Tag: European Union

Aamulehti: Suomessa pian kansalaisuuden saa helpommin kuin oleskeluluvan?

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Comment: Here is a story published in Tampere-based Aamulehti that looks like a soap opera that backfired in the face of the authorities. The main characters of the soap opera are the embattled immigrants that move to Finland but do not know how many years they have to wait to apply for citizenship.

JusticeDemon says the following: “The documentation on this reform is on the website of Parliament here.

It is not uncommon for foreigners to be in a position where they have a choice between seeking citizenship or a residence permit, so this is nothing new.

Based on a quick survey of the parallel texts in the government bill, it appears that fixed penalties for petty offences (e.g. the 10 euro fine for jaywalking) will no longer be an obstacle to naturalisation, but there are no indications of any change in policy regarding serious crimes, so the first sentence of this teaser appears to be incorrect.”

Before a court ruling, the officials at the Finnish Immigration Service decided arbitrarily how many years you’d have to wait. If you were, for example, a student studying at the university your wait could take anywhere from 11 to 13 years. Usually those six to eight years that you studied at the university did not count towards naturalization. You would have to wait another five years to be eligible.

In effect, the new law may make it easier to get citizenship than a residence permit. Another aspect is that a person that has committed a crime in Finland can apply for citizenship, according to Aamulehti.

What are your experiences with the Finnish Immigration Service and do you think the new law is bad?

______________

Suomen kansalaisuus voi irrota jatkossa helpommin kuin oleskelulupa. Vakavakaan rikos ei estä kansalaisuuden saamista – toisin kuin monessa muussa EU-maassa.

Kansalaisuuden saaminen helpottuu eduskunnan hyväksymän kansalaisuuslain muutoksen vuoksi. Velvoitusta Suomessa asumisesta lyhennetään kuudesta vuodesta viiteen. Maahanmuuttovirasto pelkää, että rikolliset alkavat hakea kansalaisuutta oleskeluluvan sijasta.

– Tuleeko tilanteita, että kansalaisuuden saa helpommin kuin pysyvän oleskeluluvan? Jos henkilö hakee pysyvää oleskelulupaa eikä saa, pitääkin tyytyä kansalaisuuteen, Maahanmuuttoviraston kansalaisuusyksikön johtaja Tiina Suominen pohtii.

Lue lisää asiasta torstain Aamulehdestä

Muslims are not the real enemy to European democracy

Posted on by Migrant Tales

It is quite significant when EU heavyweights such as France and Germany take a stand on an important issue like immigration and diversity. Recent statements by German Chancellor Angela Merkel are a good example of the disturbing trend, when she stated that multiculturalism had “utterly failed” in Germany.

The statement by Merkel, which does nothing to promote greater integration between different groups in Germany, does not bring anything constructive to the table. At the best, it ends up polarizing Germans of different ethnic and religious origin even more.

A critical journalist would ask why Merkel is making such affirmations at this particular moment. The answer is simple: Germany will hold elections in a number of states in 2011.

Merkel’s statement even caused a reaction from UN Secretary Ban Ki Moon, who warned against a “dangerous trend” of intolerance emerging in Europe especially against Muslim immigrants.

“A dangerous trend is emerging, a new politics of polarization. Some play on people’s fears,” he said. “They accuse immigrants of violating European values. Yet too often it is the accusers who subvert these values and thus the very idea of what it means to be a citizen of the European Union.”

What is the danger of ever-greater intolerance and polarization in Europe? For one it paves the way for other minority groups to become targets and victims of intolerance. It would be naive to think that the only “enemy” are Muslims.

The greatest threat to Europe is not any particular ethnic or religious group but those who want to draw us apart from our diversity.

If the worrying trend continues in a global climate of economic uncertainty, it has the ability of impoverishing us in many ways. Instead of reaping benefits from our diversity we will be spending too much time hating each other.

Islamization and Islamophobia in Europe and Finland

Posted on by Migrant Tales

There was a letter to the editor in Saturday’s Mikkeli-based Länsi-Savo about the Islamization of Europe, while Time magazine asks in its August front cover if America is Islamophobic? The two headlines, although from vastly different publications, shed light on how some Europeans and USAmericans see Islam: a threat or over-reaction.

As in the letter to the editor, the writer uses one of the favorite arguments of Islamophobists to prove how much under threat Europeans are: high birth rates.

Any sensible person with a limited understanding of the social sciences understands that demography, even though it may have a bearing, is not the most crucial factor that determines the shape of societies. Values and inclusion are.

Moreover, if we could predict the shape of societies of the future with the help of a simple calculator,we would have to be plants without free will or robots guided by culture that never changes.

Demography is not the most crucial factor, excluding groups through suspicion and hatred from our culturally diverse societies is a far greater threat than high birth rates.

The demographic argument has its roots in deep fear and is a slap in the face to those Muslims that want to live among our ranks as citizens and consider this continent their rightful home.

A disfavor to Finland’s future

Posted on by Migrant Tales

With the April 2011 election approaching, parties in Finland are feverishly scrambling on ways to lure voters. One campaign issue that has the ability to move voters and inflame passions is immigration.

One important matter to keep in mind in the ongoing debate on immigration is to understand its parts: immigrants living in Finland, labor immigrants from the EU and elsewhere, and refugees (quota and asylum-seekers). When political parties and their representatives debate immigration, try to find out which of these groups they are talking about.

Which parties are using the immigrant-bashing card to lure votes? Of the one’s that have MPs in parliament, the True Finns are the main culprits. Their party’s position on immigration is pretty clear: xenophobic, ethnocentric and off the wall. Other parties like the Social Democrats aren’t too far off; in all parties you will find people who have anti-immigration stances.

Here are some points that should help you figure out the double-talk and baloney that some parties put out concerning the subject:

(1) We want to do away with multiculturalism (True Finns). Political parties use this term multiculturalism to mean a society with many cultures. When they state that they want to do away with multiculturalism, what do they mean? Kick out all the foreigners in Finland? Kick out the foreigners who are different from us? Close our borders and don’t allow immigrants to move to our country? Ask dark-skinned immigrants to dye their hair and get plastic surgery?

(2) The state should not finance multiculturalism in order to speed integration (Wille Rydman, Kokoomus). This is one of the best examples of double-talk I have seen by a Finnish politician. Rydman is suggesting that we should not allow immigrants to cherish their identity and background since he thinks that this will speed their integration into Finnish society. Rydman should look at studies on the subject that show the total opposite. He should visit Amerindian reservations in the United States that tragically show what consequences ripping a person’s culture and identity have.”

I could go on with a long list of other incredulous affirmations that will knock you on your back.

One important matter to keep in mind: Immigration is a political issue. Some groups, like the True Finns, may place ludicrous expectations of how immigrants are supposed to adapt to our society. The question, however, is if such expectations are realistic.

Having a successful immigration policy requires a long-term perspective so that immigrants may become productive and dynamic members of our society. Being only focused on the 2011 election is doing Finland a disfavor.

Fallacies of Finland’s immigration-refugee debate

Posted on by Migrant Tales

If we look at the ongoing immigration-refugee debate in Finland, there are six seven fallacies that one should look at critically in order to understand the debate. I have compiled a list of the top six seven claims that I consider the most absurd and politically questionable but are used constantly in the ongoing debate:

1. The SDP “love it (or leave it)” or “In Rome do as the Romans do” (maassa maan tavalla) stand on immigration. This rhetoric is nothing more than a good-cop-bad-cop tactic to bash immigrants while saying that the SDP party “welcomes newcomers.” Have you noticed that nowhere in the statements of SDP chairperson Jutta Urpilainen and MP Eero Heinäluoma do they tell you how many immigrants they are speaking of and from where? Last year some 4,000 immigrants got residence permits from outside the EU. Both Heinäluoma and Juttilainen speak as if Finland were not an EU member where people can work freely in different member-state countries.

2. SDP MP Eero Heinäluoma: “immigrants will fuel racism.”  This statement was made in the Swedish-language daily HBL. The MP does not consider racism a problem in Finland since it is the immigrants’ fault. They “will take jobs away from Finns,”according to him.  Heinäluoma’s argument is as ludicrous as those given by some sexual offenders,  who claim that “the devil made them do it” because the woman looked so sexy and therefore it was her fault she got raped.

3. Finns fear being labelled racists and therefore don’t speak freely enough about immigration issues. All one has to do is check the media in Finland to see that there is a very lively and passionate debate on immigration and refugees. Those who disagree are anti-immigration groups like the True Finns, Hommaforum, and Jussi Halla-aho, who would inflame discussion by fuelling it with more nationalism and racism.

4. True Finns: We are defending Western values. Since when was spreading hatred and populism defending modern Western values? I am certain that the National Socialist Party of Germany in the early 1930s used the same arguments to seize power. If parties like the PS and others would get in power, their aim would be to undermine civil liberties and create a many-tier society where anything different from their point of view would be seen as a threat. The first civil liberties that would fly out of the window are acceptance of diversity, freedom of speech and equality. Like the Nazis and other ultra-nationalist groups, they would argue that diversity is bad and therefore we have the right to kick out everyone who we do not like from the country (see Lebensraum). If you ever meet a representative from an anti-immigration group, ask him/her what should be done to people they consider “threats” to our values. You will get back as an answer a modern version of Lebensraum.

5. “We aren’t racists.” Too many speak about racism in Finland without being a minority nor having an adequate background to understand the social ill. Just because one has an academic degree is no guarantee that they understand racism. Some of the big deficiencies in Finland concerning the integration program is that it takes too little into account what immigrants want and need. Racist groups use the argument “we aren’t racists” to maintain a hate discourse in public. When you threaten to sue them for slander, they argue that their freedom-of-speech right has been violated. In English we call that type of defense a generous dose of phony baloney.

6. Being “critical on immigration.” This is a funny term made up by the anti-immigration groups that do not want to be labelled racists. Thus we are critical NOT racists when we bash immigrants and refugees with colorful adjectives. If one studied what they are actually saying, it would be easy to conclude that their “critique” of immigrants and refugees is a gross understatement. It is only a flowery diplomatic term that hides their real agenda, which is not acceptance of other cultures in our society.

7. Foreign workers are being abused and working illegally. This is favorite of the Social Democratic Party. If we were to believe them, the majority of the foreign workers in Finland are working in the black for slave wages. If this is the case, why aren’t we hearing of any huge busts in the media or of officials clamping down on the serous problem? The answer is simple: It is a scare tactic by the SDP to spread and maintain a climate of racism in Finland.  The last thing that the likes of Heinäluoma and others are worried about are working conditions and discrimination that immigrants face on a daily basis.

YLE: Another feather in Finland’s media immigration hysteria hat

Posted on by Migrant Tales

As the political climate gets tenser in Finland due to the recession, a good example of another red herring threat caused by immigration is a news story by YLE on Wednesday that claims that 3,200 foreign nationals were  not allowed to enter Finland illegally, according to the Finnish Border Guard.

These types of stories of the “threat” of outsiders are becoming more common and fueling a collective hysteria against immigrants and people coming from outside Finland (especially Russia). While the law should do everything possible to thwart illegal immigration, such claims must be put into perspective.

Perspective 1: Over 3 million tourists come to Finland (not mentioned in the story because it would deflate much of its strength) and 3,200 is a drop in the bucket, or about 0.01%.  Should the headline read: “Thanks to the efforts of the Finnish Border Guard, only 0.01% of tourists attempt to enter Finland illegally?” A bit misleading, no? What about this one: “Illegal immigration not an issue because 0.01% attempted to enter Finland with forged documents?”

Perspective 2: Why was this story published and why didn’t YLE give comparative figures on the total number of tourists or compared it with last year’s figures? The answer is obvious: laziness and sloppy reporting.

Perspective 3: Another interesting claim made by the Finnish Border Guard is that all of these illegals would end up human-trafficking victims in Finland or in other countries.How do they know this? That is a claim not a fact but serves to fuel anti-immigration/anti-Russian hysteria.

US Louisiana justice of the peace refuses to wed white woman with a black man

Posted on by Migrant Tales

The refusal of a Louisiana justice of the peace to marry a white woman and a black man has caused dismay and calls by government as well as civil rights groups for the removal from office of the public official, Keith Bardwell.

The United States overturned in 1967 a law which prohibited in a number of states such as California marriages between black and white people.

In an article in the Louisina-based Hammondstar.com, Bardwell defended his decision. “I don’t do interracial marriages because I don’t want to put children in a situation they didn’t bring on themselves,” he said. “In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer.”

The odd reasoning by the Louisiana justice of the peace clearly shows that racism in the United States is alive and kicking. Even though there are no such laws in the European Union that forbid multicultural marriages, there are some stark reminders of it in our recent history in Europe.

Jimmy Carter said Republican congressman’s outburst was based “on racism”

Posted on by Migrant Tales

Here is an interesting case: The biggest military and economic power in the world, the United States, continues to be hounded by one of its dubious legacies – racism. On the other side of the Atlantic, we too have a long way to go before we wipe the scourge of racism from our continent.

It is a positive matter, however, that in Finland the debate on racism and equality for all of its inhabitants has been taken up by parties on the traditional left and right of the political spectrum. Racism has no place in our society since it undermines our Western democratic values.

Former President Jimmy Carter, a civil and human rights champion, said this week that US Representative Joe Wilson’s outburst to President Barack Obama’s speech to Congress was based on racism.

“I think it’s based on racism,” Carter said in a story by AP at a town hall meeting held at his presidential center in Atlanta. “There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president.”

Wilson shouted from the aisles “you lie!” during Obama’s speech.  He later apologized for the outbreak.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxUCYRrfnHw]

Carter, who is also a member of the Democratic Party, added: “Those kinds of things are not just casual outcomes of a sincere debate on whether we should have a national program on health care. It’s deeper than that.”