Finland: On the Decline in the Birth Rate and the General Crisis of Imperialism
We hereby share an unofficial translation of an analysis published by Punalippu (Red Flag):
In imperialist countries, there is a general trend towards a decrease in the birth rate. In oppressed nations, there is some variation for various reasons: for example, in several Asian countries, the birth rate is falling, but in several African countries, for example, it is increasing. Many factors influence this. However, especially in imperialist countries, the basis can be considered to be that children have become, from an economic point of view, a mere “expense item” whereas in feudal or semi-feudal society they are needed as a labor force and to care for their parents in their old age. Furthermore, child labor is generally not present in imperialist countries. For a working-class family, children therefore “only” represent an expense, from an economic point of view.
In Finland, the total fertility rate was 1.26 in 2023. This is one of the lowest in Europe. According to the bourgeoisie, the total fertility rate should ideally be above 2 in terms of “economic sustainability”. The first-time mother is typically in her thirties. Statistics show that those with higher education want more children on average, and those with lower education want few or no children at all. However, studies show that the number of children in families is generally below expectations, and people have not completely stopped wanting children. The problem is that, for various reasons, having a first child is delayed beyond the age of 30, even closer to the age of 40.
The bourgeoisie uses the decline in birth rates to intensify exploitation, justifying this with the so-called “sustainability gap”, the decline in birth rates and the aging of the population. It does so on the one hand by, for example, dividing the working class by bringing in laborforce from oppressed nations and on the other hand by, for example, lengthening working ages and increasing the supply of labor by weakening social security.
Declining birth rates and patriarchy
One significant reason for the decline in birth rates is patriarchy, the contradiction between the patriarchal family and women’s participation in social production. In imperialist countries, women have – more or less – become part of social production. In a working-class family, both parents must work. Although Finnish imperialism boasts, for example, of a more “progressive” “welfare state model” than in Central Europe, which offers children, for example, extensive day care, the typical family is a “nucleus family” and society is very individualistic and housework, in addition to the burdens of paid work, still falls mainly on women. Grandparents no longer live with their children, and as migration to the large cities of Southern Finland accelerates, many live hundreds of kilometers away from their families. This phenomenon is becoming more and more intense.
Engels wrote the following in his work Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State:
“With the patriarchal family, and still more with the single monogamous family, a change came. Household management lost its public character. It no longer concerned society. It became a private service; the wife became the head servant, excluded from all participation in social production. Not until the coming of modern large-scale industry was the road to social production opened to her again – and then only to the proletarian wife. But it was opened in such a manner that, if she carries out her duties in the private service of her family, she remains excluded from public production and unable to earn; and if she wants to take part in public production and earn independently, she cannot carry out family duties.”
However, it is not enough that a woman has been “liberated” to also be exploited as a worker; the condition for a woman’s true liberation is “to bring the whole female sex back into public industry, and that this in turn demands the abolition of the monogamous family as the economic unit of society,” as Engels states.
Engels tells us:
“With the transfer of the means of production into common ownership, the single family ceases to be the economic unit of society. Private housekeeping is transformed into a social industry. The care and education of the children becomes a public affair; society looks after all children alike, whether they are legitimate or not.”
Patriarchy cannot be destroyed within imperialism, but requires the abolition of private property, as Engels has shown: only the socialization of property can make it possible to crush patriarchy. The working woman is doubly oppressed: as a woman and as a worker. Therefore, in addition to the burdens of paid work, she often also has to do housework. For example, Statistics Finland reported in 2021 that although the time women spend on housework has decreased, they still have the main responsibility for housework. When a woman is still expected to cope with this alone, without the support of her family or other close community, childlessness represents “freedom”.
When a woman gives birth to a child and takes care of it at home, this is taken away from her and her family’s livelihood. Young women are still discriminated at the labor market due to the “risk” of having children. Children affect women’s careers and, for example, pensions. At the same time, many proletarian women work in sectors where part-time work and, for example, zero-hour contracts are common. Although conditions in Finland are reasonably good, and children are born even in poorer circumstances, economic and other insecurity, combined with the fact that child labor is not common and imperialism forces consumerism and other ideological decay on all classes, also affects birth rates among the proletariat. Women are still subject to intimate partner violence and there is no real freedom to divorce due to the fact that women are usually in a weaker economic position in marriage. The position of single mothers is very difficult, as they are the sole earners of their families. On the one hand, having children also limits the “freedom” that women are granted under imperialism. This particularly affects working women, who are in the weakest economic position, but also petty bourgeois women, who, for example, may seek higher education before having children, which in turn postpones having children.
The total fertility rate of women from oppressed nations is generally higher than that of Finns, but lower than the average total fertility rate in these countries themselves. When comparing the figures for 2020-2023 with those of ten years ago, the total fertility rate of immigrant women has remained the same or decreased slightly. The higher total fertility rate of women from oppressed nations is essentially influenced by the cultural difference built on the basis of semi-feudalism, which also affects immigrants (although birth rates can still be low in some semi-feudal countries for various reasons). In many cultures, women are expected to stay at home more often and have many children, and immigrant women are also less likely to be employed than immigrant men for various reasons. In some large immigrant communities in Finland, such as the Somali community, it is typical for the family to participate more actively in raising children.
The question of the status of immigrant women cannot be addressed properly except on an anti-imperialist basis. Otherwise, we end up with petty-bourgeois and bourgeois chauvinist horror stories, where the main problem is that these women have not “integrated” enough, have not adopted Finnish (in this view, superior) bourgeois culture, and they are being tried to “help” them with the means of the “welfare state”, demanding that they put their children in daycare even when they are under 1 year old and that they are exploited even more than their sisters who belong to an imperialist nation, for example in the cleaning sector and in care work.
As mentioned above, women’s financial insecurity in particular affects birth rates. However, the bourgeois media mainly promotes the petty-bourgeois idea that the petty bourgeoisie in particular is so poor that they cannot afford children or have to postpone them. A recent example of this is Mona Mannevuo’s column on ‘Yle’, in which the author discusses research work and uncertainty in the academic world and its impact on birth rates through her own experience. The position of working-class women – especially women from oppressed nations – is the worst of all, but are their problems discussed in the bourgeois media? On the one hand, this insecurity experienced by the petty bourgeoisie is influenced by the plight of this class, squeezed by imperialism and big industry, which is reflected in its ideological decline. The petty bourgeoisie also has a strong idea that children must always be offered more than they had in their own childhood. Therefore, a “stable” life, which includes a permanent job and a home they own, is considered ideal. When this is not possible for the ever-widening layers of the petty bourgeoisie and the labor aristocracy in the general crisis of imperialism, they postpone having children even further. However, the voice of working women is missing from the discussion. At the same time, their position is becoming increasingly miserable as the bourgeoisie solves the problem by increasing exploitation.
The general crisis of imperialism is indicated by the fact that young people generally assess the economic outlook as bleak in terms of having children. Economist Vesa Vihriälä’s blog post from 2020 considers that this does not correspond to the larger lines of economic development. Although economic indicators have been on the rise since 2005, according to Vihriälä, the decline in the birth rate has only accelerated. Vihriälä also points out that the birth rate did not fall, for example, during the recession of the 1990s. However, it is not just about economic trends, but about how the masses generally see their future. Furthermore, although economic reasons are a significant factor when it comes to birth rates, as we have explained, they are not the only one, although Vihriälä examines the matter very one-sidedly only in terms of economic indicators. Crisis after crisis, the situation of the masses only worsens. Imperialism is a dying system that has no bright prospects to offer to young people, even though Vihriälä claims so. He can continue to slouch.
Vihriälä also draws attention to the fact that, compared internationally, child poverty in Finland is low and the support and services for families with children are at the top international level. This is true. Finnish imperialism has a huge social machinery, the purpose of which is to prevent “disadvantage” and to strive to maintain social peace. The only problem is that this machinery fails to meet the demands of the masses, as it has been created only to hold them back and keep them oppressed and exploited, and its entire foundation is constantly becoming more unstable.
Ideological decline
One, secondary reason is the ideological decay that affects all classes in one way or another, which is strongest in the petty bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie, but from which the working class cannot escape either. This is particularly evident in extreme individualism and in the idea, which particularly affects the petty bourgeoisie, of a youth that lasts until one’s forties or even fifties, in which one does not have to take responsibility for anything. The most important thing is to serve one’s own hedonistic desires. This is a parasitic life made possible by the exploitation of completely oppressed nations. In part, this affects the imperialist nation as a whole, including its working class, but at the same time, for the deepest parts of the working class youth, such a carefree life is an illusion crumbling before their eyes.
Imperialism is characterized by a variety of phenomena that speak of its ideological decay: internet and porn addiction, incel culture, appearance pressures, etc., which in turn influence how young people form relationships. The Brazilian MFP document on postmodernism shows how the ideological decay of imperialism, as part of its decay, leads to extreme individualism, an emphasis on sexual attraction, and a weakening of caring and respectful relationships. The text underlines that proletarian morality opposes these and emphasizes mutual respect, caring for others, and solidarity in human relationships.
The bourgeoisie, and especially the petty bourgeoisie, also spread their idea that the world is such a horrible place that it is not worth having children here. Pessimism is characteristic especially of the petty bourgeoisie, because it is oppressed by the monopoly bourgeoisie and, with the general crisis of imperialism, its position is becoming more and more cramped. It is true that there is no future for the life of the labor aristocracy, the petty bourgeoisie and the parasites of the bourgeoisie in the imperialist country, because imperialism is a dying system. However, the future is bright for the proletariat, if it only holds a firm grip on to the revolution.
Imperialism is at a dead end. Young people are increasingly concerned about their future, and although this is manifested in different ways in different classes, it is nevertheless indicative of imperialism’s lack of perspective.
The bourgeoisie is tightening exploitation under the guise of a declining birth rate
The Finnish imperialist bourgeoisie is ringing the doomsday bells when it comes to birth rates. The explanation that “we” can no longer afford it due to the aging population is a justification for increasing exploitation. For the proletariat, the decline in birth rates is not a problem in itself, but a symptom of a fundamental and incurable crisis of imperialism, an indication that this system is simply not viable. The issue is also related to several daily demands of proletarian women, such as better wages, stable employment relationships, an end to discrimination and easing the burdens of housework – in essence, a demand for the crushing of patriarchy, which can only happen by crushing imperialism. In addition to this, the phenomenon shows other features of imperialism’s decay, such as ideological decay and extreme pessimism. This also shows the need to vigorously struggle, first of all, against pessimism in all its forms, as well as the need to raise the class consciousness of the proletariat and arm them against bourgeois ideology.
In Finland, an imperialist country, falling birth rates are combined with falling mortality rates. The population is therefore aging. This is a major problem for the bourgeoisie, especially in terms of maintaining the pension system and the “welfare state”, which are significant maintainers of “social stability”. This “sustainability deficit” in turn justifies increasing exploitation. On the one hand, it justifies a greater division of the working class and the importation of laborforce from oppressed nations and increasing exploitation this way. At the same time, the retirement age is raised and thus working ages are extended. Due to the general crisis of imperialism, the constant need in a rotten system to tighten exploitation, maintaining the “welfare state” in the old way is no longer possible. Its dismantling, which has been taking place for decades, is also part of the efforts aimed at tightening exploitation by increasing the supply of labor.
Maintaining the pension system is essential for the fertility debate. Finns pay higher than average shares of their salary in pension contributions than in OECD countries. However, these are constantly rising, and at the same time the retirement age is rising. Few proletarians have time to enjoy their retirement days after having toiled their entire lives. Part of the pension contributions goes to funds, which are the largest institutional investors in Finland, and thus part also to the operation of the finance capital system. In this way, part of the worker’s salary is directly used by finance capital, and although the justification is that the “income” will be used to pay pensions in the future, the workers only get crumbs, if they live to see retirement age at all. In addition, tampering with pensions is also politically embarrassing for the bourgeoisie.
In this situation, proposals to increase the birth rate, for example by preventing child poverty and improving services for families with children, are just a mask for maintaining and increasing exploitation. They serve to mislead the masses from the path of revolution. These improvements are just crumbs. The problem is not the support and services for families with children, but imperialism, exploitation. It is also very important to note that the “welfare state” is based on the exploitation of oppressed nations and is the bribery of the Finnish working class with their blood. Therefore, the solution cannot be that the welfare state should be developed further.
The decline in the birth rate therefore indicates the fundamental decay of imperialism. The bourgeoisie uses this issue as well to justify further increasing exploitation, even though at the heart of the problem is exploitation, which is particularly expressed in the contradiction between women’s participation in social production and the patriarchal private family.
