Month: March 2010

PÄÄKIRJOITUS: Onko rasismi vallannut Suomen?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Enrique Tessieri

Ottaen huomioon maamme pienen maahanmuuttajien ja pakolaisten luvun, mitä olemme tehneet väärin ansaitaksemme tulla opportunisten politikoiden ja heidän puolueidensa päivittäisistä maallikko-solvauksista, rasismista ja herjauksista? Jopa sosiaalidemokraatit, puolue, joka on taistellut työläisten ja vähävaraisten etuuksista, näyttää lähestyneen perussuomalaisten maahanmuuttopolitiikkaa.

Esitin äskettäin kaksi kysymystä kokoomuksen nettisivulla: onko Suomi monikulttuurinen yhteiskunta ja onko puolueella virallista maahanmuuttopolitiikkaa? En saanut vastausta ensimmäiseen kysymykseeni, mutta toiseen he vastasivat lähettämällä linkin, josta pääsin lukemaan viime marraskuussa julkaistun raportin maahanmuutosta. Kysyin heiltä uudestaan, onko kokoomuksella virallista maahanmuuttopolitiikkaa. En saanut vastausta.

Totuus on ettei yhdelläkään poliittisella puolueella ole Suomessa kunnollista ja virallista maahanmuuttopolitiikan suuntaa. Ilman virallista linjaa, on mahdollista, että puoleiden sisällä on monenlaisia mielipiteitä ja kannanottoja: ksenofobisesta maahanmuuton puolesta.

Sosiaalidemokraattien uusi maahanmuuttopolitiikka, “maassa maan tavalla,” jota SDP:n puheenjohtaja Jutta Urpilainen ehdotti, on uudenveroinen, sillä se asettaisi kyseisen puolueen ensimmäiseksi, jolla olisi virallinen maahanmuuttopolitiikka. Onko puolueen maahanmuuton kanta oikea ja tuleeko se menestymään, on toinen kysymys. Monet maat ovat ehdottaneet kannan samanlaiseen nationalistiseen ratkaisuun, pakottamalla maahanmuuttajat allekirjoittamaan sopimuksen, että he noudattaisivat uuden kotimaansa sääntöjä.

SDP:n maahanmuuttopolitiikka tulee epäonnistumaan, ei vain siksi, että se on etnokeskeinen, vaan koska se on perustuslain vastainen. Kuinka voisimmekaan pakottaa toiset ihmiset hyväksymään niin suppean näkemyksen suomalaisuudesta (mitä on suomalaisuus?) jos perustuslaki ja yhdenvertaisuuslaki antavat tilaa kunnioitukselle, erilaisuudelle ja oikeudet mm. harjoittaa omaa uskontoaan.

Nykyinen maahanmuuttokeskustelu ei ole pelkästään muodostanut farssin, mutta se on ennen kaikkea loukkaus kaikkia maahanmuuttajia ja pakolaisia kohtaan, jotka asuvat Suomessa.

Ei olisi ollenkaan huono ajatus jos he menisivät lakkoon samalla tavalla kuin tuhannet Italiassa ja Ranskassa. Viesti olisi päättäjille selvä: emme ole poliittista tykkiruokaa.

The sad case of Somalis in Finland

Posted on by Migrant Tales

By Enrique Tessieri

Below is a good example of how a public official’s comments helps  strengthen racism and stereotypes of certain ethnic groups living in Finland. One of the biggest flaws in the arguments of anti-immigrant groups is that they incorrectly believe that cultures don’t change and therefore different groups are incompatible. I hope that the same stance as these far-right groups hasn’t overtaken the Finnish Immigration Service when we speak of the Somalis.

Does the Finnsh Immigration Service have a special grudge against the Somalians? Is this the reason why it likes to feed these types of stories in order to fuel xenophobia to new heights?

The warning is, however, clear: We don’t want Somalis in Finland because they will never adapt to our country. Up to 90% who want to move to Finland through family reunification are illiterate.

Phony bolony!

UPDATE (31.3.10): Here is a good example (in Finnish) of the hysteria that the Finnish Immigration Service and the media fuel with a percentage. The headline of the Tampere-based Aamulehti article says it all: Finland is not prepared for an avalanche of illiterate immigrants (Suomi ei ole valmistautunut lukutaidottomien maahanmuuttajien vyöryyn). The term “avalanche” is not only misleading it gives the impression that Finland is being invaded by “thousands of illiterate immigrants.”

It is odd that some Finnish policy-makers and politicians never ask if the problem of high unemployment among Somalians has to do with the hostility and bigotry they face daily in our society. Is it due to their outdated views of cultures and outright prejudice?

Finnish anti-immigrant and anti-Somalian critics forget to tell us that the majority of Italian, Spanish, Eastern European and other immigrants that moved to the Americas in the late-eighteenth and early nineteenth century were illiterate. Even though they faced racism and discrimination in their new countries, some of these groups ended up adapting very well and succeeding.

Even blacks from Africa that were forced to come to the United States as slaves from 1619 suffered tremendously from an oppressive system but later, through centuries of struggle, ended up finding a prominant place in US society. Most of these blacks, as well as their future relatives, were once illiterate.

Jussi Halla-aho, who appears to take joy and pride in bashing Somalis and Muslims for fun and personal gain, quoted Jorma Vuorio of the Finnish Immigration Service by stating that “90% of Somalis coming to Finland are illiterate.”

According to the Finnish Immigration Service, Vuorio mentioned that “85%-90%” of Somalians seeking residence permits in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, are illiterate. Fine. But how many? According to the Finnish Immigration Service, we are speaking of 2,260 residence-permit applicants in 2009 compared with 1,855 in the previous year. “We expect the figure to rise to 4,000 this year,” said a Finnish Immigration Service official.

Seriously, can a few thousand Somalis force our social system to implode and did all of the applicants receive a permit to come to Finland? Are they a walking social time bomb as Hallo-aho warns in his usual populist style?

The social bomb that some warn us of will be instigated by our suspicion and prejudices – not by a handful of Somalians who can learn to read and write with our help.

EDITORIAL: Has racism inflicted Finland?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

By Enrique Tessieri

Taking into account the underwhelming size of the immigrant and refugee community, what have we done wrong and why are we the target of daily insults, racism and abuse by opportunistic politicians and their parties? Even the Social Democrats, the party that has championed for the rights of the working man, appears to have aligned itself close to the True Finns on immigration.

I recently asked in a Kokoomus blog two questions: Is Finland a multicultural society and if Kokoomus had an official immigration policy? I never got a response for the first question. For the second one, Kokoomus gave me a link to a report published in November. When I asked them the second question again, if the party had an official immigration policy, I got no response.

The truth is that no political party in Finland has an official policy on immigration. Without such an official stance, it leaves the political playing field inside a party to a wide range of contradicting views: from xenophobic to pro-immigration.

In this sense, the immigration policy, “in Rome do as the Romans do,” suggested by Social Democratic Party chairwoman Jutta Urpilainen, is novel since the SDP will become the first party in Finland with an official immigration policy.  Whether the party’s stance on immigration is the right one or if it will be successful is another question, however. Many countries have suggested this nationalistic approach by forcing immigrants to sign contracts that they will follow the laws of their new homeland.

SDP’s immigration policy will fail not only because it is ethnocentric, but because it is unconstitutional. How can you force people to comply to a narrow view of Finnishness (whatever that is) if the Constitution and Non-Discrimination Act permit diversity and other matters such as freedom of worship?

The one-sided ongoing immigration debate has turned into a farce and an insult to all immigrants and refugees living in Finland.

It would not be a bad idea if immigrants went on strike like thousands did in Italy and France to drive home the point that we are not anyone’s pet political fodder.

(Another) Finnish Border Guard scare-tactic story

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Here is another scare-tactic story by the Finnish Border Guard to reinforce our fears of the “uncontrolled hordes” of immigrants that are attempting to enter Finland illegally. It is a bit like a recent story by YLE that aims to fuel refugee and immigrant hysteria among the population.

Let’s dissect this story with tweezers and see its flaws. In the first place, it speaks of “about 20,000 illegal immigrants” attempting to enter the European Union through Finland from Russia. Note, the article speaks of immigrants as opposed to refugees from Asia, Africa and Palestine. If they are real refugees, shouldn’t they have a right to apply for asylum?

Another matter that should be pointed out about the story is that the figures  are only rough estimates.

These types of stories serve the Finnish Border Guard very well. It reinforces the unsubstantiated notion that we are under constant attack by hordes of foreigners (immigrants and refugees) and therefore it is a good matter that the police are handling immigrant affairs in the country. If I wanted more funds from the state, these types of stories would serve me well.

Some Finnish politicians and the police have used these types of scare tactics in the past. During the cold war, there was no discussion about our foreign policy because it was an issue of national security. Hysteria was also fuelled by people such as the Keijo Korhonen, who around 1990 warned Finns in a populist fashion about unonctrolled masses of Russian refugees overtaking Finland.

If the Finnish Border Guard wants to talk about illegal immigration seriously, they should study the US-Mexican border or travel to Spain and Italy. An estimate of 20,000 is a drop in the bucket with what the latter countries have to deal with.

PÄÄKIRJOITUS: Suomen maahanmuuttokeskustelu

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Enrique Tessieri

Voiko intohimoinen maahanmuuttokeskustelu muuttua vielä rumemmaksi? Ulkoministeri Alexander Subb toi vähän järkeä maahanmuuttokeskustelun, kun hän sanoi, että ”siinä haiskahtaa rasismi, nationalismi, populismi ja ksenofobia (muukalaisviha).”

Keskustelun itsepäinen ja piittaamaton reitti on jopa pelästyttänyt yhden sen tärkeimmistä luojista: (sit.) perussuomalaisen Jussi Halla-ahon. Luultavasti hän on huolissaan keskustelun sävystä, joka voi olla takaisku kaikille maahanmuuttajille Suomessa. Hän sanoi kirjoituksessaan Helsingin Sanomien mielipidesivulla, ettei enemmistö suomalaisista vastusta maahanmuuttoa kuten HS-gallupin kysymys oli osoittanut. Halla-ahon mielestä kyseinen mielipidemittaus olisi pitänyt tehdä kysymällä pitäisikö Suomen myöntää enemmän oleskelulupia Somalista ja Irakista tuleville turvapaikanhakijoille.

Halla-ahon lausuma ja HS-gallupin kysymys ei kerro meille mitään uutta tietoa. Kuinka monessa maassa sen kansalaiset kannattavat maahanmuuton lisäämistä? Kuinka monet uskovat, että heillä on maassaan liian vähän maahanmuuttajia?

Mielipide- ja asennetutkimukset maahanmuuttajista Suomessa heijastavat samanlaisia holhoavaa kannanottoa kuin nykyinen yksipuolinen keskustelu maahanmuuttajista. Tämä selittää sen, miksi lähes olematon maahanmuuttopolitiikka on epäonnistunut ja miksi hälyttävän suuri määrä maahanmuuttajista elää syrjäytyneinä suomalaisesta yhteiskunnasta.

Sosialidemokraatti Puolueen (SDP) puheenjohtaja, Jutta Urpilainen, kiihdytti maahanmuuttokeskustelun intohimot, kun hän syytti viikonlopulla nykyistä hallitusta ja maahanmuuttajia syypäiksi ongelmasta.

Ottaen huomioon työpaikkojen niukkuuden Suomessa ja maahanmuuttajien korkean työttömyyden, Urpilainen sanoi, että Sdp:n uusi maahanmuutto- ohjelma ei vain pakottaisi ihmisiä oppimaan suomen tai ruotsinkieltä, mutta heidän pitäisi etsiä työtä. Hän ei selittänyt sitä, että olisivatko maahanmuuttajat omasta tahdostaan työttöminä käyttäen näin sosiaaliturvaa väärin tai eivät halua oppia suomea tai ruotsia.

Nykyisillä keskustelutasoilla, he jotka vastustavat maahanmuuttoa Suomessa, voivat olla tyytyväisiä. Nykyinen yksipuolinen keskustelu ei pelkästään anna aihetta maahanmuuttajille muuttoa maastamme, se myös pelottaa heidät pois, jotka haluaisivat muuttaa Suomeen.

Kuka haluaisi muuttaa niin vihamieliseen maahan, jossa maahanmuuttokeskustelu on yksipuolista ja jossa ”haiskahtaa rasismi, nationalismi, populismi ja ksenofobia?”

EDITORIAL: Finnish immigration debate

Posted on by Migrant Tales

By Enrique Tessieri

Is the present one-sided and passionate debate on immigration in Finland going to turn ugly? Minister for Foreign Affairs Alexander Stubb poured some needed cold water on the debate by stating that it “reeks of racism, nationalism, populism, and xenophobia.”

The wayward and reckless route has even frightened some of its main perpetrators. Probably fearing a backlash to all immigrants, Jussi Halla-aho of the True Finns said that the majority of Finns are not against immigration as a Helsingin Sanomat poll showed. He said that the poll should have asked whether Finns want more refugees from countries such as Somalia and Iraq.

The statement by Halla-aho and the poll by Helsingin Sanomat do not tell us anything new. How many countries can you name where its inhabitants favor more immigration? How many believe their country has too few immigrants?

Opinion polls and attitude studies of immigrants in Finland reflect the same patronizing stances as the one-sided debate on immigration. They explain why our near-non-existent immigration policy has failed and why too many immigrants live marginalized from Finnish society.

Social Democratic Party (SDP) chairman, Jutta Urpilainen, stoked the immigrant-debate fires on Saturday when she blamed the government and immigrants for the problem.

Taking into account the lack of jobs in Finland and high immigrant unemployment, Urpilainen said that the SDP’s new immigration program would not only force people to learn the Finnish or Swedish language, but they would have to get off unemployment as well. She did not elaborate if unemployed immigrants were on the dole because they were taking advantage of the system or that they did not learn Finnish or Swedish because they did not want to.

At the present rate those who don’t want immigrants to come to Finland are sitting pretty. The present one-sided debate is not only forcing immigrants to reconsider their residences in Finland but scaring off potential newcomers.

Why would anyone want to move to such a hostile country where the immigration debate is one-sided and  “reeks of racism, nationalism, populism, and xenophobia?”

YLE: Another feather in Finland’s media immigration hysteria hat

Posted on by Migrant Tales

As the political climate gets tenser in Finland due to the recession, a good example of another red herring threat caused by immigration is a news story by YLE on Wednesday that claims that 3,200 foreign nationals were  not allowed to enter Finland illegally, according to the Finnish Border Guard.

These types of stories of the “threat” of outsiders are becoming more common and fueling a collective hysteria against immigrants and people coming from outside Finland (especially Russia). While the law should do everything possible to thwart illegal immigration, such claims must be put into perspective.

Perspective 1: Over 3 million tourists come to Finland (not mentioned in the story because it would deflate much of its strength) and 3,200 is a drop in the bucket, or about 0.01%.  Should the headline read: “Thanks to the efforts of the Finnish Border Guard, only 0.01% of tourists attempt to enter Finland illegally?” A bit misleading, no? What about this one: “Illegal immigration not an issue because 0.01% attempted to enter Finland with forged documents?”

Perspective 2: Why was this story published and why didn’t YLE give comparative figures on the total number of tourists or compared it with last year’s figures? The answer is obvious: laziness and sloppy reporting.

Perspective 3: Another interesting claim made by the Finnish Border Guard is that all of these illegals would end up human-trafficking victims in Finland or in other countries.How do they know this? That is a claim not a fact but serves to fuel anti-immigration/anti-Russian hysteria.

Peter Kivisto’s definition of multiculturalism

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Here is a definition by Peter Kivisto of multiculturalism as a social policy:

Multiculturalism refers to a view that ethnically or religiously diverse societies should protect and promote diversity and should be based on both individual and group rights.

As one may recall in an earlier post, Finland is not officially a multicultural nation such as Canada, Australia and England. There is no mention of the term “multicultural society” in our Constitution and Equality Act. However, Kivisto, states that Finland is a nation with multicultural susceptibilities.

HS Suomen Gallup: 60% feel that Finland should not take more immigrants

Posted on by Migrant Tales

A poll commissioned by Helsingin Sanomat, Finland’s largest-circulation daily, and conducted by Suomen Gallup showed that close to 60% of Finns now feel that the country should not increase the number of immigrants. The corresponding percentage three years ago was 36%.

These types of polls, in my opinion,are very one-sided and help keep alive negative attitudes and scapegoats to blame the recession. They are also carte blanches to insult more vociferously other groups since “it is ok to be racist during a recession” rather than in an economic boom cycle.

Heikki Evarsti, a social policy professor at the University of Turku, believes: “As immigration is not yet any major phenomenon in Finland, relatively few Finns have personal contacts with immigrants, which is why individual citizens’ views have hardly had any significant impact on the public opinion.”

Certainly these types of surveys are welcomed by anti-immigration groups such as the True Finns and serve as a warning for other parties. The Helsingin Sanomat article says that other political parties are finding it highly tempting to follow the True Finns’ anti-immigration charge for fear of losing votes as parliamentary elections near.

I personally believe that in this decade as more immigrants come to the country and show with their work and determination their importance to Finland, attitudes will change very rapidly.

Those that jump on the  populist anti-immigration bandwagon today are the ones that will, at the end of the day, lose the most.  Keep a close watch on the parties and the politicians who vacillate opportunistically from one side of the fence to the other.

Finns are an intelligent lot. The last thing they will do is be spoon fed hatred and incomprehension by anti-immigrant groups and figures on personal messianic power-ego trips.

Racism debate: Finland today – United States in the 1970s

Posted on by Migrant Tales

By Enrique Tessieri

Some Finns argue today that they are automatically labelled racists if they speak out too strongly against immigration. The statement resembles very much the atmosphere in the United States in the early 1970s, when blacks started to win legal as well as social rights after the civil rights movement.

The fact that some openly question racism in Finland should be seen as a welcome and positive matter. The knee-jerk reaction of different anti-immigration groups show that society openly questions their agendas.

Such a debate in the 1990s and before would have been impossible on such a scope since the racial ideology of the country was different due to the underwhelming size of Finland’s immigrant population and far-flungness.

If the United States awoke from its segregated deep sleep thanks to the civil rights movement led by men such as Martin Luther King, Finland is also awakening to the same reality. I remember very well the new USAmerica that the civil rights movement had helped forge. We too were sensitized into a new way of thinking and interacting with blacks and other minorities. For many of us, our old views and fears of other groups had been thrown into the trash can of history.

Contrary to the civil rights movement of the United States, the ever-growing immigrant population in Finland is awakening the country to a new century. At least today racism is being questioned when before it was normal, accepted and even promoted openly as something “Finnish” and “patriotic.” In post-civil rights United States, racism got a hard blow. Such behavior became shameful and socially inappropriate.

What is important about the shift in social behavior in the United States and Finland today is that it ushers in and questions old stereotypes that are based on racism.

One of the greatest achievements of the US civil rights movement was that it started to do away with the racial stigmas labelled on different groups by whites. With respect to the blacks, this happened almost overnight in some parts of the country.  Seeing is believing today: President Barack Obama.

Whenever a Finn uses the “fear-of-being-labelled-a-racist” argument because he/she is against immigrants, immigration and/or refugees, it should be seen as a knee-jerk reaction of an ever-dwindling minority.

Openly and vociferously questioning our racism is unique, courageous and a watershed in our society. It is the brave new face of Finland in the new century.