The results of the parliamentary election of 2007 were quite astonishing, in spite, or because (?), of the uninspired campaign and widespread indifference.

In Finland it doesn't much matter who sits in the parliament: compromise and consensus reign supreme. Only pragmatism counts. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but a voter is bound to feel powerless, and I personally miss wider views and higher ideals. Still, this time it seems things might change. But it's another matter whether it will be for the better or for the worse, or just 'change'.

In spite of my lack of interest I tried two Internet election machines. Their questions emphasise social services and other everyday matters, which don't personally move me much. I even watched The Great Election Debate on MTV3, which was more entertaining than I had expected, but as useless as the election machines from the point of view of deciding how to vote.

So far my voting experiences have accorded with the Anarchist slogan "Vote today, repent tomorrow". This time I considered selling my vote for a bag of garden cress seeds. I have had worse grounds for my decisions. I have voted for looks, for right opinions, for probability of being elected, for maximum nuisance... I have voted for candidates from the right of Conservatives to the left of Social Democrats. I feel like an idiot voting, but I just cannot "not vote".

It was the centennial of the first modern election for a unicameral parliament in Finland. Four of the parties represented in 1907 still exist. In the 1907 election there were altoghether 19 parties, now there are 20. A hundred years ago 19 of the 200 new MPs were women, now 84. Then the left won, now the right.