Don’t let the “critics” hijack the immigration debate in Finland

by , under All categories, Enrique

We would be in a lot of trouble if the one-sided immigration debate in Finland was left to a certain group of people. Those that I am referring to call themselves “critical of immigration,” maahanmuuttokriittinen. It is a funny term used to describe groups that are in fact hostile to immigration.

More people in Finland are beginning to understand the difference between racism and sensible debate.

One of these is Center Party Prime Minister Mari Kiviniemi. She recently labeled SDP MP and anti-immigration hardliner Eero Heinäluoma’s statements as “flirting with racism.” Naturally Heinäluoma does not consider his statements racist at all. One of the many incredulous affirmations he has made is that immigrants will fuel racism because they will take jobs away from Finns.

The argument is a bit like the man who raped a woman and then claims that it was the victim’s fault because she was wearing a mini skirt.

There are countless of other examples of anti-immigration groups like the True Finns who claim not to be racist but in truth some are. You can find, unfortunately, these types of people in all of Finland’s political parties.

Since ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law, it should not be one for insulting other ethnic groups. Even so, some of the views that some Finnish politicians have of immigrants and immigration dates back to the murky 1930s.

Even though not everything that is debated can be slammed as racist, it shows how much in diapers the immigration debate is in Finland. Some do not even know the difference (or pretend not to know) between what is appropriate and racist.

I have said on numerous occasions that you do not need to pass new laws for immigrants in Finland. The only thing we have to do is apply those we have in force today.

A good rule of thumb when speaking of immigrants in Finland is to ask if you would ever make such a statement about your own group or voters. If not, stay clear from them.

One of the pet topics of the far-right in Finland is speaking about social security fraud. The only problem with the debate is that the  only culprits  are foreigners. Supposedly Finns are honest and therefore do not take advantage of the social security system.

Why aren’t any politicians making a big deal about social security fraud in general, or among Finns in particular? Because it is a hyper-sensitive political issue. They would not touch it with a ten-foot pole especially with elections approaching in April 2011.

Bashing foreigners and over-exaggerating social security fraud among immigrants brings more votes and political mileage.

  1. Osmo

    A large percentage of immigrants from certain countries are known to use every trick in the book to get free money. Canada, which was made into a Multicultural country by a former Prime Minister, is now reaping the rewards of importing hundreds of thousands of Chinese and East Indians into the country. It is very difficult for someone sitting in their comfortable office in Finland to imagine the affect of these policies. You can theorize, you can postulate and do all the things that you were taught in political science or whatever courses you took, about the wonders of Multiculturalism. But unless you have seen the future, or have lived close to the ghettos created, literally countries within countries, you cannot image what has happened to this dream. Can you imagine that a school would turn 90% Punjabi? No! Can you imagine a whole municipality controlled by Punjabis (no offense against their race)? Until you have seen it, you cannot imagine it. When your kids have to be pulled out of these schools for harassment, being called “white trash” or being told that your kids are not allowed in a particular school because the school officials don’t want you because you are not brown…We have experienced this in Surrey BC Canada.It is the politicians and academics that created this mess and now these want to do the same in Finland. It is a disgrace.

    • Enrique

      –It is the politicians and academics that created this mess and now these want to do the same in Finland. It is a disgrace.

      So what do you suggest? Kick out all the Punjabs and make Canada 99% white again? You have to read your history better. Canada is a country made of immigrants. Those immigrants that live in that great country in my opinion share public spaces. Thanks to multiculturalism Canada is today ONE nation not a bunch of small nations made up of different ethnic groups. If you read carefully the history of Canada you will note that your country’s solution to cultural diversity is a zillion times better than it was before the 1970s. How did Canada treat its First Nation (Amerindians) people and other ethnic groups? Although not perfect, Canada’s multiculturalist social policy has done a lot of good. It has been an effective answer to the country’s cultural diversity and helped keep it together as one nation. Tell me which groups in Canada want to scrap this social policy and return to the 1950s?

  2. Tiwaz

    -“Thanks to multiculturalism Canada is today ONE nation not a bunch of small nations made up of different ethnic groups. ”

    No, it is something which pretends to be one nation, but lacking the glue to keep the different parts with different cultures and different wants.

    It is house of cards, should there be serious push it would all collapse just like Soviet Union and Yugoslavia.

    Those are proof of how attempt to cram different cultures into one nation is recipe of failure.

    As said, there are some Canadians in forum I visit who were happy when they left Canada. They saw the ugly truth behind poster boy attitude you present here.

    Old ethnic conflicts brought from Middle East to Canadian streets. No Kumbaya and feeling of brotherhood, but ethnic violence brought to places where it was before unknown.

    I want Finland to avoid this, and that means that immigrants have to adjust to Finland, not expect Finland to adjust to them.

    • Enrique

      –No, it is something which pretends to be one nation, but lacking the glue to keep the different parts with different cultures and different wants.

      Tiwaz, read your history carefully and then jump to conclusions. Multiculturalism in England played the same role: to keep the nation from splitting up (Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland). Your recipe, integration by perkele, would have produced a former Yugoslavia.

      Your problem is that you do not understand what the word multiculturalism means. Are you speaking of the social policy (Canada) or a society made up of different cultures. The True Finns do not even know the difference even though they claim that Sweden is such a nation. They are lost on the subject as you.

  3. xyz

    Tiwaz: Half of my family immigrated to Canada from the middle east. They have good jobs, own houses and enjoy living there.

    I think the only one who causes problems are narrow minded people like you. People like you build barriers between people which makes live/integration for immigrants hard. What is the motivation to integrate into a society if you get rejected straight from the beginning just by the fact that you are a bit different? Do you think it is motivating to integrate if people like you say (quote you): “Because of POOR QUALITY OF WORK! Immigrant efficiency equals poor quality”

    You have never been an immigrant, you have never learned a new language in a new country and you live in a place where there are anyway almost no immigrants. Fact is that you don’t have any clue about foreigners.

    Integrating into a country takes some time. I think there are not many educated people who want to live from Kela for years. Why begging in Finland if they are plenty of well paid jobs in other countries?

    • Enrique

      xyz, you make some good points. A society must offer opportunities and be inclusive — not exclusive.

  4. xyz

    Well of course there are also foreigners who can not just move to another country because they have family, children etc. in Finland.

  5. Tiwaz

    -“Half of my family immigrated to Canada from the middle east. They have good jobs, own houses and enjoy living there. ”

    And you think they represent how large portion of immigrants from ME going to Canada?

    -“You have never been an immigrant, you have never learned a new language in a new country and you live in a place where there are anyway almost no immigrants. Fact is that you don’t have any clue about foreigners.”

    Been abroad, lived there. Did not like it and came back. But what I did NOT do, is whine that natives have to appease my foreign ass like you do.

    -“Integrating into a country takes some time. I think there are not many educated people who want to live from Kela for years.”

    Boo hoo.
    Let us pretend we speak of trained doctor here. One who has no grasp of culture or language of Finland.

    Why should I ever let that doctor anywhere near me or my family when I know that his/her lack of essential skills (language) raise the odds of mistreatment radically?

    Why, were I potential employer, would I hire someone who would take constant babysitting because they do not understand Finnish language or know Finnish legislation?

    We have already seen how things turn out when you try to build with load of different foreign workers in Olkiluoto. Finnish inspections repeatedly shoot down the whole thing.

    -“Tiwaz, read your history carefully and then jump to conclusions. Multiculturalism in England played the same role: to keep the nation from splitting up (Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland). Your recipe, integration by perkele, would have produced a former Yugoslavia. ”

    And of course English rulers always maintained such enlightened position… No wait, they didn’t! They told their Welsh etc subjects to suck it up and pay taxes.
    Scots were only group who managed to negotiate some kind of deal with English in exchange for being quiet. And guess what…

    They are also only group who really want to secede from system. Rest became property of English crown through… Right of conquest.

    -“Your problem is that you do not understand what the word multiculturalism means. Are you speaking of the social policy (Canada) or a society made up of different cultures. The True Finns do not even know the difference even though they claim that Sweden is such a nation. They are lost on the subject as you.”

    Multiculturalism is failure in both definitions. Trying to impose stupidity as social policy is as failed as trying to pretend that having different cultures would somehow magically get along fine.
    Educated people should figure out by themselves that if they have holes in their skillset, they are not going to be very desirable employees.

    -“xyz, you make some good points. A society must offer opportunities and be inclusive — not exclusive.”

    No, he does not make good points. He fails to take into account that foreigner who has holes in his/her skillset is bad worker.
    Foreigner is not some special snowflake entitled to special treatment.

    • Enrique

      –But what I did NOT do, is whine that natives have to appease my foreign ass like you do.

      So instead you came back to Finland to whine about immigrants in Finland. Hey, Tiwaz, nobody goes around insulting other people like the way you do. When you do this you undermine your arguments. It is a poor debate strategy.

      Read history over and over again. Don’t skim over it and jump to your own conclusions. Multiculturalism plays an important role in keeping Canada and the United Kingdom together.

      You did not give me a definition of multiculturalism all you said is: “Multiculturalism is failure in both definitions. Trying to impose stupidity as social policy is as failed as trying to pretend that having different cultures would somehow magically get along fine.”

      After countless posts, I still do not understand what you defintion of multiculturalism is and how your vision of society works. Sorry, but a lot of us are lost on this.

  6. xyz

    And you think they represent how large portion of immigrants from ME going to Canada?
    -What do you mean?

    Been abroad, lived there. Did not like it and came back. But what I did NOT do, is whine that natives have to appease my foreign ass like you do.
    -You were running home after a few months from the UK even so you had a job and spoke English. Did they hate you so much there? 🙂 Just imagine how it is to be an immigrant if you don’t speak the language and you don’t have a job. You would have run home after 1 week.

    One who has no grasp of culture or language of Finland.
    -What do you think. How many people on this planet have a grasp of Finnish culture and language? In percentage its maybe close to 0%. Where should somebody learn about it if not in Finland?

    Why, were I potential employer, would I hire someone who would take constant babysitting because they do not understand Finnish language or know Finnish legislation?
    -Well if you are an employer who has learned English at school (I suppose English is taught almost in every country) then you would not need to be a babysitter. You can send your employee to Finnish courses in the meantime. I am quite sure, if you treat your employee well, he/she will also be motivated to learn your language. If you treat him/her like garbage then forget about integration.

    We have already seen how things turn out when you try to build with load of different foreign workers in Olkiluoto. Finnish inspections repeatedly shoot down the whole thing.
    -Ah and how do you think is it possible that other countries have nuclear plants? They were all built by Finns?

  7. Charlie

    To the author of this blog.

    You like to call names and complain about other people’s ideas being unintelligible, but you don’t have much insight to offer yourself.
    All your blogs are a collection of imprecations and rants that do little to advance your point, apart from dismissing other people’s point of view as misguided.
    And every time you see a potential rejection of immigrants in somebody’s argumentation, you use the classic trick: argue that there have been so many immigration waves over the course of history, that discriminating against a current one is not legitimate since immigration has been around for ever.

    But people are not just discriminating against migrants overall, they are discriminating against problems, current day problems. The stakes of modern immigration are much higher than in times past. The wealth and confort at stake, the political differences, the disparities in family structures and fertility are unmatched.

    “A society should be inclusive.”
    That’s all you got?

    You claim that you don’t understand so I’ll tell it like it is.
    People who you want to convince (or at least triumph of) are not interested in morals. They are interested in things like:

    How for sure do you convert immigrants from underpriviledged countries into model citizens without spending more on insertion and educational programs than you do for “regular” citizens?

    How do you guarantee that the culture shock between traditional societies and a richer capitalist model will not generate civil unrest?

    Mass immigration opponents want certainties. Humanism is big on promises, short on certainties.
    They are sick of taking a chance on people.

    Looks like that’s beyond your comprehension. I don’t care about your wellness as an immigrant or even a human being.
    Your life and your right to happiness are of no importance to me.

    The truth is that your arguments are purely moral ones. It’s a grand syllogism where you try to hammer your conception of society, in virtue of universalistic values that the conservatives you want to prove wrong just don’t agree with in the first place.

    I’m not Finnish but I respect Finland for not being the whipping boy of torrents of needy migrants from derelict nations and cultures.
    You want freedom, build it yourself.

    Am I ready to defend mine at your expense? Absolutely.
    And that’s what Finland should keep on doing.

    • Enrique

      Hi Charlie, how are things in France?

      –And every time you see a potential rejection of immigrants in somebody’s argumentation, you use the classic trick: argue that there have been so many immigration waves over the course of history, that discriminating against a current one is not legitimate since immigration has been around for ever.

      I never knew that a “classical trick” meant defending people’s civil rights in a society. I believe that far-right groups are as dangerous to Europe than with the rise of Nazism in the 1930s in Germany. Look at the program of these groups. In order to implement it it would require changes in the civil rights we enjoy today. Those inalienable rights I am ready to defend tooth and nail. It is, in my opinion, an issue to extends to the core of our Western, liberal and democratic values. By denying a group basic civil rights (or the ones you enjoy) is synymous with undermiing the basic values of our society.

      Your use of adjectives are pretty interesting: “mass” immigration. Is that the same as “uncontrolled” immigration? Which groups use these words to describe immigration? I’ll let you answer that question.

      So how do you plan to “correct” “mass” immigration? Kick them all out and “let them build their own Nirvana in their ‘derelict’ nations and cultures?” I think this kind of an affirmation tells a lot about how you see other cultures that come from such countries.

      So defending your culture means breaking the law and forgetting civil and human rights? I think we have a major problem with that argument.

      When Martin Luther King fought for civil rights (was he from a derelict culture?) he did not ask to pass any new laws just impose those on all the people that live in the country. You cannot build a society with double standards (civil rights apply to natives and immigrants have other sets of laws). And, yes, inclusion. Do you want another simple but very important word:acceptance. That is the key to healthy relations between two people never mind groups. And morals and values? Without them your society or mine would be reduced to rubble.

      So, Charlie, I disagree with your point of view.

  8. Charlie

    Every man is equal in that they have the right to demand the freedom and social benefits they see fit from the government of their country of origin.
    But if their country of origin is not able or willing to put in place an institutional model that allows these demands to be met or even heard, it’s not my problem.
    We live in a world where it’s deemed wrong and imperialistic to criticize other cultures, yet it’s perfectly fine for people of such cultures, often fiercely protective of the traditions that have failed them, to compensate for the trappings of their institutional model by leaving for another country and settling there for ever.

    The rights of immigrants should be based on the standards of their country of origin, not on those of the adoptive country.
    Emigration is social shopping, no more no less.
    What drawback is there to moving to Europe if you are starving in the plains of Mali? None. Why wouldn’t you do it? What do you really have to lose?

    And even as people in emerging countries become richer, emigration will remain high. It won’t stop or get “reasonable”. It’s a pipe dream.
    Because everyone on Earth is now exposed to pop culture items and media streams coming from the most developed countries, which set a standard for personal accomplishments and success that simply cannot be met by the everyday man, even in the faster emerging countries.
    Unless you are at least a middle class citizen in one the absolute top countries in the world, you know deep down you are missing something. Blissful ignorance is a thing of the past.

    That’s why immigrants should never gain for themselves or their relatives any permanent right to stay in their adoptive country, after any length of time. Naturalization should never happen. Not for themselves, not for their children. Family regroupment should not be an automatic right.
    Any child that is born of the union of an immigrant and a citizen of the country does not automatically gain citizenship of the richer country, and does not get the automatic right to reside in the richer country. Before even being approved, the migrant has to get a waiver from his government stating that it guarantees citizenship of the migrant’s original country to any child the migrant might give birth to on his adoptive country’s soil.

    Immigrants shall be barred from wedding a national of the host country, and they should certainly be barred from gaining residence or citizenship that way.

    They shall not receive social benefits that do not exist in their home country.
    They shall be barred from free healthcare and free education.
    They shall be barred from trying out for highly paid jobs, as well as influential positions in the media and politics.
    They shall solely receive a recurring work and residence permit whose duration is decided in function of their personal wealth and qualifications.

    When the economy of their adoptive country does not require the migrant’s presence any more, his permit is revoked.
    Part of the salaries he has received during his stay is kept on escrow, which he will only be able to collect in person, in his country of origin, over a lengthy period of time in small payments.
    Naturally, if he attempts a return to the richer country as a clandestine, he loses it all and faces prison.

    Now that’s a bit closer to what I would call mutually beneficial immigration.

  9. xyz

    In my country do live 5 times more Finns (10.000) than citizens of my country live in Finland. Most of them come because:
    -They get a job there because there are no jobs for them in Finland
    -They are married to a person of my country
    -They study there

    I think it is great that they are coming. That’s the idea of the EU.

  10. Charlie

    But that’s still a negligible number. And importing Finnish people to your country is much less dangerous and costly in terms of welfare, than to import third world people. It’s a convenience move for many of them. Might also help them evade taxes.

    If you look at all the sizeable foreign communities living in your country, I’m sure you will find that some do indeed represent a burden from your welfare system.

    For example, when filtering potential North African season workers for its agricultural exploitations, Spain discriminates heavily towards female candidates, because they tend to have family duties in their home country that incite them to go back, whereas men who have no such obligations tend to cheat and remain in Spain past the deadline of their work permit.

  11. JusticeDemon

    Charlie

    At the risk of feeding an obvious troll, tell us whether Finland should resign from the Council of Europe and the European Union.

  12. xyz

    The problem is that if you talk about immigrants, then you are also talking about people who are coming from countries like Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, France, USA, UK, etc.

    However, I know plenty of immigrants (even my father is one of them) from the middle east who got a job in their new country and have now a good position. Just because they are from the Middle East, Africa etc does not mean that they want to live from your social welfare system. Of course there are always black sheeps but for many it is just really hard to get a job.

    Ever been to the labor office in Hakaniemi? You will find many immigrants there. Talk to those people and you will understand them better if you know their background. Believe me, not everybody wants to exploit your welfare system.

  13. AllWillBeGood

    Is there any racist politician that has been embraced on the world stage? no, except in their meeting halls by their coward followers. Racist politicians rise for a short time in their parties and fall so hard that primary school kids laugh when their names are mentioned.
    Charlie I dont know where you come from but I think you need help. You are so full of hate that admitting you are racist will be life transforming. Its not too late to change your views to join Micheal Jackson singing “heal the world, make it better place for you and for me and the entire human race….”.

  14. Charlie

    How am I trolling?
    All that I am doing is challenging you to prove that mass immigration from third world countries does not mean sizeable consequences for the quality of life and finances of the host nation.

    Maybe your cousin and brother are fantastic additions to the social fabric of your new country, and maybe not.
    What I care about is the proportion of immigrants from a given community who rely on higher welfare benefits than the average population of the country, and step outside the law.
    If that average is higher than the nation’s average, then we have a problem.

    Reactionary (not necessarily racist) politicians fail because progressists and humanists are overrepresented in the fields of public education, journalism and justice, especially in Europe.
    Our elites love to bathe in the glory of European enlightment and promote so called dignifying values, but they do so at the expense of the middle class people who live in contact with underpriviledged immmigrants day to day, which they don’t.
    They pay for the tolerance they offer to underpriveldged foreigners by sacrificing the quality of life of the middle class.

    I remember at age 11 in school, being taught that before the death penalty was abolished in France, a majority of French citizens were in favor of it, therefore the majority of French citizens was wrong and sometimes you have to go against the will of the majority to impose ideas favoring the reinsertion of criminals.
    That’s a clear abuse of a teaching position to indoctrinate young people, and there are countless such abuses destined to tip odds in favor of progressist ideas, from our chilhood to the news shows we are subjected to everyday.

    In France, it is also proscribed to promote ideas that are hostile to “integration” in the media. You can face severe ostracism just for pointing to the drawbacks of massive immigration from third world countries in the press.

    I leave you with this quote, and it comes from somebody notable enough that I hope you won’t label it as trolling:

    “The excessive and unreasonable immigration that we are witness to in France represents, through all of its consequences, an unbearable burden.”

    Maurice Allais, 1988 Nobel Prize in Economics

    • Enrique

      –Reactionary (not necessarily racist) politicians fail because progressists and humanists are overrepresented in the fields of public education, journalism and justice, especially in Europe.

      Charlie, it looks like you think immigration is a threat. What I suggest is that you scale back economic output and lower your living standards in order to discourage immigrants from moving to France. Then you will understand what role immigratnts play in your society. Although immigration, like any social phenomenon, offers challenges, one of the most important is equal opportunity and acceptance. Some countries in Europe are better off than others in this respect. No, Charlie, immigration is not a social illness, discrimination and exclusion are. Why? Because those groups that wield power in society do so by exclusion. It’s all a matter of control and wealth distribution. If you were in power, immigrants would live (or some live today) like blacks in the United States in the 1950s. Your points of view on immigration reflect this.

  15. Tiwaz

    -“So instead you came back to Finland to whine about immigrants in Finland. Hey, Tiwaz, nobody goes around insulting other people like the way you do. When you do this you undermine your arguments. It is a poor debate strategy. ”

    As I have said, I could have stayed but did not like the place. So I came home where I feel comfortable.

    And now you little wankers come to my home and tell me that I must change my way of life because you want to both live in Finland but not live in Finland.

    As for debate, there is no debate here. You and your ilk never stand up and present any proof to support your ideology.

    You just repeat same, tired mantra “multiculturalism good. Canada!”

    Repeatedly those “arguments” are shot to pieces but in next “debate” you again just state “multiculturalism good. Canada!” like broken record.

    Once you start to actually debate, as in support your position with evidence and facts, you might get more debate out of me.

    -“Read history over and over again. Don’t skim over it and jump to your own conclusions. Multiculturalism plays an important role in keeping Canada and the United Kingdom together. ”

    You read the history. Canada was staying together as long as cultures which formed huge majority of population had extremely small differences. It was hardly multicultural with mainly British and French present.

    Today, with introduction of Middle Eastern etc groups who have totally different worldview, Canada is starting to fall apart.

    Same with Britain.

    -“After countless posts, I still do not understand what you defintion of multiculturalism is and how your vision of society works. Sorry, but a lot of us are lost on this.”

    I’ll explain it simply then. Multiculturalism, form which I oppose strongly, for me is when you have in same region multiple different cultures which are not all subjected to framework of single culture.

    IE, Finland is not multicultural with Finnish Swedes or Sami present, because they do not have culture which would conflict with Finnish society. Nor do they expect Finns to appease their cultural differences.

    Monocultural society is one where everyone is either represented by single culture, which may have variation within, or all various cultures submit themselves to framework and limitations of single culture.

    This is also only functional form of society, as it reduces the conflict between different groups.

  16. Tiwaz

    -“When Martin Luther King fought for civil rights (was he from a derelict culture?) he did not ask to pass any new laws just impose those on all the people that live in the country. You cannot build a society with double standards (civil rights apply to natives and immigrants have other sets of laws).”

    So why you whine when immigrants fail to fulfill same standards as Finns and suffer because of it?

    No double standards means also that there are no benefits offered to immigrants beyond those offered to natives.

    Which means, your inability to speak Finnish is just as much reason not to hire you as it would be for Finn. Find Finn who cannot speak Finnish and they will not get job any easier than immigrant not speaking Finnish.

    THAT is lack of double standards.

    But when you speak of not wanting double standards, you want to maintain all double standards which would benefit foreigners. In essence, your every post reeks of attitude that Finns should be second class citizens in their own country.

    -“And, yes, inclusion. Do you want another simple but very important word:acceptance. That is the key to healthy relations between two people never mind groups. And morals and values? Without them your society or mine would be reduced to rubble. ”

    How about you start preaching acceptance to immigrants?

    Because biggest problem is that immigrants do not grasp that they must accept that Finland, and France and whatever country you move into, is not like at home. You must accept the system and way of life of that country as it is.

    Or leave. Not demand that natives must accept your way of life.

    • Enrique

      –So why you whine when immigrants fail to fulfill same standards as Finns and suffer because of it?

      Because you THINK, SUPPOSE, that this is the case, it is then OK to discriminate?

      And about acceptance by immigrants of Finns, yes, I believe it is very important. Everything is one-way for you: foreigners want this, want special loopholes, etc. It is a two-way street all the way.

  17. Jonas G

    IE, Finland is not multicultural with Finnish Swedes or Sami present, because they do not have culture which would conflict with Finnish society. Nor do they expect Finns to appease their cultural differences.

    Hi Tiwaz, I find this part of your comment of this morning intriguing. Swedish-speaking Finns are not able to be in conflict with Finnish society because they are an integral part of it, in the same way it would be absurd to suggest that Finnish-speaking culture n Finland could be in conflict with Finland’s society – it’s also a part of it. I imagine you use the word “Finns” to mean only those who belong to the Finnish-speaking population in your last sentence. If so, I’d fully agree. It is strange though if you do, as I am sure a few months ago you wrote that Swedish-speaking Finns have some way of controlling the country and ‘forcing’ all Finnish-speakers to learn Swedish. Curious. I am glad to hear you’ve changed your mind and now embrace the bilingualism that is such a core of Finnishness and Finnish society.

    • Enrique

      Hi Jonas, great to hear from you again. Tiwaz uses funny logic when drawing the cultural and linguistic map of Finland. The fact that we are officially a bilingual country is insurance of the tolerance that will always exist in Finland. Thank you Swedish-speaking Finns!

  18. AllWillBeGood

    What a big disgrace Charlie??
    In general, the mainstream media coverage in the United States and the United Kingdom were all largely critical of the French police’s handling of the demonstrators. Describing the situation with words like “outrage” and “brutal,” the coverage largely sympathised with the protestors.

    “Sarkozy under fire after video shows brutal treatment of immigrants” declares the headline of the UK’s Independent.

    “French police caught on video dragging women along the ground,” read the Sky News headline published in both the UK and on its sister company’s website at Fox News.com

    “Police filmed dragging women and babies during protest,” CNN reported, echoing the same theme as Skynews.

  19. AllWillBeGood

    How many of these French national football team players have 3rd world country background Charlie? Take note of this —if you educate a man you educate a whole nation.
    Goalkeepers: Nicolas Douchez (Rennes), Stephane Ruffier (Monaco)

    Defenders: Aly Cissokho (Lyon), Mathieu Debuchy (Lille), Rod Fanni (Rennes), Philippe Mexes (Roma/ITA), Adil Rami (Lille), Mamadou Sakho (Paris St Germain), Benoit Tremoulinas (Bordeaux)

    Midfielders: Yohan Cabaye (Lille), Lassana Diarra (Real Madrid/ESP), Blaise Matuidi (Saint-Etienne), Yann Mvila (Rennes), Samir Nasri (Arsenal/ENG), Charles Nzogbia (Wigan/ENG), Moussa Sissoko (Toulouse)

    Strikers: Hatem Ben Arfa (Marseille), Karim Benzema (Real Madrid/ESP), Jimmy Briand (Lyon), Guillaume Hoarau (Paris St Germain), Jeremy Menez (Roma/ITA), Loic Remy (Nice)

    • Enrique

      Hi AllWillBeGood, thank you for pointing this out. It appears you follow the French football league.

      Facts and common sense are the racism’s and discrimination’s worst enemies. They are the very things that stop the progress of humankind.

  20. xyz

    I was wondering what the motivation for foreigners is to learn Finnish, if you can not even get a job after 15 years in the country and even so you have learned Finnish? That sounds odd. This means temp jobs until you retire. Every 3 months another job interview. Tons of applications and tons of rejections. What a life…

  21. Tiwaz

    -“Hi Tiwaz, I find this part of your comment of this morning intriguing. Swedish-speaking Finns are not able to be in conflict with Finnish society because they are an integral part of it, in the same way it would be absurd to suggest that Finnish-speaking culture n Finland could be in conflict with Finland’s society – it’s also a part of it. I imagine you use the word “Finns” to mean only those who belong to the Finnish-speaking population in your last sentence. If so, I’d fully agree. It is strange though if you do, as I am sure a few months ago you wrote that Swedish-speaking Finns have some way of controlling the country and ‘forcing’ all Finnish-speakers to learn Swedish. Curious. I am glad to hear you’ve changed your mind and now embrace the bilingualism that is such a core of Finnishness and Finnish society.”

    Culture and language same thing not be.

    Swedes once had different culture, at least those who immigrated from Sweden. Over generations they have had to accommodate to dominant Finnish culture.

    This has been aided by fact that Finnish and Swedish cultures have reasonably small gap. Result is that Swedish speakers do not have cultural attributes which would somehow conflict with Finnish culture, what may have existed has been forfeited.

    As for Swedish language, it is useless piece of bygone era which today drags down Finnish society by taking room from more useful language.

    Instead of having people learn Swedish, it should be left completely voluntary so that students could choose if they want to use their time to learn Swedish or some genuinely useful language.

    German, Mandarin or Russian come to my mind, both have far greater potential to benefit Finnish society long term.

    RKP has managed to hijack Finnish society as “hostage”, through their singleminded obsession of maintaining mandatory Swedish. They get to government time and time again by virtue of having no other agenda but mandatory Swedish. They are cheap and “safe” government partner to give some extra votes in parliament. Don’t touch Swedish and RKP will vote whatever rest of govenrment parties want.

    I wish one government had balls to leave RKP out hanging and start dismantling this pointless law.

    -“I was wondering what the motivation for foreigners is to learn Finnish, if you can not even get a job after 15 years in the country and even so you have learned Finnish? That sounds odd. This means temp jobs until you retire. Every 3 months another job interview. Tons of applications and tons of rejections. What a life…”

    And have you ever bothered to wonder how many “hotel and travel business”-professionals who are Finns actually are managering things they were trained for?

    I’ll tell you, damn few! There is huge overabudance of such people compared to managerial positions. Thus, unless you are lucky you have to look elsewhere.

    Why should Murat from the article be exception? Shoul he be preferred to managerial position instead of some other equally or more competent Finn?

    I am again stunned how you people make your claims without bothering to think about reasons behind situation, and how you eagerly apply double standards to try to justify your racist attitude towards Finns and Finland.

    -“Facts and common sense are the racism’s and discrimination’s worst enemies. They are the very things that stop the progress of humankind.”

    Amusing to see you speak of facts Enrique. You are the one who is trying to either deny or avoid them like plague.

    Like in your little “controversial document” about Finland, which in it’s summary is just loads of lies and racism.
    Like you expect that police should be made quiet of crimes committed by foreigners.

    You do not want truth or facts Enrique, you want only things which support your little fantasy of multiculturalism and everything else you close your eyes from.

    Facts are worst enemy of multiculturalism, because they prove how it is a failure.

    And racism? That is todays excuse for your own failures for immigrants. Never blame the immigrant, for they are perfect in every way. To ask them to look at mirror and first look for fault there is now racism!

    Everything which does not end up in bending over to immigrants is racism to you people!

    I hate racism above all else, but even more I hate people who try to use word racism as some kind of excuse for failures of immigrants themselves.

  22. xyz

    Why should Murat from the article be exception? Should he be preferred to managerial position instead of some other equally or more competent Finn?
    -But this guy worked as a travel manager in one of the most popular holiday destinations in Europe. You really think that he has not enough skills? That sounds odd to me.

  23. Tiwaz

    -“But this guy worked as a travel manager in one of the most popular holiday destinations in Europe. You really think that he has not enough skills? That sounds odd to me.”

    Working in Turkey is far call from working in Finland.
    Different work culture, different requirements.

    And have you grasped that there is VERY limited demand for travel managers. If there is no job, there is no job.

    And if there is a nice, cushy job, do you think that there aren’t dozen or so Finns applying for the job as well?

  24. xyz

    Working in Turkey is far call from working in Finland.
    Different work culture, different requirements.
    -Yeah exactly, and this guy is most likely also not able to learn those few differences. How was he able to become a manager in his field in his own country then? Honestly, If I go to a travel agent and want to book a flight e.g. to turkey then I think this guy knows much better whats going on there than any Finn.

    And if there is a nice, cushy job, do you think that there aren’t dozen or so Finns applying for the job as well?
    -I am quite sure that this guy did apply for jobs which are below his qualification in his field as the article said that he was not able to get a job in his field.

  25. Charlie

    AllWillBeGood:

    Why should I care that the majority of players on the French soccer teams are Africans?
    What does it prove, except they benefited from the French training system?
    Actually, do you know how many of Algeria’s national team players were actually trained in France?
    A vast, vast majority.
    Look it up. Many of Africa’s national teams use products of the French training system financed by French money, for their own national prestige.
    When they are good enough to play for France, they chose France. When they don’t make the cut, they go for their country of origin. Simple as that.

    As for me, as a citizen of a developed country, I don’t need to base my self esteem on the success of a mere sports team. I leave that to the third world.
    I value my quality of life, because I have one (when it’s not disrupted by third world immigrants like those who repeatedly damage my neighborhood).

    The folks mentioned in these articles you quote, being dragged on the ground, were immigrants evicted from a place they had no right to live in, who refused to bulge after being told to evacuate a street. Some of them were illegals (a fact that their spokesman nonchalantly brushes aside). This collective was infringing the immigration laws of France by representing the interests of illegals who use jus solis to claim welfare benefits from a country that is not theirs.
    Because that’s how it works here (and in many other developed countries): poor saps enter the country, lay low for a while and then demand passports based on the fact that they have lived here for so long, and their children have been raised here, despite the fact that their entire stay was illegal.

    The article you mention tells clearly that there was nothing more than bruises in cuts, and there exists just as many articles pointing to the French police forces’ restraint during ethnic riots, whereas a growing part of the public would like them to respond in a more proactive manner.

    • Enrique

      –As for me, as a citizen of a developed country, I don’t need to base my self esteem on the success of a mere sports team. I leave that to the third world.

      I am happy for you Charlie because the scandalous way the French team performed in South Africa would have given birth to a lot of grey hairs. Remember that France HAS immigrants, sons and grandchildren of immigrants. They exist in the present tense not in the future. They are a part of our society. Your point of view is that they do not exist (or in the future), don’t have a history. By fighting for their rights and place in society they are creating that history and place you want to erase.

  26. xyz

    I think you should maybe discover the roots why those immigrants are violent.

    If you move for example from France to the UK then you are also an immigrant. Would you be happy if everybody would say you are violent just because because of the fact that you are an immigrant?

    Once, I was working in Finland with a guy from France (he also moved to Finland because he had a Finnish girlfriend). He told me that he has an MBA from one of the best Unis in France. Guess what, he was 1 year unemployed in Finland even so he comes from a developed country 🙂

  27. Osmo

    Very Interesting. However, you have not addressed the failings of Multiculturalism in Canada. Nowhere in the Canadian History books does it say that Pierre Elliot Trudeau’s Multiculturalism saved the country from falling apart. By what means could it achieve that anyway? Could it do so by watering down the existing English and French cultures perhaps? Thus creating a society that is less English and less French? Thereby drowning out the two sides with massive numbers of Asians? (We love Asians, that is not the issue here) My observations in situ, is that it appears to work and it is advertised widely as doing so, but in reality, it is a failure. Let’s talk about reality, not theories. What do you know about both the beneficial and detrimental aspects of Multiculturalism? Let’s be honest. Is it all positive? I think not. We love the immigrants we have, but at the same time, we are leery of the long term effect of large influxes of immigrants from the East. Why because they are resistant to intigration, by their own volition. They want to be separate, they discourage their kids from intermarriage etc. etc. etc. You only see the good side, and that is fine, if it makes you feel better. But there is the cold reality too. I see both sides, and I admit there are some good points – the food for example, but is that enough to say I want more ghettos, and the existing ones expanded? NO! Remember, most Asians segregate themselves – they are not pushed into ghettos.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_multiculturalism

    • Enrique

      Osmo, read your history closely and these things will become clearer: why multiculturalism became a part of Canadian society. Then, take a look at what the social policy aims to do in Canada. The way you speak against it show me that you do not understand its aims. About restricting immigration from the east… That was done for quite a while in the last century.

  28. Osmo

    If you go to the link above, you will find that instead of uniting America and Canada, multiculturalism actually was divisive. I don’t know whose history books you read, but they aren’t the ones most of us read.

  29. Osmo

    I don’t have to read my history closely. I know exactly what happened. The reason Multicultural policy became a part of Canadian society is one man: Pierre Trudeau and his vision of a multicultural Utopian society. He was a Marxist down deep, who idolized Fidel Castro. He found himself in the middle of a separatist revolution that threatened to split the country. He declared the War Measures Act and arrested thousands of people in the middle of the night without having to say why. He put down the revolution. So, do you think that declaring Canada a multicultural society saved the country? I don’t think so. The French are very anti multicultural because the see it as a threat to their minority status that is supposed to be an equal participation in Canada. With millions of newcomers coming, they just believe that it is a ploy to drown them out. That is the fact in Canada and multiculturalism in the name of diversity does not keep the country together. What does keep it together is the fear of what would happen if it split. This fear was the reason the French voted (by a slim margin) to stay in Canada. Thousands of people from Western Canada went to Quebec to encourage them to stay. This had nothing to do with multicultural policy. People do not trust that what the government says is really good for the country. Government has been wrong too many times about too many things. People mistrust government and politicians in general.

    “The fear that the multiculturalism policy is promoting too much diversity at the expense of unity has been voiced increasingly in recent years. Critics say the policy is divisive because it emphasizes what is different, rather than the values that are Canadian. Canadian culture and symbols, it is felt, are being discarded in the effort to accommodate other cultures. On the other hand, defenders of Canada’s approach to multiculturalism argue that it encourages integration by telling immigrants they do not have to choose between preserving their cultural heritage and participating in Canadian society. Rather, they can do both.” – Parliament Library of Canada.

    However, the promotion of preserving cultural identity does not extend to everyone, only visible minorities. Another failure of multiculturalism. The effect is destruction of Canadian identity.

    Canadians are split on the issue – split means divisive. Diversity does not promote unity. Similarity promotes unity – when people can identify with others in a way that they can see that others are like them. Multiculturalism as it is being promoted in Canada, tries to emphasize differences and telling the rest of Canadians to accept these differences. So most Canadians say OK, we’ll accept them, but they never really understand the differences. They do it because they are told to do so. You see, there really isn’t the unity as it is supposed to be. It is mostly due to people believing that they should accept other people who are different – a relatively superficial acceptance.

    So, my friend, you read your Canadian history and get back to me. But get all sides of the story…from the Canadian perspective. I am not totally against multiculturalism, but I know that the smaller groups of Canadians of European ethnicity have been largely drowned in a sea of Asians, who monopolize all the air waves in Vancouver and smaller groups can hardly afford the air time anymore, because Asians can afford to advertise to a larger number of people and therefore pay more for air time. You have to consider every possible result of multiculturalism before you promote it in Finland. Take off your rose colored glasses and take a closer look. Have you done so?

  30. Osmo

    Addendum:
    If I were a native American in the 1800’s and I met you, and we had a discussion about immigration, which side would you be on – for or against? That is the position I am in: you are the immigrant or their decedent, and I am the native. You are now telling me that you are right, that we Finns should accept more immigration, because it is “good for us.” That is the bottom line of your position. My position is naturally the opposite: there is no proof that more immigration will enhance the Finns’ life significantly. On the contrary, there is evidence that it will harm the country in the long run, since the lions share of the immigrants will probably not integrate, or “mesh” properly with the existing Finnish culture and therefore they will always be a fringe element as for example the Roma. They will be working toward rights for themselves like the Russians in Estonia who want language rights etc. Mark my words, this massive immigration has to be stopped by Finns themselves, just as our grandfathers and fathers refused to be integrated into a Swedish nor Russian culture. We are stubborn Finns who want to dictate who comes here. We are generous too, but smart enough not to be taken in by Liberal Marxist ideology that will just ruin the country. We do not sing Kumbaya very well.

    That is my opinion and I’m sticking to it.

    • Enrique

      –If I were a native American in the 1800′s and I met you, and we had a discussion about immigration, which side would you be on – for or against? That is the position I am in: you are the immigrant or their decedent, and I am the native.

      Wrong. You are definitely NOT First Nations. A speaker that I heard told the audience something very revealing: Whenever we start speaking of ourselves as an indigenous group, we start to borderline racism. I would add that that kind of thinking acts like a fertilizer that encourages your xenophobia and racism to bloom. Don’t insult First Nations Canadians by stating that you belong to some indigenous group.

      Did I say that countries accept immigrants only because it is “good for us?” They accept immigrants because their is an economic and demographic need. There are no hula dancers waiting at the airport welcoming immigrants when they arrive in a country. The other factor is globalization. Many have said it and I agree totally with them that people have always immigrated since the dawn of time. Humankind has always built roads because it does not believe in isolation.

  31. Tiwaz

    -“Yeah exactly, and this guy is most likely also not able to learn those few differences. How was he able to become a manager in his field in his own country then?”

    Different requirements. I guess for you it is hard to grasp that Finland is not Turkey.

    -“Honestly, If I go to a travel agent and want to book a flight e.g. to turkey then I think this guy knows much better whats going on there than any Finn.”

    You mean he has some great insight on flight schedules? You are grasping ever thinner straws.
    Agent in Finland does not need to be familiar with destination, they have people there to provide agents with information.

    What agent in source nation must have is ability to relate and communicate with client in their preferred way.

    -“I am quite sure that this guy did apply for jobs which are below his qualification in his field as the article said that he was not able to get a job in his field.”

    Irrelevant. I asked if you think there weren’t lots of Finns applying for same jobs.
    Also, are his qualifications recognized in Finnish system?

    -“Once, I was working in Finland with a guy from France (he also moved to Finland because he had a Finnish girlfriend). He told me that he has an MBA from one of the best Unis in France. Guess what, he was 1 year unemployed in Finland even so he comes from a developed country :)”

    And his Finnish skills were fluent?

    They weren’t? How did I guess…

    He was an idiot. MBA… The very field which is NOT niche and thus not one where lack of Finnish skills might be overlooked.

  32. Osmo

    Any opposition to immigration is met with the catch words “xenophobia and racism” which are not appropriate here. I am not those. I am a Finn and am proud of Native Americans re-establishing their identity. I follow their progress with interest. No you are wrong. I love all people. BTW “racism” comes from the concept of “race” and you should know as an educated person, that the concept of race does not exist. In fact Untied Nations abolished it after the second world war. The only valid concept I could be accused of is hate. But that is not in me. I enjoy associating with all people of the earth, BUT – contrary to your assertion, I am not xenophobic or racist – am “protectionist.”

    My attitude to immigrants is that many jobs are being shipped out of the country to Portugal, China, Hong Kong etc., and there is less need for outside help. We should make sure that the Finns are employed and then, look to our brothers in Europe and post jobs there, first, before we jump to the conclusion that the only place we can get employees is the Middle East, Pakistan, Arabia, Iran, Iraq etc. etc. etc. This is what I am against because I do not believe that Finns want to bring in people from that part of the world. What the Finns want, they can have, but what they don’t – please don’t force them on us. We love those people, but we love them over there.

  33. Osmo

    “Whenever we start speaking of ourselves as an indigenous group, we start to borderline racism.”

    Oh sure, we have to share with the whole world what we have, regardless if it destroys what we have in the process. Why? How is it borderline racism to not share what you have worked for hundreds of years. Yes, today with our Internet and TV etc. greedy eyes have recently focused on Finland. They want what we have. Do we give it to them or…be called racist? Interesting question. I don’t understand the connection with not wanting to share with someone and being racist. I suppose the assumption is that if you don’t want a Somali or Pakistani in Finland, you must be racist, or something like that. Firstly, one of the main reasons for not wanting these people is their religion, and as you know, religion is not a race. So how can one be a racist if that is the only objection? And I believe this is one of the main objections Finns have, although I cannot rule out the element of hating brown people because of their color. Let me ask you, which country in Europe would volunteer to receive 100 Roma? Would you call them racist if the refused? Then the same applies to receiving Pakistani and Somali.

    • Enrique

      –Oh sure, we have to share with the whole world what we have, regardless if it destroys what we have in the process.

      Do you think this is the case? I don’t think so. Immigration has to do with economics. Countries need labor and immigrants search for better standards of living. It is that simple. After both start to benefit from their relationship, we enter into the political sphere. As I have mentioned it many times, countries like Canada have a zillion times better chance of surving as a nation than countries which have hang ups with Otherness. I will not mention Finland but Russia as an example. It was one of the reasons why it fell to pieces.

  34. abroad

    What problem do you have with people from the Middle East, Pakistan, Arabia, Iran, Iraq etc.? Do you know people from there by person?

  35. Osmo

    Furthermore, what makes you think Finns are not aboriginal? What makes a person an aboriginal? Why do you think Finns cannot claim their country on the basis of having been there for thousands of years? What about Italians, are they aboriginal? Inuit? Haida? Finns are not immigrants on their land, we know that now with the DNA information we have. In fact, they are probably the original people of Europe, and they are now only in the area of Scandinavia and northern Russia, having been absorbed further south by Germanics etc. Finns are aboriginal, having lived in the north since the Ice Ages. And that is not racist.

    • Enrique

      –Why do you think Finns cannot claim their country on the basis of having been there for thousands of years?

      Because it is not true. Finns are not like the Inuits. In the first place they have a country and have coexisted with Europe for a long, long time. Even Vikings had settlements here and they traded with Russia. Why is it important that Finn be called “Native Europeans?” Is it because you are into eugenics and that that determines ethnicity? I personally think it is a lot of baloney.

  36. Tiwaz

    -“Because it is not true. Finns are not like the Inuits. In the first place they have a country and have coexisted with Europe for a long, long time. Even Vikings had settlements here and they traded with Russia. Why is it important that Finn be called “Native Europeans?” Is it because you are into eugenics and that that determines ethnicity? I personally think it is a lot of baloney.”

    Give me proof that Finns are not native inhabitants of this land.

    That few vikings had houses here is not proof of opposite. Finns were here as far as anyone knows straight after ice receded.

    It is just your sick desire to have Finns and Finland degraded, belittled and destroyed which makes you think Finns do not have right to this land through unbroken line of inhabitance.

    -“Do you think this is the case? I don’t think so. Immigration has to do with economics.”

    Short term economics which cause collapse like US housing bubble.

    -“Countries need labor and immigrants search for better standards of living. It is that simple.”

    Countries need labor which can do something USEFUL.
    Finland does not need huge percentage of people coming here, and even bigger percentage of people who would want to come here. Why? Because they have no skills which Finland demands.

    -“After both start to benefit from their relationship, we enter into the political sphere. As I have mentioned it many times, countries like Canada have a zillion times better chance of surving as a nation than countries which have hang ups with Otherness. I will not mention Finland but Russia as an example. It was one of the reasons why it fell to pieces.”

    No, Canada is actually a failed state.
    If you bothered to read history and learn from it, you would notice that only societies which have stood the test of time are ones with UNITY.

    United societies stand and survive because they are strong. Those which resemble Canada have fallen after very short periods of success, because internal divisions and conflicts caused by fractured society fall apart so easily.

    Future belongs to unified societies, not to fractured ones. And multiculturalism is all about fractures.

Leave a Reply