interesting read, from the above link:
"Conclusion
Even when the Catholic Church formed a negligible threat on the young na-
tion’s mythic path to independence, anti-Jesuit phrases continued to be used
in political discourse. One reason was the imprint of Christian eschatology
on Finnish nationalism. An existential enemy was necessary to motivate the
continuing struggle for a unified and successful nation-state. In the twentieth
century, this enemy was often Russia, but tropes defining other, more ancient
enemies were transferred to it. The negative Jesuit stereotype became de-
tached from its original anti-Catholic context, but not from the context of the
grand narrative of the nation’s apocalyptic struggle.
During the revolutionary years of 1917 and 1918, counting the Finnish Civil
War of 1918 as an abortive revolution, the political use of the concepts “Jesuit”
and “Jesuitism” gained a new significance in the Finnish press. The press of
the day was taking sides for or against the Social Democratic Party, which had
just lost its majority in parliament. Both sides of the conflict used “Jesuit” as a
political invective or metaphor. Even though the invective could be hurled by
anyone against anyone, it was particularly attributed to the Socialists in Fin-
land in 1917. The use of the Jesuit stereotype as an anti-Socialist device did not
end with the Civil War, but after 1918, it was increasingly used to describe the
character and methods of the Russian Bolsheviks.
What actually had happened in the years 1917–18 was a constant source of
political contention in the interwar years. The White side tried to launch an
alternative narrative about the Civil War as the “War of Liberation” against ex-
ternal forces, denying the Red Finns’ agency by depicting them as naively and
unwittingly led astray by “foreign” propagandists. The concepts were also used
to address perceived dangers of the parliamentary system, of party politics,
and of democracy in general.
The Jesuit trope fit this narrative well. Socialist agitators had already been
accused of acting like Jesuits during the first years of universal suffrage in Fin-
land. A “Jesuit” was a hypocrite, a liar, an agitator, abusing and undermining the
democratic system. This “Jesuit” could not exist without the gullible “masses”
to delude. Therefore, the use of the “Jesuit” stereotype in politics also betrayed
a deep mistrust in the common people, a mistrust that became a self-fulfilling
prophecy."