Here is wishing all of you a wonderful and successful 2009.
Thank you for posting your comments and taking part in this very interesting debate about Finland’s future.
Enrique
Author: Migrant Tales
Merry Christmas and greater ethnic understanding in 2009
Here is thanking all of you for taking part in this rich debate about a home we call Finland. Some of you may remember that apart from traveling geographically, we can also travel through cultures. Here is a quick “visit” to a lower-middle class trailer home somewhere in Southwest United States. It was sent by a friend and posted because it shows with humor that Christmas can be celebrated in many ways.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P37xPiRz1sg&feature=related]
Robert Earl Keene’s Merry Christmas from the Family
Mom got drunk and Dad got drunk at our Christmas party
We were drinking champagne punch and homemade eggnog
Little sister brought her new boyfriend
He was a Mexican
We didn’t know what to think of him until he sang
Feliz Navidad, Feliz Navidad
Brother Ken brought his kids with him
The three from his first wife Lynn
And the two identical twins from his second wife Mary Nell
Of course he brought his new wife Kay
Who talks all about AA
Chain smoking while the stereo plays Noel, Noel
The First Noel
Carve the Turkey
Turn the ball game on
Mix margaritas when the eggnog’s gone
Send somebody to the Quickpak Store
We need some ice and an extension chord
A can of bean dip and some Diet Rites
A box of tampons, Marlboro Lights
Hallelujah everybody say Cheese
Merry Christmas from the family
Fred and Rita drove from Harlingen
I can’t remember how I’m kin to them
But when they tried to plug their motor home in
They blew our Christmas lights
Cousin David knew just what went wrong
So we all waited out on our front lawn
He threw a breaker and the lights came on
And we sang Silent Night, Oh Silent Night, Oh Holy Night
Carve the turkey turn the ball game on
Make Bloody Mary’s
Cause We All Want One!
Send somebody to the Stop ‘N Go
We need some celery and a can of fake snow
A bag of lemons and some Diet Sprites
A box of tampons, some Salem Lights
Hallelujah, everybody say cheese
Merry Christmas from the Family
Finnish “mono-” versus “multicultural” debate
There has been an ongoing ping-pong debate on how good or bad is mono versus multiculturalism. I believe that this type of debate is fruitless because European cultures in general and Finland in particular have always been multicultural.
To quote one of our avid “monoculturalist:”
I have no feeling of inferiority, Enrique, quite the opposite. Looking at how horribly you multiculturalists have failed in your nationbuilding, I feel rather secure and superior considering how my country has managed to become wealthy, stable and well functioning. Which is why I oppose your suggestions of bringing that failure to Finland
One of the biggest fallacies that our education in Finland is committing with our children is that they are still being taught that somehow human growth and creativity in Finland tended to occur within separate and isolated cultures. There is little emphasis placed on how Finnish culture/other cultures mixed and formed constantly changing societal variants.
Claude Lévy-Strauss, the dean of structural anthropology who will turn 100 on November 28, speaks about the role of the incest taboo in different society. Apart from genetic disorders, the incest taboo forces — according to Lévy-Strauss — members of a family to marry outside of the group. This means that through marriage a family group becomes more extended by forging new family ties, which help it to survive more effectively.
In my opinion, cultures and societies work in the same way: cultures have for thousands of years been in constant contact with each other through traders, explorers, pirates, travelers, multicultural marriages and in other ways. They have taken part in a sort of dynamic “cultural market place” were we barter and try on new customs, ideas and ways to solve problems in our society more effectively.
One anthropologist mentioned that defenders of the classic view of separate and isolated cultural development believe, incorrectly, that classical Greece sprung from nowhere. However, their growth was not a pure and isolated event, but through Greek encounters with foreigners (traders etc).
So, in many respects, multiculturalism has always existed because humankind has not believed in isolation but on survival. Cultural exchanges, incorporating and trading different parts of our culture not only offers us the exciting prospect to try something new, but offers us an opportunity to create a more resilient and stronger society.
Thanks to multiculturalism we have been able to build diverse societies in Europe, for example, that are in a still in the process of constant change.
However, whenever a group raises the monocultural flag, that usually sparks strife and mass wars. Nazi Germany and the former Yugoslavia are prime examples of this type of “monocultural bullying” and its utter failure as a model.
Finnish identity in the new century
Since humankind does not still have one flag to rally all the peoples of the world, until that time I hope that it will be the Finnish flag that will wave over this land.
Ever since Finnish independence in 1917, Finns have been forging a sense of national identity. The same tools we used in the previous century to build our national identity have come into conflict with people who do not fit the Elovena-woman prototype on the box of a popular Finnish porridge brand.
In the process of forging a national identity, we created a narrower view of who was entitled to be called a Finn. The dual-citizenship act of 2003 was one of the most important laws that changed matters and opened up the Finnish-identity playing field. Another important right worth mentioning that came into force in the 1980s, was when women were given the right to pass on Finnish citizenship to their foreign-born children.
In my opinion, a Finn is a person who feels he/she is from this land in his/her diverse way. This may include an endless combination of religions, ethnicities, and cultures. To single out people and exclude them from their identity is one of the worse forms of discrimination. It is the same thing that white Americans did to blacks and other minorities before the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. They were “Americans” but they were first and foremost blacks.
When a Finn states that a member of this society must accept Finnish values and customs in order to be accepted, what is he/she actually saying? The message is clear – we do not accept your diversity.
Due to the hundreds of thousands of Finns that migrated from this country in the past century, and the fact that more people are immigrating to Finland, it is clear that we have forged alongside the “official” view of Finnish identity another unofficial one.
Laws like dual citizenship and the equality act are important watersheds that allow our diverse Finnish identities to flourish and be defended by law in this country. A multiethnical Finland should not be seen as a threat, but as an opportunity for this country.
One matter is for certain. It will be the new bold face of Finland during this century.
“New” Finns, Finns or which ethnic label fancies you?
I went to a meeting recently where a civil servant who works with refugees asked the small group of foreigners the following question: “Do you want to be called immigrants (maahanmuuttaja) or New Finns?” She explained that the word “immigrant” meant that one was “constantly moving” and therefore “New Finn” could be considered a more appropriate word for foreigners in Finland. “Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen has started to use the term New Finn.”
I personally feel that it is not only a mistake but wrong for Finns to place ethnic labels on foreigners living in Finland. What is a New Finn?! I remember in my youth that in Mikkeli people spoke of “Old Mikkeli” (vanha mikkeliläinen) residents. If foreigners will start to be called “New Finns” then the majority culture that labels them as must be the “Old Finns.”
Even if such labels are ridiculous because they are only invented by people who do not even belong to such a group, one must ask if they are even important for those that live in Finland.
Which ethnic label would be appropriate? That depends on the person. What would he/she like to be called? Does he/she want to be called an “absolute Finn,” a Finnish xxxxx or possibly he/she does not want any national-ethnic labels placed on him/her?
The term New Finn conveys hope since it suggests that outsiders can integrate and become part of Finnish society. Placing labels, however, on groups that do not identity with such names ensures that they will be replaced. A good example is the Finnish term Lapp versus Sami, or Eskimo versus Inuit.
Let the person decide what he wants to be called and with which group he identifies with.
The Equality Act and Finnish Independence Day
What better time than to bring up the Equality Act of 2004 during Finland’s Independence Day. One of the matters that makes me happy about being a member of this society is that after December 6, 1917, Finland did not become an autocratic country that had no respect for human rights. Despite all the challenges this country faced in the previous century, it still had the courage to build a society based on social justice.
One of the most important laws that have been past in recent years in this country is the Equality Act of 2004. You can also get acquainted with the law in other languages such as Swedish, Russian, Spanish and others. In a nutshell, the law states: The Equality Act prohibits discrimination based on age, racial or ethnic origin,citizenship, language, religion or belief, conviction, opinion, state of health, disability, sexual orientation or other personal characteristics (such as financial position, pregnancy, and family situation).
It would be naive to think that one law can correct a social ill such as racism. However, it is a very good and bold first step. It offers hope not only to us, but also to future generations so one day we may build the foundations of a society that is based on good ethnic relations between all groups.
Ghostbusting national identities
Linda has posed an interesting question: What is Finnish culture? Even though the answer to the question is more complex than one would think, it brings forth some very important points about our identity and who we believe we are.
One of the biggest problems with “national identities” and “cultures” is that they are built with heavy doses of myths. Other national cultures, such as the Germans, British, Brazilians, Japanese also use myths to build the pillars of their national and cultural identity.
One of the biggest myths about Finnish culture is that it is a tribe; Finns are honest; Finns love nature; Finns have Sisu etc… In every country the children are breast fed and taught that their culture and language is the best. We speak of internationalization but, in fact, we are brought up to be very povincial and ethnocentric beings. In order to hide our myopic views of ourselves and others, we allow ourselves to be spoon-fed with a heavy dose of myths about ourselves.
National identities have got the world into a lot of problems. It has been responsible for sparking wars, internal and external, and mass murder as happened recently in the former Yugoslavia and Nazi Germany. It continues to be the fuel that racism runs on.
I am certain that if we do not end up destroying ourselves, humankind will look at this period 50 to 100 years from now and feel sorry for us. They will say in disbelief: Didn’t they understand that cultural differences are human made and maintained with the help of myths.
A neat quote by Topelius about who are the Finns
Zacharias Topelius , a Finnish cultural heavyweight who lived in the 19th century, embraced multiculturalism in the following manner below.
When I read such a quote, I am more convinced that 1939-1995 was an anomaly for this country. Finland was always multicultural — not a “monocultural” nation that fought tooth and nail to exclude people from diverse cultural backgrounds.
“No group can claim to be so pure that not one of their forefathers had foreign blood; nor speak a language that has not shared words from other languages. All nations are builders of the great humankind society, which branches off into many directions.
Ei ole yhtään sukuperältään niin sekoittautumatonta kansaa, ettei sen esi-isissä olisi vierasta verta; eikä kieleltään niin puhdasta kansaa, ettei se olisi sanoja muilta lainannut. Ja kaikki kansakunnat ovat työntekijöitä ihmissuvun suuressa yhteiskunnassa, joka jakautuu moneen haaraan.
Zacharis Topelius: Maamme Kirja (1875)
Is Finland prepared for multiculturalism?
In an interesting article published by Siirtolaisuus – Migration issue 2/1996, social psychologist Professor J. W. Berry asks what factors have to be in place to establish reasonable harmonious relationships between diverse groups. Ethnocentrism is a theory devised by Sumner in 1906 and means when “one’s group is the center of everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it.”
In the article, he asks: “What conditions need to be met, in order to manage successfully a multicultural society?”
(1) In our view there needs to be general support for cultural diversity as a valuable resource for a society; (2) there should be overall low levels of prejudice in the population; (3) there should be generally positive mutual attitudes among the various ethnocultural groups that constitute the society; (4) there needs to be a degree of attachment to the larger national society.
You are free to disagree with me, but I feel that Finland fails on all four counts. With respect to the first point, too few still have a clue in this country what cultural diversity means. The ones that are steadfastly against the claim that diversity destroys or is a threat to Finnish culture and, therefore, one would have to be “mad” to support the existence of a pluralistic society.
If we look at recent polls on how some Finns perceive foreigners, it becomes clear that there aren’t low levels of prejudice in Finland. Racism is still too common, and even encouraged, among some groups as something “manly” and “patriotic.”
Taking into account some of the comments one hears from foreigners, it becomes clear that they too have misconceptions about Finnish society that have caused misunderstandings and resentment. Too few bridges of cultural understanding exist today between the Finns and foreigners. This is fed by outright rejection by Finns of such outgroups. High unemployment among foreigners is not only structural, it is an example of mistrust as well. It is a vicious circle: Finns would prefer not to hire foreigners and, foreigners, don’t even try because they believe finding a permanent job is futile.
Point four is related to three.
In my opinion, the multiculturalist argument is a simple one: If we have people from diverse cultures living in our country, we should make an effort to accept and respect them as members of our society. Apart from being a sensible proposal, it is more effective economically and socially than rejecting and denigrating them. Finland only benefits from a situation where people from diverse cultures can contribute positively to our society. It will not happen through integration by perkele or by placing unattainable cultural benchmarks.
If Berry’s model of multiculturalism is used, it paints a pretty bleak picture for Finland. Or does it?
A disgraceful era we should never repeat in Finland
By Enrique Tessieri
If there was a disgraceful period on how Finland treated foreigners, that period would be the cold war era. Even though Russian troops never took control of Finland such as countries like Poland, Hungary and others, the shadow of the for former Soviet Union hung deep in Finland. This period, 1945 to the early or mid-1990s, should never be allowed to happen again.
Apart from outright censorship and self-censorship of the mainstream media on Finland’s foreign policy, human rights was seen by some officials in this country as synonymous with anti-Soviet propaganda. Did Helsingin Sanomat ever write an editorial on the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia? Did Suomen Kuvalehti ever denounce in an editorial the treatment of Soviet dissidents by Finnish Frontier Guards? What role did Alien’s Office head Eila Kännö have in these detentions and their speedy return to the Soviet Union?
Looking at some old files I have from the days I was Financial Times correspondent in Finland, I found one that has never received an answer never mind an apology from the government. On the Amnesty International list dating from the 1980s, there are 12 Soviet citizens who were captured in Finland while attempting to flee “a workers’ paradise” called the former USSR.
If anyone knows of any other cases of former Soviet citizens trying to flee successfully or unsuccessfully through Finland, it would be neat to hear your story.
Here is a short account of what is on the four pages of the AI report:
With respect to the case of each of the USSR citizens named below Amnesty International has received information indicating that the individual was imprisoned in the USSR after having entered Finland and subsequently having been sent back to the USSR by Finnish authorities…
AUGUST 1982: HILLAR PRUUNSILD was arrested by Finnish frontier guards and returned to the USSR, where he was convicted of “illegal exit abroad” under the Estonian equivalent of Article 83 of the RSFSR Criminal Code. This charge carries a maximum sentnece of three-years imprisonment but the term given to Pruunsild is unknown.
JULY 1980: VYACHESLAV N. CHERAPANOV was arrested in Hattuvaara and forcibly returned to the USSR two days later, after he had allegedly been beaten by Finnish police in Ilomantsi. He is currently serving the first part of this sentence in a corrective labour colony for political prisoners in the Perm region, and will not be due to be released before 1996.
1975 VLADIMIR KORFIDOV was arrested and returned to the USSR where he was sentenced to three years imprisonment… Since spring 1980 he is reported to have been confined against his will in a maximum security psychiatric hospital in Kazan.
Other ones include ALEKSANDR SHATRAVKA, MIKHAIL SHATRAVKA, BORIS SIVKOV and ANATOLY ROMANCHUK were arrested in Kuusamo… Their request to speak with officials from the US Embassy in Finland was rejected, as was their request to cross to Sweden…They were driven back to the border in handcuffs and handed over to the Soviet guards.
1973 HEIGO JOQESMA was arrested by Finnish police and forcibly returned to the USSR where he was committed to a psychiatric hospital…
There is also MR RULEV, whose first name is not known, arrested in September 1968 by Finnish frontier guards at Parikkala. After some questioning, he was returned to the USSR… GEORGY IVANOV is another one that did not make it to freedom in July 1967.
Apart from CHEREPANOV, another tragic tale is that of VILHO FORSELL and PEKKA TUPITSYN who were arrested in JUNE 1959 by Finnish frontier guards in the Joensuu region. They were taken to Helsinki prison and questioned for one week, during which their request for asylum was rejected. An official from the Soviet Embassy visited them and urged them to return home. They were transferred back to Joensuu where Finnish guards allegedly threatened to shoot them if they fled. They were handed over to Soviet guards. Each was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment…
Both men were from the Karelian Autonomous Republic. Forsell, born 1932, graduated from Petrozavodsk University in 1957 and worked as a translator. HIS PARENTS WERE OF FINNISH ORIGIN and had immigrated to Karelia from Canada in 1931. Tupitsyn, also a graduate from Petrozavodsk University, was a teacher.