. With ecological studies becoming commoner, discussion has been aroused in Finland too regarding the nature of interpretations to be made from aggregate material. This problem particularly concerns political ecology, for it seems to be part of the nature of political ecology that it should tend towards causal interpretations on the level of the individual. While emphasis has been laid upon the hypothetical character of such material, it has been stated that pregnant causal interpretations on the individual level can in given circumstances be elicited more easily from this kind of material than from a material based on mere interviewing.³ Only exceptionally have there been any opportunities for comparing results of materials of different level by contextual analysis.

The most commonly employed regional unit is the commune, which, it is true, is in many
senses a unit but which reveals an internal variance, due to its being comparatively large,
that is a drawback. It is true that voting data are available from smaller units, the electoral

wards, but the latter are ignored in the collecting of data on other phenomena. As usual in election studies, the settings have chiefly been static ones; attention has mainly been devoted to finding stable political areas or to analyzing the stand taken at given moments, while less interest has been directed towards processes of change. In the absence of a general formulation of theory each researcher has selected his explanatory variables as he chooses on the basis of his own premisses, with the consequence that there is an abundance of disconnected hypotheses together with a weakening of comparability. The few investigations made can be divided into general cartographies, delimited regional studies, and analyses attempting to test general hypotheses.

A general cartography of the support of the communist movement is a part of the basic investigation of the political ecology of the entire country, and was reported on in the previous fascicle of this yearbook.⁴ In the first part of the investigation, which centres upon the description and the discovery of political regions, i. e. the static features of the political stage, the fact was demonstrated that, as was previously known in general outline, the support for communism in Finland is distributed over varying regions and in disparate communities. The smaller and more broken-up region of communist support is located in the developed and industrialized areas of southwest Finland, the traditional soil of socialism, while the actual main region lies in north Finland. As the more radical groups of the bourgeoisie too have received most support in the north, the country can be regarded as being generally divided into two basic climates; in the east and the north both the bourgeoisie and the leftists are inclined to select the more radical alternative, while in the west and the south they are inclined towards the more moderate or conservative one. In the later parts of the investigation an explanation will be sought for the distribution of support of the communists and of the other parties and also of changes in the strength relationships.

The first study to shed light upon communist support, inspired by the French tradition, had taken as its subject two East Finnish constituencies that also cover two bordering provincial communities and modern economic regions.₅ In terms of economic and social structure these do not decisively differ, but in the field of politics the difference is all the greater: the western part of the region. North Savo, is traditionally a communist support area, while the eastern part, North Carelia, is socialdemocratic. The proportion of valid votes received by the communists in the constituencies was 38 % and 5 % respectively in 1922 and 30 % and 17 % respectively in 1954. The objective of the study was to explain, firstly, the difference between these two areas of behaviour and, secondly, their internal variation. In the first instance reference had to be made above all to socio-economic conditions half a century previous, to the premisses for spontaneous activities and orientation in the provincial functional centres and to the events of the controversies in the Civil War and the Labour Movement. When the analysis proceeded to the ward level it was observed that communist support in rural conditions correlated with the variables indicating a low standard of living and geographical and social isolation. In the Red areas, where communism was the dominant leftist form of behaviour, these factors had, however, a greater significance in explaining the geographic differences than they had in the White areas. This radicalism was found to be mainly what is called "backwoods" communism of the poor outlying areas, which is without any ideological content to speak of and which has its roots as a social protest in a feeling of alienation associated with isolation and economic conditions.

From industrial Finland too there is available a regional study concentrating upon a single constituency, in which, it is true, communist support is dealt with only as a part of the question ⁸ This study has, on the one hand, proceeded to test hypotheses found in the literature regarding factors influencing the support of the parties and the changes therein, and, on the other hand, it endeavours to develop a theoretical model of these factors. With this in view, factor analysis was selected as the research method, and this was employed to describe the conditions of a point in time, and changes within a given period and the period as a whole. Use was also made of transformation analysis in order to compare the results of two "crosssection factorizations" in common variables. The communism of 19205, however, was studied

statically, only for the 1927 situation of support. This support proves to vary geographically and is linked up with such factors as language, large-scale industry, social insecurity and political events. "The communist supporters were Finnish-speaking, employed in industry, socially insecure and had experienced the great strikes of the turn of the century. Those who voted for the party can be described as industrial workers radicalized by strikes"⁷

The widely-known studies of Finnish communism by Erik Allardt are methodically interesting from many points of view and are pioneering works at least in Europe.⁸ He has made parallel, comparative and supplementary use of ecological and interview material, and has in this manner endeavoured to facilitate the transition from the aggregate to the individual level. Differing from the French tradition, he has analysed by statistical methods factors influencing political behaviour; the calculation of correlations and factor analysis are his preferred methods. By means of multi-variable analysis he has been able to attempt inductive theory formation in this field where deductive points of departure are poorly developed. At the same time his scientific grasp has been characterized by an endeavour to link empirical observations deductively with ever-wider contexts and to use the material for the testing of increasingly general hypotheses.

Allardt proceeded from the class-based division of party activities and found from Gallup data of the 1950s that, e. g. about 2/5 of the people of the working class voted for the Communists and the same number for the Social Democrats. When the dichotomies urban-rural settlement and North-South are introduced it is found that the center of gravity of communist support in relation to the total number of voters lies in the rural areas of eastern and northern Finland while that of Social Democracy lies in the urban areas of western and southern Finland. The rural character of communism is thus a phenomenon typical of Finland, in contrast with Marx' original hypothesis that "the more industrialization, the more class-consciousness". Working-class people in the countryside of northern and eastern Finland are mostly smallholders who make part of their livelihood as forest workers. There are many traits in their lives that are generally associated with political radicalism. They have been living in economically insecure circumstances; they may have good contacts inside the group but little outside it; the recent and rapid process of modernization has led to improved opportunities of comparison and thus to an increase in the level of demands; the dependence on their farmsteads promoted by the government's farming policy has probably contributed towards the prevention of social mobility.

As, however, the majority of the population lives in the south, there are, reckoned in absolute figures, also more communists there than in the north. It has become the custom to speak of the industrial communism of the developed parts of the country and of the backwoods communism of the remote areas. Roughly speaking coincident with this is the division into traditional and emerging radicalism. In the east arid the north great activity and radicalism is largely a result of post-second world war development, while in the south it has established traditions. By correlation and factor analysis of the ecological material Allardt began to clarify the social basis of these two types of communism.

It proved that industrial and backwoods communism are to be explained in terms of very different social factors, and that it is possible to speak of an institutionalized instrumental radicalism and of a diffuse expressive radicalism. In its earlier stages of development a political mass movement has mainly expressive functions whereas when becoming established it habituates it members to an increasing extent to instrumental functions. In the south and the west communist support has many correlates that are identical with those of the social democrats all over the country, e. g. a strong connection with the numbers of industrial workers and old socialist traditions and class conflicts. It seems surprising that unemployment, as well as emigration from the commune, is more closely connected with social-democratic support than with communist support. In short, communist support in developed areas tends to be great where (1) political traditions are strong, (2) economic change is relatively minor and social conditions stable, (3) migration is slight and (4) the class structure is relatively rigid and inequality is presumably strongly preceived.

In the north and the east the situation is altogether different: with most of the background variables employed, communism there showed a very low correlation with these factors. On the aggregate level it is most distinctly associated with unemployment, voting activity and feebleness of religious activity. Allardt placed backwoods communism somewhere between socialism and agrarism: the latter at its strongest in the most backward areas and the former in the most advanced. In certain stages of economic development communism thus turns out to be an alternative with voter appeal. It appeals to isolated and rootless people who have recently been uprooted from a traditional social order but have not yet merged into an industrial system. In undeveloped areas communist support thus tends to be strong where (1) the importance of traditional values such as religion has recently declined, (2) economic change is rapid, (3) social insecurity prevails, and (4) migration is common.

In both instances the communists feel that they are isolated from the national social system, but in different ways. In urban areas the communists have an extensive network of citizens' organizations that, however, have largely stood apart from the rest of society. In the backward regions voting activity does, however, correlate very weakly with other social and political activities; the communists as individuals are isolated and alienated on account of the lack of opportunities of social participation, and their voting activity has a distinct character of emotional protest. "The results point to a theory according to which lack of group ties, weakening of norms and uprooting of individuals have radicalizing effects in backward and economically underdeveloped areas, whereas, on the contrary, strong group ties, strong group norms and lack of cross-pressures tend to increase radicalism in industrialized and economically differentiated environments".⁹

Separately, Allardt has paid attention to the dynamics of communism, i. e. the circumstances that favour increased radicalism. The strengthening of communism throughout the country can largely be explained in terms of the same social factors as those used in explaining the strength of backwoods communism. Thus the phenomenon is associated with circumstances in which alienation and the rootlessness of the individual occur. The theories of what is called mass society can thus be employed in explaining the emerging radical movement but not in explaining traditional radicalism.

Political attitudes in Finland are strongly class-based. Accordingly, communist voters represent on the average the poorest and status-wise most inferior part of the population. According to every criterion they are much more frequently than not on a lower level than are the social democrats. A high status crystallization combined with a low vertical status thus tends to engender deprivation, class-consciousness and political radicalism, which matches roughly with the Marxian theory of class. The regional variation, the strength of communism in the poorest part of the country, naturally contributes to this average result. In a survey study conducted in the industrial city of Tampere there were, roughly measured, no decisive differences found between the material standard of living of social democrats and that of communists. It was found, however, that communists much more frequently had experiences of unemployment and that, for them, the disparity between the realized and the aimed-at standards of living was greater than it was for the social democrats.¹⁰

Ideologies and Attitudes

Reference will be made in this section to two investigations, one dealing with individual
attitudes and patterns of behaviour and the other with group ideologies i. e. party programmes.

Yrjo Littunen has analysed interview data gathered from among working youth of voting age in order to clarify the dependency of radicalism on social-activity factors and on social alienation. Measuring on a converging scale the number of intellectual contacts, he found that the common identification mark of young people who voted communist was a relative intellectual passiveness or isolation. Regarded as a whole there was no significant difference between the political attitudes of the active and those of the passive in organizational activities, while it was characteristic of the radicals that they should belong to certain types of groups, i. e. parties and other organizations with a political colouring. The alienation from general

group-type interests had, according to his observations, taken place already in childhood. The results link up with previous generalizations regarding the liveliness of internal intellectual communications and the paucity of external communications as being factors favouring radicalism. When making a general classification of the connection between social alienation and radicalism Littunen actually rises to the level of interpretation on which we move in the studies, referred to above, that proceeded from aggregate material and social variables. In his opinion his results suggest the dominance in Finland of an emotional or expressive radical type whom it is perhaps difficult to draw into intellectual life but who, even while being passive, can be roused into emotional participation. The attitude of this type of person could be called "communish of the heart". It must be noted that the result is evidently regionally-bound and may, perhaps, be a reflection of conditions in other than distinctly industrial areas.

Olavi Borg too found a certain trait of expressionism in Finnish communism at the group level in his analysis dealing with the ideologies of Finnish parties,¹¹ which drew its material from the parties' declarations of principles. It became apparent in an emphasis of ideological values of objectives in argumentation concerning activity demands, in contrast to means values chiefly put forward by the other parties including the Social Democrats. It is true that the Communist Party programme too includes a great number of direct demands concerned with practical reform.

The general objective of this study, which applied the approach of a quantitative classification of content, was a systematic comparison of the content and structure of the principles and the specification of what is called the ideological basic order, i. e. the convential rightistleftist dimension. It proved that the traditional classification is not rigidly valid even on the level of programmatic attitudes, for parties are most often separated in a fashion different from merely into two groups by the dividing line between socialists and bourgeoisie. In some political questions of primary importance the dichotomy is nevertheless realized according to expectation, in that the watershed runs between the communists and all the other parties. This is true in particular of the attitudes towards the objectives and methods of the activities of the State, and generally in the attitude towards society, where the communist grouping, which aims at radical change, stands far apart from the others. A kind of sociometric overall measurement revealed that generally too the "preferences" of the extreme left for programmes even of groupings nearest in the scale of parties were very rare. On the other hand, there is something of a programmatic dichotomy within the communist movement too. The 1957 programme of the Communist Party, which is at present under revision, is "orthodox" in that it is of theoretical and ideological content, and in content implies the application in Finnish conditions of Leninist Marxism. The programme objectives of the Finnish People's Democratic League have been essentially determined by tactical considerations regarding support: the programme is a very concrete one, appealing strongly and emotionally to various feelings of discontent and shunnning open socialistic tendencies.

The study also had theoretical and methodical objectives: it wished to test the use and applicability of quantitative methods in research on political ideologies and the language of politics on the basis of documentary material. The result is an elegant performance in which concurrent and flexible use was made of theoretical premisses and methods of analysis, from the methods characteristic of historical science right up to the multi-variable analysis of quantified material.

Structure and Behaviour of the Elite

According to investigations, the communist voters represent the poorest and status-wise lowest part of the population. This feature may be expected to be reflected in the structure of the leadership. According to a study made on the social background of members of Parliament and on their careers before being elected,¹² this assumption is a valid one, although the difference from the Social Democrats was slight during the period between the two world wars. Nearly two thirds of the members of each of these two parties were from working-class homes, but in both parties the largest single social group was made up of persons already detached

or in the process of being detached from their original backgrounds, who according to objective criteria were members of the middle class and who, on account of their being journalists and functionaries of labour organizations etc., were to be regarded as being professional politicians. When an examination is made of the social stratification of the members it appears that after the second world war the Social Democrats were becoming bourgeoisie to a far higher degree than the Communists were. The relatively low educational level of the Communist members was, in contrast, already conspicuous in the 19205. About half of them had received no occupational or other education subsequent to primary school. The study did not make a separate examination of whether the regional differentiation of the communist movement caused any variation within the group.

The prevalent ideological insularity and isolation was paralleled in the behaviour of the leadership in making actual political decisions. Indications to this effect are provided in the study by Pekka Nyholm, which clarifies the political field of forces in the Parliament on the levels of the individual member, the organized party group and the actually occurring coalitions. The study proceeds from a measurement of the cohesion of the parliamentary groups by the old Stuart Rice index of cohesion. In contradistinction to all the other parties, the People's Democrats proved to be practically unanimous group (the 1948—51 index was 95.1). On the average they split up in any fashion only at every 6th open vote, while the other parties did so at about every second vote. Actually, the most important group combinations appearing in the voting distribution proved to be communists/other parties and bourgeoisie/socialists. The former distribution covers about Ils of the analyzed divisions of 1948-51 and almost one half of those of 1954. The question was usually one of the Communists' own motions and propositions which were not backed by the Social Democratic members. These were also the cases in which the cohesion of the group was greatest, i. e. almost perfect. Insofar as there was any flexibility at all observable, it occurred in questions where the division took place along the line rural/urban. Whereas the majority of the group would take the urban side the minority would take the rural one, and the reverse. It is interesting that there could be found in these exceptions a certain regularity which is associated with the regional variation of communism referred to above. For the rurally-inclined Communists were elected from North Finland while those who were urban-oriented appear to have been from industrial Finland. This phenomenon has a counterpart in the Agrarian group, in that its most leftist-inclined members were from North Finland.

In the Finnish multi-party system a spontaneous cohesion in combination with adjustments within the group usually suffices to engender quite strong cohesion without extensive use of exterior pressure, i. e. party discipline. By inference Nyholm reached the conclusion that a conflict between party interests and mebers' convictions was usually decided in accordance with the principle of mebers' freedom of action. The Communist group was, however, regarded as being the exception, in which the individual member's freedom of decision was perceptibly limited. When the group split, it was strictly a question of a permitted deviation from the majority view over specified issues.

Future Prospects

The characteristic features of extreme pluralism - multi-polarity, polarization and centrifugalis ¹³ - have doubtless coloured the Finnish party system to some extent. The social and political isolation of the two working-class parties, naturally of the communists in particular, has been regarded as a phenomenon typical of the political life of the country and as one reinforcing the said features. This traditional setting, which can be found in many other countries too, reveals the non-regulated nature of the conflict between the Communists and the Rest, the systematic isolation of the Communist Movement from the functions of government and its becoming congealed in a situation divorced from the national community of values and turning into an opposition that takes an extreme critical attitude towards the political systems at its various levels. In recent years there have been an increasing number of indications of an integration of attitudes covering the entire party life of the country, which

is expressed in a kind of ideological and functional centripetal force mollifying dissension between groups.¹⁴ Also the People's Democrats and Communist Movement have taken part in this development to some extent, and — because of the change of generation in the leadership — are doing so ever more distinctly. It is a question partly of the gradual liberalization of the Movement itself and of its becoming accustomed to the basic norms of the system of parliamentary democracy, partly of a change in the attitude of the other groups: the government constellation of 1966 can be regarded as being an expression of this change.¹⁵ An analysis of the effect that a continuation of this process might have on the above and other phenomena of the Communist Movement must be left for future investigation.

Jaakko
University of Turku

Jaakko Nousiainen

---

NOTES

1 Sartori, 1967.

2 Laulajainen, 1967.

3 Allardt, 1966, pp. 4-5.

4 Pesonen and Rantala, 1967.

5 Nousiainen, 1956.

6 Sånkiaho,1967.

7 op. cit._} p. 95.

8 Allardt has presented his results in many articles and reports. Gf. Scandinavian Political Studies, 1, (1966) bibliography numbers 480, 524, 546-553, 598, 599; 2, (1967) numbers 210, 212.

9 72.

10 Pesonen, 1965, pp. 82-95.

11 Borg, 1964.

12 1964.

13 Gf. Sartori, 1966.

14 E.g. Borg, 1965, pp. 162-170.

15 Gf. review in the section "Recent Political Development: Finland", in this fascile.

REFERENCES

Allardt, Erik, "Social sources of Finnish communism: traditional and emerging radicalism",
International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 5, (1964).

Allardt, Erik, Aggregate analysis: the problem of its informative value. Research Reports
No. 72, Institute of Sociology, University of Helsinki, 1966, (mimeo).

Borg, Olavi, Suomen puolueideologiat (The ideologies of the Finnish political parties),
Vammala, WSOY, 1964.

Borg, Olavi, "Ideologisia virtauksia Suomen. poliittisessa elamåssa" (Ideological trends in
Finnish political life), Sosiologia, 2, (1965).

Hakalehto, Ilkka, Suomen kommunistinen puolue ja sen vaikutus poliittiseen ja ammatilliseen
tyovdenliikkeeseen 1918-1928 (The Finnish Communist Party and its influence on the political
and Unionist activities of the Labour movement), Porvoo-Helsinki, WSOY, 1966.

Hodgson, John H., Communism in Finland: a history and interpretation. Princeton, Princeton
University Press, 1967.

Laulajainen, Pertti, Kommunistisen ryhmån syntymisen ekologia (An ecological study of the
arrival of the Communist groups), Institute of Political Science, University of Turku, 1967,
(typewritten).

Littunen, Yrjo, "Aktiivisuus ja radikalisrni" (Activity and radicalism), Politiikka, 2, (1960).

Nousiainen, Jaakko, Kommunismi Kuopion Lddnissd (Communism in the Kuopio province),
Joensuu, 1956.

Nyholm, Pekka, Suomen eduskuntaryhmien koheesio (The cohesion of the party groups in
the Finnish Diet), Helsinki, 1961.

Pesonen, Pertti, Valtuutus kansalta (Mandate from the people), Porvoo-Helsinki, WSOY,
1965.

Pesonen, Pertti and Rantala, Onni, "Current election studies in Finland", Scandinavian
Political Studies, 2, (1967).

Rantala, Onni, "The political regions in Finland", Scandinavian Political Studies, 2, (1967).

Sartori, Giovanni, "European political parties: the case of polarized pluralism". In J. La
and M. Weiner, eds.: Political parties and political development, Princeton,
Princeton University Press, 1966.

Sartori, Giovanni, Typologies of party systems. A critique. Paper, World congress of the
International Political Science Association, Brussels, 1967, (mimeo).

Soikkanen, Hannu, Sosialismin tulo Suomeen (The arrival of Socialism in Finland),
Porvoo-Helsinki, WSOY, 1961.