Category: Enrique

Finnish identity in the new century

Posted on by Migrant Tales

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?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

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

Posted on by Migrant Tales

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

Posted on by Migrant Tales

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

Posted on by Migrant Tales

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?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

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

Posted on by Migrant Tales

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.

 

Foreigners in Finland: Integration or conversation?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

I recently had a very interesting chat with a colleague of mine over how much foreigners should integrate or assimilate into Finnish society. He felt that it was definitely not a matter of assimilation and that integration should only apply to the workplace. “Integration is important if you want to take part in the Finnish labor market,” he said. “Anything else, should be conversation.”

Some of the readers of this blog have very strong opinions about the matter. They believe that tax-paying foreigners who live in Finland have no other choice but to give up their identity and adapt 100% to Finnish values. This model of integration is not only impossible but ends up destroying the person’s identity and self-esteem.

In my opinion, one of the biggest setbacks of modern-day Finnish culture is in its definition of what is a Finn. It is too narrow and exclusive. If we are fair, there is a historical case for such a narrow definition. Finns are still in the process of molding a sense of national identity 91 years after the country´s independence. While it has been successful at building a strong sense of “us” and “them,” its drawback is that it has little tolerance for diversity. This is why some Finns believe that the only way for foreigners and their children can be accepted as Finns is by throwing away their identity.

One of the biggest setbacks of the present identity model is that by excluding others from being “Finns,” it has made the Finnish cultural field much smaller. One group that has suffered from this type of national identity model are Finnish expatriates and their children and grandchildren. In sum, all those who despite their diverse cultural background continue to have a sentimental bond with this country.

Finnish culture does not only include our mainland culture but a very diverse and rich group of people that were brought up in diverse cultural backgrounds in foreign lands as well as in Finland.

If there is work to do in improving our perception of ourselves as Finns it is in this area. Widen the definition to include all those who may wish to embrace this culture.

I for one hope that in the future Finns will start to look at their identity in a more open fashion that will include diverse groups irrespective of their background. This can only strengthen not weaken Finland.

The Anti-Finland League in Canada

Posted on by Migrant Tales

This is a funny story I read in The Hammer, a Canadian satirical magazine that tells about how the Finns have taken over the maritime provinces.

It writes: “Oh, he’s right, the Finnish are taking over. Nowadays, you can’t even get a job pumping gas round these parts if you don’t speak Finnish,” insisted McJones. “And the way those Finnish tourists come here every summer and flaunt their wealth with their flashy trousers and gold plated bracelets and strut about town as if they own the place, talking loudly into their cell phones and complaining about the quality of our sauna baths and how the kalakukko is too salty, I tell ya, it’s enough to make a Swede blush……

Click on the link to read the full story.

The building of Finnish national identity within a multicultural society

Posted on by Migrant Tales

One of the matters that some Finns who read the many comments in this blog should try to understand is that cultural diversity or multiculturalism should not be perceived as a threat but as an opportunity.

For some Finns, who see foreigners as a threat to our culture, this fear can be best explained through two historical factors: 1) Finns are still building a national identity since independence in 1917 from Russia; and 2) the Winter and Continuous War that put in grave jeopardy that identity- and nation-building process.

Finns have gone to great lengths to forge a sense of national identity. In the 1920s, for example, Finns were encouraged to change their “foreign” surnames for Finnish ones.

It may seem odd, however, to some that even to this date the process of building a national identity appears to be as strong and as imperative as it was after 1917. Even so, facts like globalization, European Union membership, and the fact that more foreigners living in Finland of diverse backgrounds, have brought in question how we define Finns and how foreigners should be perceived within that national identity-building process.

Since mutual respect is one of the golden rules of living in a successful society that has diverse backgrounds, it has to be a two-way street. Finns have a right to be Finns and be proud of their identity in the same way as other groups that may not fit the general definition of what is a Finn have the right to be proud of their heritage. It is a healthy matter that cultures can grow together in synergy and retain a sense of “us” and “them.” The strong healthy sense of “us” should not mean excluding others from being a part of this society.

What is pathological, however, is discrimination, racism and the lack of respect for other cultures. That is something unacceptable in any society, especially in a country such as Finland.

Why is it unacceptable? Because it runs against our sense of justice and undermines those very values that keep our society from falling into a state of moral disarray.