Author: Migrant Tales

SDP Heinäluoma’s populist anti-immigrant “roll”

Posted on by Migrant Tales

The Social Democrats are on the populist anti-immigrant roll: SDP strongman Eero Heinäluoma stirred passions on Saturday in an HBL interview (in Swedish) by stating that Finland should not be too enthusiastic about bringing labor immigrants due to high unemployment among Finns. UPDATED (25.4.) Some dailies such as Ilta-Sanomat asked if Heinäluoma believes that immigrants will take “our women” as well.

Heinäluoma’s comments have been condemned not only by Center Party Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen, but by the chairman of the Young Social Democrats, Teemu Hirvonen, who is concerned by the party’s ever-growing populist stand.

Echoing fears that part of the Social Democratic leaders have stiffened their stances on immigration to get votes in the 2011 elections, Hirvonen said that the party should stick to its values and not allow anti-immigrant groups like the True Finns to control the ongoing debate.

UPDATE (25.4) Another incredible snow job hurled at the public by Heinäluoma is that since labor immigrants “will take away jobs from Finns,” this will lead to racism. So, in essence, Heinäluoma is telling us that it is ok to be racist because “foreigners are taking away our jobs.”

This low ebb in SDP politics in Finland is a slap in the face to those immigrants who have lived in this country for years, paid taxes and work hard to make a living. Heinäluoma doesn’t appear to care about them because it is not the example he wants to give about immigrants. It won’t win his party a lot of votes.

If we did not know that Heinäluoma is a Social Democrat, some of us would think he belongs to an anti-immigrant party like the True Finns. And, please, who says that more immigrants will fuel racism? Aren’t they offering a service to this society? Doesn’t their work and tax-euros count? Is Heinäluoma afraid that his party is having the same problems adapting to the real world as the Center Party did before EU membership in 1995 with respect to the agricultural sector?

Some believe that one of the mentors behind the anti-immigration wing of the SDP party is former interior minister, Kari Rajamäki. I once attended a panel in October with him and guess what: The True Finn representative and Rajamäki were in full agreement about “the threat of refugees” to Finland.

Taking into account that EU citizens have the right to work in any member country, what did Heinäluoma mean by his statement? (Updated 27.4)  Who ARE those foreign workers that Heinäluoma warns us of? It seems pretty incredible that he does not even give us a clue of where the “threat” is coming from.

Was it another xenophobic trick by the SDP to lure voters from the True Finns?

True Finns’ chairman, Timo Soini, thinks so. He was quoted in Helsingin Sanomat as stating that the SDP adopted the True Finns’ policy labor immigration.

Folks, the show will turn more tragic-comic when the SDP and True Finns start to fight each other in public to prove which party has the toughest stand against immigrants.

Racism in Finland and elsewhere

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Every society has its racists but the question is where we draw the line. For a country like Finland, the problem of drawing a clear line hinges on the fact that there are still too few immigrant and ethnic groups living in this country, amounting for 2.7% of the population (143,256).

Even though foreigners in the late-nineteenth and early twentieth century had a big impact on Finland (Stockmann, Fazer, Rettig, Paulig, Finnlayson and others), our view of cultural diversity as a normal characteristic of  society is mixed. Some Finns don’t have any qualms with this while for others it is a life-and-death issue.

If we look at the laws, educational system and the ideals we want to pass on to our children, however, it is easy to conclude that immigrant-and-refugee hate groups in Finland are a minority whose presence and arguments are storms in a tea-cup.

A good example is the present one-sided immigration-refugee debate. While the anti-diversity-and-populist True Finns, and to many sad respects the Social Democratic party under chairman Jutta Urpilainen, have not seen their popularity soar in the polls despite their stiffening rhetoric  on immigrantion and refugees.

If we look at the definition of racism and agree that it means “discrimination or prejudice based on ethnic background,” we still have to look at the specific society where this type of social ill is taking place. How do people discriminate in Finland, how do we define racism and what does the law say? The Equality Act, for example, gives clear definitions of discrimination and harassment.

In my opinion, an excellent example of discrimination in this country is high immigrant unemployment. Since racism attempts to exclude and keep other groups from realizing their potential in society, high immigrant unemployment serves this purpose and shows where we have a lot more work to do. Immigrant unemployment in Finland at the end of 2009 stood officially at 26%(!) compared with 9.2% nationally.

Even though anti-immigrant-and-refugee groups in Finland attempt to change the ongoing debate and their hate agendas with funny catchwords like “immigrant-critic,” and “freedom of speech/democracy,” we must draw the line as a society and call a spade a spade.

What would we say if there were anti-women’s-rights groups that used the same arguments to justify oppression of women in public as they do when stereotyping immigrants and refugees?

I am certain that many of us would be outraged.

MTV3: Being critical of immigration isn’t synonymous with being racist

Posted on by Migrant Tales

There is an interesting article published in MTV3 on anti-immigrant pressure group Homma ry chairman, Matias Turkkila, who tells us that being critical of immigration isn’t synonymous with being a racist. “(Death) threats  are a sad path that one should not take,” he said. “I am against such actions, but I understand in some cases the frustration of those people that make such threats.”

Even though open debate is a healthy trademark of western, democratic societies, the statement “being critical of immigration isn’t synonymous with being racist” is a good example of deliberately evasive and ambiguous language, or double-talk in plain English. How can one even “understand” people that aim to take the law in their hands because they disagree with an issue?

Are groups such as Homma ry really interested in debate when their popularity rides on bashing immigrants with the help of stereotypes and miconceptions? When groups such as Homma ry spread questionable “facts” about immigrants they help fuel and maintain a climate of racism in the country.

In my opinion many of these so-called “immigrant-critics” have serious problems understanding the outside world and that change forms part of our normal lives. Groups such as Homma ry don’t like to be labeled “racist” because it undermines their message, which is filled with hatred, stereotypes and suspicion of immigrants in Finland.

Racism manifests itself in different ways in different societies. In Finland, it appears as elsewhere as a stereotype that justifies our view of a WHOLE group. A good example are foreign construction workers, who are ALL working for slave-wages, not paying taxes and stealing jobs from “honest” Finns. Is this true?

I remember in the 1960s the same arguments used in Finland today to be against immigrants and refugees as those in the United States during the civil rights movement. Bigots claimed that “blacks are lazy and therefore they are poor” to justify their racism. In my opinion, a Finnish verion of the latter is taking place in this country and maintained by groups such as Homma ry.

I am confident as Finland grows more accustomed to immigrants and these groups learn to defend and fight for their rights in our society, interviews such as these by MTV3 will be carried out but in a more critical fashion since such groups will be put under closer scrutiny by society.

PÄÄKIRJOITUS: Maahanmuuttajat, suomalaiset ja muutos

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Niin sanottujen ”maahanmuuttokriittisten” ryhmien strategiat voivat epäonnistua pahasti jos he uskovat, että vain keskustelemalla avoimesti aiheesta “kansa yhydistysi” heidän taakse maahanmuutto ja pakolaispolitiikassa.  Eräs suuri virhe, jonka maahanmuuttajavastaiset ryhmät tekevät on, että he uskovat etteivät kulttuurit koskaan muuttuu, ja siksi jotkut maahanmuuttajaryhmät eivät sopeudu Suomeen.

Vaikka jotkut koulutetut ihmiset, virkamiehet, poliitikot ja toimittajat käyttävät näitä argumentteja heidän kielteisiin asenteisiin maahanmuutosta,  maanmuuttajista ja pakolaisista, ei yksikään heistä ole tuonut esille luotettavaa tutkimustietoa, joka vahvistaisi heidän väitteensä tosiksi.

Mielestäni yksi suuri ongelma Suomessa on, että emme ole lukeneet tai painottaneet riittävästi historiaamme. Historiassa on paljon tietoa siitä, kuinka olemme olleet ja tulemme olemaan monikulttuurinen yhteiskunta. Mielenkiintoinen kysymys onkin, miksi tieto monikulttuurisuudesta ei ole tiedostettu.

Uskon, että yhteiskuntamme arvot, jotka näkyvät Perustus- ja Yhdenvertaisuuslaissa, ovat kohdallaan. Jos hyväksyisimme toiset kulttuurit ja ihmiset osana suomalaista nykypäivän yhteiskuntaa, monet ongelmat liittyen rasismiin ja syrjintään voisivat poistua kertaheitolla.

Yhteiskuntamme arvot, jotka sallivat moniarvoisuuden ja monikulttuurisuuden  ovat voimavaroja, jotka antavat meille kaikille suomalaisille, riippumatta taustastamme voimia kohdata tulevaisuutemme yhteiskunta.

Rasismille ei siksi ole paikkaa Suomessa ja sitä pitääkin käsitellä samalla tavalla kuin mitä tahansa yhteiskunnallista sairautta. Nämä negatiiviset ilmiöt heikentävät ja hajottavat maatamme.

Olen asunut yli kolmekymmentä vuottaa Suomessa ja tunnen niin hyvät kuin haasteelliset kohdat yhteiskunnassamme. Siksi uskon, että pystymme voittamaan tämän ajan, jossa rasismi ja tietämättömyys ovat nostaneet päätään.

EDITORIAL: Immigrants, Finns and change

Posted on by Migrant Tales

So-called “immigrant-critical” groups may see their plans backfire badly if they believe that by debating openly immigration is all it takes to strengthen their negative stand against immigration and refugees. One of the biggest flaws these groups use is that they believe that since cultures are so different, they can therefore never adapt to Finland.

Even if educated people, public officials, politicians and journalists use these arguments to justify their negative stances on immigration and immigrants in Finland, not one of them has produced one credible study nor fact that confirms their views of other cultures.

In my opinion, one of the problems in Finland is that we have not studied our history thoroughly enough. We could find a lot of facts about what kind of society we were and that we will continue being a multicultural society. The interesting question to ask is why this information about Finland’s multiculturalism is not that well-known by the population.

I believe that our values as a society, which are enshrined in our Constitution and Non-Discrimination Act, are correct. If we would accept other cultures in the same way as we treat each other, many of the problems due to racism and discrimination would disappear in one shot.

Our values as a society, which also permit diversity and multiculturalism without somebody ramming “Finland-love-it-or-leave-it” (maassa maan tavalla) down our throats, are our strengths that give all of us as Finns, irrespective of one’s ethnic background, the ability to meet our future challenges as a society.

Racism for this reason has no place in Finland and it should be treated like any social illness. Such negative forces only serve to weaken our potential as a nation.

I have lived in Finland for over thirty years and believe I have learned to know the positive matters and challenges our society faces. For this reason I believe that we will be able to overcome this dark period where racism and ignorance have raised their head for all of us to see.

(Another) disturbing Keskisuomalainen editorial

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Jyväskylä-based Keskisuomalainen, which appears hellbent on enlightening us on how Finland should relate to other cultures, now dedicates an entire editorial based on two cases of circumcision practiced on children by their parents.While such operations should be only carried out by trained medical staff, it is surprising how forcibly Keskisuomalainen condemns such an act.

Taking into account a previous editorial that incredulously suggests that refugees should be helped in their home countries, it isn’t surprising how such writings help fuel hysteria and xenophobia among the population.

I would kindly suggest to Keskisuomalainen’s editors to take a course in multiculturalism at some Finnish university to bring themselves up to date on how modern, western and democratic societies live with diversity.Instead of looking at other cultures in a narrow-minded fashion, they would do their readers a service by bringing their knowledge on multiculturalism (they are against this path for Finland) up to date and what role it plays in our society.

If they don’t have time to attend any seminars, they should read Arto Leitzinger’s dissertation, Ulkomaalaiset Suomessa 1812-1972. At least they would understand that Finland was, is and will be a multicultural society demographically.

Moreover, their editorials should address more pressing social issues like racism in Finland, high unemployment/equal opportunity and pathways to integration of immigrants into Finnish society.

PÄÄKIRJOITUS: Kuinka suuri on tietämättömyys maahanmuutajista?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Enrique Tessieri

Jotkut väittävät, että pitäisi antaa anteeksi niille suomalaisille, jotka ovat esittäneet ihmeellisiä kannanottoja maahanmuuttajista ja pakolaisista, koska se johtuu heidän tietämättömyydestään asiaan. Jos on vakavia puutteita kotouttamisohjelmassa, niin siinäkin voidaan syyttää tietämyksen puuttumista.

Jos kuitenkin ajattelisimme niin, että ongelmat voisivatkin johtua siitä, että on liian vähän tietämystä ja kokemusta maahanmuuton asioista, niin se voisi antaa tehokkaan syyn lakaista kaikki ongelmat mattojen alle.

Onko kuitenkin mahdollista, että asia joka koskee kymmeniätuhansia maahanmuuttajia Suomessa, heidän lapsiaan ja lapsen lapsiaan, voitaisiinkin todeta sen johtuvan myös tietämättömyydestä?

Äskettäin julkaistu jyväskyläläinen päivälehti, Keskisuomalainen, mainitsi pääkirjoituksessaan, ettei Suomen pitäisi ryhtyä monikulttuuriselle tielle ja että pakolaisia tulisi auttaa heidän kotimaassaan eikä turvamaassa. Pakolaisten vastaanottamisen Suomessa tulisi olla vasta viimeinen vaihtoehto.

Maamme suurin päivälehti, Helsingin Sanomat, käyttää halventavan termin julkistamista ”mamu” otsikossaan, kun se puhuu maahanmuuttajista.

Miten poliitikot kuten SDP:n Jutta Urpilainen, PS:n Timo Soini ja toiset, jotka tietoisesti tai tietämättään panettelevat kaikkia maahanmuuttajia, kun he väittävät, että heidän pitäisi noudattaa Suomen lakia ja elää maassa maan tavalla?

Kuinka oikeassa ovatkaan laitokset todellisuudessa kuten Rajavartiosto, Maahanmuuttovirasto ja toiset, kun he luovat ja ylläpitävät rasistista ilmapiiriä pelon ja epäilyn avulla väittämällä, että jotkut maahanmuutonryhmät ovat ”valtaamassa” Suomen. He jopa käyttäytyvät ja esittävät kuin yhteiskuntatieteilijät viittaamalla, ettei nämä ryhmät pystyisi sopeutumaan kulttuurimme.

Voisimme vastaavasti kääntää kysymyksen toisten päin: onko nämä edellä olleet esimerkit johtuneet tietämättömyydestä, ovatko ne tahallisia tai johtuvatko tiedon tai kokemuksen puutteesta?

Tai onko se muoto missä rasismi piiloutuu Suomessa?

EDITORIAL: Are Finns ignorant about immigration?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

By Enrique Tessieri

Some claim that one should forgive some Finns for their outrageous statements on immigrants and refugees since they are fuelled by ignorance. If there are serious shortcomings in our immigration and integration policy, it can be blamed on our lack of experience.

If we were to give Finland the benefit of the doubt, it could offer us an effective solution to brush all the problems related to immigrants under the rug and blame it on inexperience.

Can, however, an issue that affects tens of thousands of people’s lives, their children and grandchildren, be conveniently blamed on ignorance?

A recent editorial by Jyväskylä-based Keskisuomalainen, which was against Finland taking the multicultural road, incredulously suggested that refugees should be helped in their home countries and brought to Finland as a last resort.

Helsingin Sanomat, the countries largest daily, continues to use the demeaning term “mamu” in headlines to refer to immigrants.

What about politicians such as Jutta Urpilainen, Timo Soini of the True Finns and others, who knowingly or unknowingly vilify all immigrants in this country by suggesting that they must follow the law because in this country we do things the Finnish way?

What about the Finnish Border Guard, Finnish Immigration Service and others that create and maintain a climate of fear and suspicion of certain immigrant groups through their statements that Finland is in danger of being “invaded” by these people? They even play at being social scientists by suggesting that these groups can never adapt to our culture.

One could correctly turn the question around: Are these examples of misinformation intentional and what role does ignorance play?

Or is this the shape and way racism manifests itself  in Finland?

Employment of immigrants in Sweden

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Here is a neat article in Zuzeeko’s blog about employment of immigrants in Sweden. According to the article, 41% of the cleaners  are immigrants.

It would be interesting to know what the unemployment rate among immigrants in that Nordic country.

A question: If Sweden has had lots of immigrants since the 1970s, how many generations will it take for Swedes to accept immigrants? What does this say about Finland, where we are a couple of generations behind Sweden on the home immigration front?

A-Talk: What is wrong with the Social Democrats?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

At least for me, the debate on immigration on A-Talk on Thursday was a disappointment. The only sensible persons on the show were Anni Sinnemäki of the Greens and  Jyrki Katainen of Kokoomus. The two opposition leaders, Jutta Urpilainen of the Social Democrats (SDP) and Timo Soini of the True Finns, were a disappointment spewing the usual hollow catchwords that reek of populism, protectionism and heavy doses of obnoxious nationalism.

One matter that came clear is that Urpilainen has a very superficial idea of  immigration. On the one hand she vilifies the immigrant community in Finland by stating that they must follow the law (duh?!), but then claims to be for equality.

Why is the SDP leader making such no-brainer statements? Her aim appears to be to steal votes from the True Finns with the immigrant-bash card and thereby become the biggest party in Finland. If the SDP succeed in this dangerous game, anti-immigrant sentiment and life for the common non-Finn and their families will get much worse.

This will be a tragedy for Finland since we need to bring labor immigrants (not scare them away) to plug the labor gap left by an ever-large group of people retiring from the workforce during this decade.

I am just as confused as some of you. Maybe somebody should show the Constitution and Non-Discrimination Act to Urpilainen. Thanks to these laws, Finland permits as a democratic liberal society cultural diversity. We are not in the habit of ramming narrow-minded cultural habits down people’s throats.

Another statement that caught my eye was her criticism of foreigners she knew that had not learned to speak Finnish even though they had lived many years in the country. Certainly this is unfortunate but what are the causes? Lack of equal opportunities? Hostility by society? Racism? Lack of motivation? Attitudes like Urpilainen’s? Or a combination of all of the latter?

The Social Democratic stance on immigration is an unfortunate one. It looks like a house of cards that is maintained upright with the help of fear and populism.

The most disgraceful aspect of this type of populist rhetoric is that it does not help further a sense of community among immigrants and Finns but keeps alive old suspicions that fuel hatred.

And all this for the opportunitic goal of securing more votes in the 2011 parliamentary elections.