Comment: Here is a worrying story that is the tip of the iceberg. For many foreigners it is a common story.
What did Iltalehti report? A True Finn allegedly tried to pick a fight with a naturalized Finn for offering him work. One matter is a group of True Finns supporters acting in a hostile fashion but a more serious matter is their contentious message towards the immigrant population.
The major parties in Finland made a big mistake by not giving the True Finns the cold shoulder like what happened with the Sweden Democrats. OK, the True Finns are not all following Jussi Halla-aho, but the party’s leadership opportunistically approves Islamophobic behavior by not condemning it.
The attacks and rancor towards immigrants and minorities in Finland will continue to pick up as long as parties like the True Finns continue to peddle their populism, which is deeply rooted in ignorance and bigotry.
Do you agree?
___________
Olli Waris
SDP:n ehdokkaan Ranbir Sodhin vaalitilaisuus Vantaan Myyrmäessä sai ikävän päätöksen viime lauantaina, kun perussuomalaisehdokkaan taustajoukot heittivät ilmoille syrjiviä kommentteja.
To keep on reading click here.
I already know which single line from that article our rabid contributors will fasten on.
One of the obvious pluses of immigrant candidates is that they bring out this side of PS. Despite every effort to maintain a respectable façade, incidents like this are as natural as a baby’s smile when fascists come face to face with evident counterexamples to their sick propaganda.
I wonder if all of the PS are as work shy as the unemployed supporter who scorned the SDP candidate’s job offer. Is this person also claiming benefits?
Well said, JusticeDemon: Despite every effort to maintain a respectable façade, incidents like this are as natural as a baby’s smile when fascists come face to face with evident counterexamples to their sick propaganda.
Well of course Adolf Hitler famously showed considerable public restraint at the 1936 Berlin Olympics when confronted with a spectacular counterexample to the doctrine that he had preached.
Ofcourse I forgot, an accused True Finn is guilty until proven innocent, but an accused immigrant is innocent until proven guilty. I love the consistency here. So much for equality, the very attribute you pretend to preach for.
By calling the True Finn party fascist, correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t recall Hitler welcoming positive or neutral immigrants to Germany regardless of race, religion, or nationality. You accuse the True Finns of fear mongering but by ridiculously comparing them to Hitler and the Nazi party I think it’s obvious who is really doing the fear mongering.
Klay
Accused of what?
Did you read the IL report?
Even I do agree with you that these specific True Finns supporters acted stupidly and unacceptable, I find it funny that you compare True Finns to fascism. C’mon, if these specific people would have been supporting Kokoomus or Keskusta, you wouldn’t have written this story. But because they are supporting True Finns, then whole party must be racist and fascist.
I have been reading this site for a while. I understand that you don’t support True Finns and don’t even like them. But you let your feelings getting in the way of the facts. True Finns criticize current immigration system, but you don’t see any problems with it? Nobody can’t be that naive. Finland has huge problems with wrong type of immigration (mostly with refugees). Some people can’t and don’t even want to integrate with Finnish society. That is the fact, you can see it by just looking at statistics. I don’t believe True Finns have any problems with immigration if the people are coming Finland to work and pay their taxes.
Hi Ville, thank you for dropping by and welcome to our blog.
–Nobody can’t be that naive. Finland has huge problems with wrong type of immigration (mostly with refugees). Some people can’t and don’t even want to integrate with Finnish society.
After all the commotion fuelled by parties like the True Finns on immigration (not the only one), I have come to the conclusion a long time ago that there is (1) no immigration problem in finland, (2) no massive influx of refugees and (3) that immigrants and reugees want to adapt to this society. Your assumption isn’t logical. Why wouldn’t they want to adapt and make something out of themselves especially if they have travelled so far? Immigrants and refugees are humans like you.
These myths, that immigrants-refugees get special treatment and more social welfare, is peddled by parties like the True Finns for the aim of getting votes and because many of the candidates are ignorant of the subject.
Finland does NOT have an immigration problem, we do have a very STRINGENT immigration law and immigrants-refugees DON’T get more social welfare than Finns.
Ville, a sincere question: If you listened to some True Finns, Muutos2011, Vapauspuolue and other anti-immigration reps, do you think they even give the light of day for people to adapt here? If you want immigration to work you have to have mutual acceptance, equal opportunities and, importantly, you have to give other people the benefit of the doubt. The atmosphere in Finland by some people has been hostile and xenophobic/Islamophobic to say the least.
You cannot bash one group and say you are “open” to the “right” immigration. That is naive. In other words, you cannot maintain a democratic system by denying others that right. You cannot speak for freedom of speech by censoring others. That, in my opinion, explains the True Finns approach to immigration.
Thank you for your feedback Enrique. I most admit that you have some good points.
You know what they say: democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried 🙂 I support equality, but I also think that you must earn it and you can as well lose it. You can earn it by following societies rules / laws and you can lose them by breaking them.
I have to politely disagree with you in immigration problem opinion. For example, almost half of the Somalians in Finland are unemployed. This is because of their lack of education and language skills. You must admit that from this kind of starting points it is very, very difficult to get a job, because even many educated Finns are unemployed. Of course, we could give them training and educate them, right? Well, the question is: with what money? If person has never been in school and is already an adult, it is way more difficult and expensive to start to study EVERYTHING from the beginning. If you would be in a government and you could decide, which one would you choose: Person A, who has university education, is from Europe and has working experience? Or person B, a refugee who is suffering in his home country, but doesn’t have any education, is from totally different culture, he most likely won’t get a job in Finland and most likely you have to pay his living for many years. Which one is more valuable for the society?
I think the good immigrant is like the person in this news: he is working, paying his taxes and even better, employ a few other people. He also did have a great education background and because of that more suitable for Finnish society. I don’t know your background, but you seem quite smart person and probably have come to Finland to study or work. In that case, you are a good immigrant as well. Of course, I don’t like your anti-Finn and anti-Finland opinions, as I have read in other blogs, but you have right for your opinion. Or maybe I have just misunderstood your writings.
Actually immigrant don’t get more social welfare, but refugee do get. Everybody in the family gets their social welfare share, even children. This information can be found quite easily, if you search it. Luckily the government is little bit more strict now, but they still unite refugee “families” and even pay their flight tickets… this is the thing what causes unhappiness in tax payers. What I would like to change it: 1) no family uniting missions 2) no free flight tickets 3) children shouldn’t get social welfare 4) social welfare should be more food aid and apartment support, not giving money directly. This could be used to Finnish citizens as well. 5) refugees shouldn’t get the best apartments in the city. Most of the people who start to work has to live in a small apartments for years, but refugees gets big apartment near the central as soon as they come here… is this fair?
I’m just curious… which party would you vote? If you say Green party, then you lose all my respect 🙂 just joking.
Ville, we are debating here so there is no problem about disagreeing. That’s fine.
I kind of sense that many of your arguments are from the anti-immigration camp. That’s fine but let’s study your points.
Did you know that 70% of Somalians that came in the early 1990s are employed? How many Somalians do you claim lack education and language skills? How many are illiterate as you claim? I haven’t seen any reliable figures anywhere. And, as you know, illeterate people in Finland are very few, even among refugees. Certainly this can be a reason but don’t you think that the hostility towards this group is also a factor?
It is interesting that you think that only your “ideal immigrant” will come flocking to this country. It’s like hoping that each Finn that is born will become an ideal citizen. Here is where I see the naivity of the anti-immigration supporters. A society does not work nor does it cater to only the “good” ones but to EVERYONE that lives there. This is an important thing to remember.
–Actually immigrant don’t get more social welfare, but refugee do get.
You know as well as I do Finns are pretty meticulous people when it comes to the law. Does the social welfare laws distinguish between refugee and immigrants/Finns? If one is “taking advantage” of such funds then you should report that to the authorities. Those civil servants who have given more unfounded benefits outside of the law will be in hot water. Why aren’t there any such cases? If they were so common why aren’t they being reported by the media? Because our social welfare system is pretty efficient and we do have qualified people.
Have you ever thought about why family reunification may be positive? What can you get out of it? For one, you help build a social network for the person. That may help him to do more productive things with his time and feel like this country were his home. I think this is a point that isn’t being discussed because some are fearful that we’ll be taken over by a certain ethnic group. As you know, you cannot predict the future with a pocket calculator.
One matter that you should also take into account, and JusticeDemon has mentioned this over and over again, is that some immigrants and refugees don’t have expensive habits like alcohol and they do know how to stretch that euro. Let me give you an example of how a group of Sudanese paid for their cars: Each loaned money to one family at a time until all of them had a car. Pretty ingenious, no? Some locals were blaming them of getting more social welfare when, in fact, they didn’t.
I am apolitical. I don’t belong to any party.
Ville
If the cap fits…
Funny how the people who say this can never specifically identify any individual immigrant of their personal acquaintance who fits such a description. The Nazis had similar problems identifying individual Jews matching the demonised stereotype.
It’s also interesting that there are quite a few Finns who have made lifestyle choices of precisely this kind in various ways. Some of these “deliberately different” Finns have even been commercially successful. Antti Hulkko is not exactly a role model for the social conformity fetishists – until he starts spending his royalty cheques.
So we imagined this, this and this?
Owing to their racist thug following, of course, PS are inevitably more likely to attract this kind of media coverage.
So after spending so much time and effort trying to propagate a racist stereotype in the teeth of abundant counterexamples, PS wouldn’t immediately assume that any visible immigrant is a work shy scrounger until proven otherwise?
The unemployment rate among displaced persons is inevitably much higher than among migrant workers. Displaced persons do not have a job on arrival and are often traumatised in various ways. It takes much longer for them to find work. At least in the case of UNHCR resettlement programme (“quota”) refugees there is time for pre-departure training and other forms of preparation. These refugees have a head start, not least because they don’t run a gauntlet of official suspicion, complex procedures and institutionalised uncertainty on arrival.
Spontaneous humanitarian migration is the greatest challenge, but here PS have offered absolutely nothing constructive or new. As long as Finland remains a party to the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and other key international legal instruments, any person who reaches the Finnish border is entitled to individual processing of a claim for humanitarian protection and cannot be sent back to a war zone. Bleating about the employability of such a person is beside the point, and demonising people in such circumstances is thoroughly counterproductive. It’s like complaining that your baby doesn’t have his mother’s eyes, as if this was anyone’s deliberate choice.
Now please tell us which of those legally binding international instruments Finland should renounce. PS certainly haven’t advocated any such thing, but bleating about the consequences of being a member of the club of civilised nations does them no credit. What’s the plan, if not to withdraw from these Conventions? To routinely break them and hope that nobody notices? This was Finland’s attitude to its obligations under the Paris Peace Treaty, but it won’t work anymore in a globalised world. If the intention is to remain in the club and honour the obligations of membership, then the present policy is simply correct and the bleating is merely a dishonest attempt to attract votes from the ignorant.
So now let’s examine those demands one by one:
Family reunification is always a matter of uniting parents and children. Should Finland withdraw from the Convention on the Rights of the Child? If not, then explain how the children of families from war zones can be reunited with their parents, subject to the terms and conditions of that Convention (especially Article 10).
Who wills the end also wills the means. See the answer to point 1.
3) children shouldn’t get social welfare
Would you like to rephrase that? Quite apart from Article 26 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, if you are really serious about this suggestion, then you need integration measures far more than any immigrant.
4) social welfare should be more food aid and apartment support, not giving money directly. This could be used to Finnish citizens as well.
This has been tried and has proved to be very expensive and open to abuse by businesses. How much more are you willing to spend on social welfare in order to administer and police such a system?
5) refugees shouldn’t get the best apartments in the city.
Now we are back to myth-building. The implication is that Finnish local government officials are actively discriminating in favour of refugees. This would mean, for example, that where a refugee family with six children, one of them disabled, is housed in 180 square metres, then a Finnish family with six children, one of them disabled, would be housed … how?
It is fair to say that living accommodation has historically drifted towards smaller units, at least in the southern cities of Finland. The average household size in Helsinki is about 1.85 persons. Any increase in the number of larger families is likely to affect housing policy in ways that resemble Posio more than Pasila, but there is no reason to suppose that the origin of these larger families is a special factor determining policy.
Maybe this could help as well (Article 6 of the Constitution): “Everyone is equal before the law. No one shall, without an acceptable reason, be treated differently from other persons on the ground of sex, age, origin, language, religion, conviction, opinion, health, disability or other reason that concerns his or her person.”
“Ketään ei saa ilman hyväksyttävää perustetta asettaa eri asemaan sukupuolen, iän, alkuperän, kielen, uskonnon, vakaumuksen, mielipiteen, terveydentilan, vammaisuuden tai muun henkilöön liittyvän syyn perusteella.”