A good editorial by Helsingin Sanomat about how the radical-right Perussuomalaiset (PS)* is the only party against bringing labor migrants to Finland and the threat such intransigency implies for the country.
It writes: “When the PS refuses to accept [hard] facts, it no longer makes sense, even from a purely selfish point of view. And when the party suggests that Finland should learn from Japan’s population policy, it sounds downright desperate.”
Contrary to the three parliamentary elections of 2011, 2015, and 2019, the PS faces a dilemma: Will its xenophobic message carry and encourage voters to vote for the party? Being called the only party against labor migrants could be a liability that will cost the PS dearly in April.
Moreover, the political atmosphere has also changed thanks to Covid, economic uncertainty, graying of the Finnish population, and the war in Ukraine.
When you leave out thecontext in a news story, you leave the door open for bias.
One topic in Tuesday’s A-studio talk show was whether it’s ok to burn the Quran in Finland. Contrary to other Nordic countries like Sweden and Denmark, burning the Koran in Finland is illegal.
While it’s generally known that it is illegal to burn the Quran, the talk show’s choice of inviting Perussuomalaiset (PS)* MP Sebastian Tynkkynen with Marja Sannikka hosting raises some questions.
From left to right: Professor Kimmo Nuotio, Perussuomalaiset MP Sebastian Tynkkynen, and host Marja Sannikka. Source: Yle
Rambling on about freedom of speech and why hate speech should not be persecuted, Tynkkynen claimed that “it looks like this [present law] is going to be a kind of Islam-protecting article.”
Apart from the shallowness of the talk show in treating such a sensitive topic, the program never answered the question it posed: Can the Quran be burned?
Sannikka never revealed to us what Tynkkynen thought about that question. She did not even ask the guest what he thought if burning the Jewish holy book, the Torah, was ok.
What would Tynkkynen say if she asked him such a question?
Would he ramble about “free speech” and that such an act, committed in front of the Israeli embassy, would be fine?
On Monday, we saw the stances of the radical-right Perussuomalaiset (PS)* and National Coalition Party’s (Kokoomus) views on the role of labor immigration outside the EU. On MTV, PS’ Sakari Puisto faced off with Pia Kauma of Kokoomus, while on A-studio, Leena Meri of the PS debated with Elina Valtonen.
It is depressing to watch the debate about Finland’s need to attract labor migrants from outside the EU. The adjectives used to describe them are insulting: social welfare migrants and low-income migrants who will accept low pay and any work offered.
It is a bad standing point: Why would I want to come to a country that wishes me so much harm and intends to relegate me to second-class and marginal status?
The most surreal debate between the two shows was on MTV.
While there was a difference of opinion on labor migrants between Puisto and Kauma, both favored limiting or excluding newcomers from getting social welfare.
The debate between PS MP Sakari Puisto and Pia Kauma was surreal. Puisto spoke against migrants from outside the EU, and Kauma who is in favor. Both were, however, of the same opinion about the social equality of such migrants. Both would take away their rights, so they can’t use social welfare. Would I move to a country that sees me as a second-class member of society? Source: MTV
When such a suggestion was made, the host didn’t even bother to ask if excluding non-citizens from getting social welfare was unconstitutional, which it is.
Kauma strongly criticized PS leader Riikka Purra’s statements against labor immigration outside the EU.
Contrary to the last three parliamentary elections in 2011, 2015, and 2019, the upcoming parliamentary election on April 2 is different for several reasons: war rages in the Ukeraine, Finland has sought Nato membership, economic growth, and chronic labor shortages are just a few.
Apart from labeling people from outside the EU as “harmful” migrants, the radical right Perussuomalaiset (PS)* attempts to argue with several CEOs of Finnish companies that rely on foreign workers that the party has nothing against qualified immigrants but is against what it labels “social welfare” immigrants.
“Finland is not very successful in attracting immigration that is economically beneficial, but it receives a lot of immigration that is economically detrimental,” Riikka Purra, the head of the PS, was quoted as saying in Kauppalehti, adding that she is against what she calls “social welfare” migrants.
Purra’s argument reminds me of a story I published in Savon Sanomat in 2012.
Back then, I wrote in the English version of the story that anti-immigration groups were using the same arguments. It’s like eating and having your cake at the same time while you put a picture of Sleeping Beauty and Prince Charming.
The PS has viciously labeled some migrants in Finland as “harmful” and “social welfare” recipients. They will tell you with a poker face that as long as the newcomer is a “super” migrant, things are ok.
Who are the so-called super migrants that some wish for in Finland?
Then Perussuomalaiset (PS)* head Timo Soini celebrated the party’s historic 2011 election victory as a “jytky,” or a loud bang. We may witness in April a counter “jytky.”
I live in a small city of about 53,000 people 230km north of Helsinki’s capital. It is a good example of the demographic challenges facing Finland. Occasionally, you may read in the local daily, Länsi-Savo, the threat of an ever-growing population of pensioners is threatening the region’s future.
None of the stories in the daily ask if Mikkeli has awoken too late to challenge the demographic problem.
To give you some fast figures, in 2022, 27,2% of Mikkeli’s population was over 64 years old and growing!
In many respects, Mikkeli is an extreme cosmos of Finland.
As we know, migration is a hot topic, especially during an election year. The PS, traditionally bases its popularity on the topic. Instead of making our society more welcoming to foreigners and offering them inclusive paths towards being a part of it, the medicine it prescribes is far worse than the illness.
Eight years of residence, speaking near-perfect Finnish, and work, before granting a permanent residence permit;
Raise the residence requirement for citizenship to 10 years from five years now;
Tighten further language requirements for the naturalization test;
Only citizens of OECD countries can have dual citizenship;
Exclude foreigners from getting social welfare;
Tighten further already strict family reunification requirements;
Only people within the EU can apply for asylum;
End labor immigration from outside the EU;
Only highly educated people from outside the EU can move to Finland.
Source: ETLA, an independent, private, non-profit economic research institute. Read the original posting here.
As any sensible person can understand, following the PS’ advice on immigration policy would be a disaster that would impoverish Finland economically, socially, and politically.
Despite the fake claims by parties like the Perussuomalaiset (PS)*, Finland has historically done everything possible to halt foreigners from moving to Finland. It was not until 1983, or 65 years that Finland passed its first aliens act.
Restrictions on foreigners and foreign companies were the rule. Did you know that even if women had the right to vote in 1906, they didn’t have the right to pass citizenship to their children until 1984? Only children of Finnish men had such a right.
This intransigence against foreigners can be best seen today through the rise of the radical right PS and the tacit approval of all Finnish parties, especially the National Coalition Party, Center Party, Liike Nyt, and Christian Democratic Party.
On Thursday’s question-and-answer session of parliament, Perussuomalaiset (PS)* MP Mari Rantanen, who is a former police officer and usually denigrates migrants, claimed that “practically all people from developing countries” that come to Finland pay a threshold fee.
According to a story in Iltalehti, “about 400 people” are “marked or suspected” of involvement in the scheme, according to the Helsinki Police Department.
About 400 people are far from “practically all people from developing countries.”
In 2022, 46,641 Ukrainian were granted temporary protection, and 4,022 sought asylum (excluding Ukrainians), according to the Finnish Immigration Service.
Certainly, Rantanen did no cite the police source, and neither did she elaborate on how she arrived at such an absolute number of people from developing countries.
“According to the police,” she said, “practically all people from developing countries have to pay a threshold fee [to come to Finland], usually to a compatriot already in the country, for a work contract or to come here in general. The average cost of such a residence permit in Finland is €15,000, and there are indications that the threshold money is linked to access to Finnish social security.”
She added by stating that “in one case,” a person paid with the social benefits from Kela, the Social Insurance Institution of Finland. The police told Rantanen that the arrangement is called “Kela money.”
Who knows, it may well be that “practically all people from developing countries” are guilty of involvement in the “Kela money” scheme.
Then again, this may be an over-exaggeration by a politician and party that profits from spreading misinformation and lies about migrants. The best way to find out is to get in touch with the police and ask them directly if they have an official statement about such a scheme.
Living inside an Islamophobic bubble is like pissing in your pants during a freezing day. At first, it may offer relief, but then reality sets in. The PS’ tar-and-feather campaign against migrants and minorities is hitting new lows.
Since the rise of the PS in the major leagues of Finnish politics after 2011, the present parliamentary election in April has a taste of déjà vu.
The last municipal election of 2021 disappointed the party after it had generously invested resources in its copy of Brexit’s “Take Finland back” campaign slogan. Opinion polls predicted that the PS would get about 18% of the votes but could only muster 14.5%.
The Perussuomalaiset and the end of the Wicked Witch of the East in the Wizard of Oz. Sources: Facebook and Youtube
The PS’ xenophobia has gained strength as the April parliamentary election nears.
The latest opinion poll published Thursday by Yleshows three important matters: Support for the National Coalition Party (Kokoomus) and Perussuomalaiset (PS)* slip while the Social Democrats regain second place. Another takeaway is the Greens, which took over the Center Party to capture fourth place.
In my opinion, two reasons for the big drop in support for Kokoomus and the PS are Finnish voters’ taste for masochism and radical-right ideology.
Why would I support draconian spending cuts at my expense as a voter? Do I believe that xenophobia will help make such cuts in spending sweeter and more bearable?
Since the rise of the PS in the major leagues of Finnish politics after 2011, the present parliamentary election in April has a taste of déjà vu.
The last municipal election of 2021, was a disappointment for the party after it had invested resources generously in its copy of Brexit’s “Take Finland back” campaign slogan. Opinion polls predicted that the PS would get about 18% of the votes but could only muster 14.5%.
The municipal election of 2021 showed that the PS was too radical for voters. But the PS bubble permits the party to commit the same mistake: Pour on the racism and attack foreigners and minorities with greater gusto. It will help the party win first place in the upcoming election.
There is nothing new in the Perussuomalaiset (PS)* immigration program announced Monday. A surprise for me was that the PS hardline stance means ALL migrants. Previously, I thought the term “migrant” used by the PS was code for Muslims or persons from outside the EU.
If the PS had its way, it would completely overhaul Finland’s immigration policy.
“EUROPEAN DAY AGAINST ISLAMOPHOBIA 2021 (EDAI): European Network Against Racism (ENAR) condemns “woke Islamism” theory as a political weapon to further legitimize the discrimination of Muslims and those perceived as Muslims in Europe.” Source: ENAR
Some takeaways:
Eight years of residence, speaking near-perfect Finnish, and work, before granting a permanent residence permit;
Raise the residence requirement for citizenship to 10 years from five years now;
Tighten further language requirements for the naturalization test;
Only citizens of OECD countries can have dual citizenship;
Exclude foreigners from getting social welfare;
Tighten further already strict family reunification requirements;
Only people within the EU can apply for asylum;
End labor immigration from outside the EU;
Only highly educated people from outside the EU can move to Finland.
As one can see, instigating such an immigration policy proposed by the radical right PS would effectively mean isolating Finland from the world.
The PS’ latest immigration program is nothing more than a copy-and-paste job of Denmark. The party’s ideological love affair with the Danish People’s Party and now its harsh immigration policy is nothing new.
