The middle-class punishes the overachiever. #☭ Environmental anxiety was popularized at the same time as hygge became a thing. They are the same. Environmental anxiety is a form of class consciousness, its a simmering hunch of the costs of hygge.

Presented a performance at a Kritiikki näkyy [Visible Critique] seminar and was interviewed on stage by Aleksi Salusjärvi (before the event by Maaria Ylikangas). The seminar was nice and I enjoyed learning how different authors approach climate matters. Class was not referred during the panels and I ended up agitating the crowd towards a global eco-social revolution. In the heat of the moment I framed it as a responsibility shared by people living in the global north. This came off as an severe symptom of a white-saviour complex and spoiled my attempt to emerge as a recovering survivalist. But still, I think moving away from environmental anxiety towards joined political movement is needed. During the seminar I realized that environmental anxiety is a reactionary political expression and that it is inviting to ecofasism (discussed in a recent episode of  DEATH // SENTENCE).

Eco-socialistic strategies for organization (self-governed small organizations syndicating in an effort to establish a global constitution which would make all forms off oppression impossible) offer a different stance to previous saviour-complexes ridden attempts to address climate change.

A project I struggled with for the past two years Personal Decamerone was published as a essay in No-Niin Issue 10. Feels great and I’m honoured of the portrait Jani Ikonen drew of me. Elham worked hard to shape the text, so that it would better help expand the horizon of possible sexual expressions (in the cis male domain I occupy). Looking back the first drafts read like a hate-letter (to myself).


We wrote an investigative article Our efforts to show solidarity for Palestine are tested at Kiasma, with Pietari Kylmälä for No Niin. The text was edited by Elham Rahmati & Vidha Saumya, who did a great job. With help from the kind people of the Boycott Zabludowicz campaign we were able to gain an update to the affairs of Chaim “Poju” Zabludowicz, a business person who funds an influential pro-Israeli lobbying organisation (BICOM), and who has a long record of investments in companies which work for the security and military forces of the State of Israel.

As a senior member of the Kiasma Support Foundation, Zabludowicz is deeply involved with the museum. In our view, their track record as an investor makes their affiliation with the public institution problematic. Kiasma should ensure that museum beneficiaries are not involved in businesses which benefit from military conflicts such as the current apartheid policies implemented by the State of Israel. We asked museum director Leevi Haapala for a response to the troubling details our investigation touched. Their response is available online.

Haapala’s response depicts a disconnection between politics and rhetorics. It’s disheartening to read how they deploy the museum’s newly announced safer space policy as a rhetorical device to slither away from responding to the concerns we’ve brought forth. They even spent a paragraph celebrating an artist whose artwork Zabludowicz’s involvement has secured into their collection.

In Haapala’s portrayal, as the director of the museum they’re also leading the operations of the support foundation. Paradoxically, while asserting that they are in control, Haapala also insists that since the museum is funded by the Ministry of Education and Culture, the organisation cannot take a public stand in humanitarian concerns. This means that in their leadership the programming of the museums is meant to represent political struggles but not to engage with political reality.

The response depicts Kiasma open and willing to receive funds from anyone. It seems there are no standards, no qualifications – as long as you bring in money and love art, the museum’s happy to serve you. This stance is common for private museums. But Kiasma is not a private museum. It is funded by the state; we need it to do better.

The museum expects its visitors to follow their safer space policy but does not expect the same from their financial beneficiaries.

Kiasma is not a “safe space” if it continues to harbour businesspeople who are investing in companies which Amnesty International is investigating for human right violations. I will not participate in events in the museum until they set forth guidelines which ensure that their beneficiaries are not involved in business actions which violate international law and human rights.