Mushis Azizi: Mörköfobiasta eduskunnan puhemieheksi

by , under Muhis Azizi

Muhis Azizi

Minua, kuten varmasti montaa muutakin politiikkaa seuraavaa on hämmentänyt mediassa esiin noussut Perussuomalaisten Maria Lohelan blogikirjoitus “Ovatko muslimit sittenkin vain mörköjä?”. Blogikirjoituksessa Lohela on erittäin huolissaan islamtaustaisten maahanmuuttajien asumisesta Suomessa. Islamtaustaisten humanitäärinen maahanmuutto on hänen mukaansa jo nyt ja tulevaisuudessakin sellainen asia, joka on suurimpia tätä maata koettelevia haasteita, ellei jopa ongelma. Perusteluksi Lohela mainitsee islamuskoisten “ahdasmieliset näkemykset elämästä”sekä aikamoisen kirjon erilaisia uhkakuvia ja pelkoja muslimien lisääntymisestä ja sen seuraamuksista. Pitänee vielä mainita, että kyseinen henkilö valittiin hiljattain eduskunnan puhemieheksi.

Näyttökuva 2015-5-31 kello 9.52.06

Mikäli ajatellaan Lohelan tavoin, että nimenomaan islamtaustaiset maahanmuuttajat eivät sovellu asumaan Suomessa, niin herää kysymys, kuinka tällainen henkilö soveltuu edustamaan Suomea kansainvälisesti esimerkiksi niissä maissa, joissa valtauskonto on islam, tai edes maallistunut islam? Miten se voi vaikuttaa maailmalla suhtautumisesta Suomeen? Minä itse uskon demokratiaan, mutta syvästi ajattelen, onko tällaisen arvomaailman omaava eduskunnan puhemies sopiva edustaja mm. maamme arvovallan ja kauppasuhteiden edistämisen kannalta. Monissa Suomen yhteistyömaissa on hallituksissa jopa hallitsijana islamin uskoinen henkilö. On varmaa, että Lohelan islamvastainen blogikirjoitus hyvin suurella todennäköisyydellä tulee leviämään maailmalle kulovalkean tavoin.

On pöyristyttävää havaita, kuinka rajoittunut maailmankatsomus voi Valtiomme edustajalla olla.  Lähes joka välistä kuulee mainittavan, kuinka kyseisellä henkilöllä on oikeus ilmaista mielipiteensä ja vedotaan sananvapauslakiin, mikä toki sallittakoon senkin uhalla, että joku saattaa siitä loukkaantua. Onko se sitten sivistynyt tapa ilmaista jokin asia, joka Lohelan mielestä maassamme kaipaa muutosta, ehkä ei. Ja toki minulla kuten muillakin on valinnan vapaus päättää luenko toisten mielipidekirjoituksia vaiko en. Mutta jos kyseessä on henkilö, joka edustaa maata jossa asun ja jonka lakia seuraan, odotan vähintään, että tämä henkilö kunnioittaa muitakin lakisäädöksiä jotka kuuluvat jokaisen täällä asuvan ihmisen perusoikeuksiin olla yhdenvertaisia. Edustaja, joka edustaa maata, jonka lakiin on kirjoitu vapaudesta harjoittaa omaa uskontoaan, mikä se lienee sitten onkin. Ja vähintään jos henkilö itse peräänkuuluttaa sivistyneisyyden perään, olisi kaikkien kannalta hyödyllisintä aloittaa omalla esimerkillään ja paneutua asiaan sivistyneesti.

En voi myöskään olla huomioimatta sitä, että samantyylinen ja samaa aihetta koskeva blogikirjoittelu vaikuttaa olevan yhdellä jos toisellakin eduskuntaan päässeellä blogiarkistossaan, ja toinen yhdistävä tekijä on ollut perussuomalaisuus. Mutta mainittakoon kuitenkin, että ystäväpiiriini kuuluu moni “perussuomalainen”, joten voi todeta että ahdasmielinen arvomaailma ei välttämättä ole puoluesidonnainen seikka.

Maria Lohelan blogikirjoituksen luettuani aloin kyllä vakavasti pohtimaan, että miten näillä eväillä nyt lähdetään integroittamaan maahanmuuttajia Suomeen, kun eduskunnan puhemieheksi valittu henkilö kantaa tällaisia aatteita. Eteenkin kun Lohela väittää pyrkivänsä aikaansaamaan Suomesta tasa-arvoisen ja sivistyneen maan? Tällaisella maahanmuuttajaryhmien “salkuttamisella” ei taaskaan päästä kuin ojasta allikkoon, ja se on erittäin huolestuttavaa. Ja jos asiaa lähdetään ajattelemaan vielä laaja-alaisemmin, niin maailman globalisoituminen on asia joka on todellisuutta, tahdoimme sitä tai emme. Sen vuoksi jokaisen meistä tulisi pyrkiä rakentamaan siltoja, eikä hajoittamaan niitä ja kansamme edustajien tulisi olla niitä, jotka toimivat tässä asiassa esimerkkeinä.
Muhis Azizi,
Turun kaupunginvaltuutettu (kok.),
Turun nuorisolautakunnan puheenjohtaja

Alkuperäisen blogikirjoituksen voi lukea tästä.

Tämä blogikirjoitus julkaistiin Migrant Talesissä luvalla.

  1. PS voter

    BTW, Muhis Azizi has also said that Finland should stop taking in more refugees, which got lot of positive comments on Hommaforum.

  2. PS voter

    A Finnish-Somali, Nur Mohamed, from National Coalition Party, has also said that he is happy that Finland cuts development aid. That has also received positive comments on Hommaforum. It seems that some of our immigrants and members of Hommaforum share many values.

    • Migrant Tales

      Nur Mohamed is entitled to his opinions. I disagree with his point of view. He is a good example that you cannot paint migrants with a single brush and that some migrants are more anti-immigration than members of the PS. In the United States some call that kine of person an Uncle Tom. But as I said, everyone is entitled to his opinions. I can chose with whom I debate. That’s my right.

    • PS voter

      Do you then think that Finland should take more debt just in order to pay more development aid? Or should Finland have even more austerity measures in Finland in order to pay more development aid?

    • Migrant Tales

      Or why not look at it this way: Development aid is important for countries that need it. At least it may give people in such countries an opportunity to improve their lives and not have to flee in perilous conditions to Europe, where they may die on the way.

    • Marshall Niles

      Ps Voter: My opinion. Finland should keep open borders, process each immigration request individually, without being biased. Does the immigrant have family in Finland, are they qualified to work? will they be willing to partake in integration programs and language courses, are they competent to run a business etc etc. Because that doesn’t generalize against a “finn and non finn”. Finland should also work with the rest of EU in debating and discussing a plan that would ease the refugee influx burden on all countries and also provide a humanitarian solution to people who are crying for help. If done right, most refugees are able to give back more to their country of solace, provided they are given a stable foundation to stand on, and the right guidance, and of course respect.

      I dont remember Africa turning down Europeans when they came plundering for oil. Remember, the EU would not be where it is today without Oil from Africa;) How hard is it to rub shoulders with Iceland, Germany and some other successful countries to understand how to deal with the refugee crisis, instead of broadcasting horribly racist diatribes like “Romas are criminals, african men should be forcibly sterilized, Nigger, True Finnish blood only, etc etc”. It is because these politicians are able to get away with saying something like this, that blogs and articles are screaming bloody murder. Its a natural instinct to defend and protect those who silently accept the abuse and walk their days with their head bowed down because they are labeled as a foreigner.

      I mean, there are so many ways this can be resolved, but in a more diplomatic way. Unfortunately, some politicians wear the pants of a pin brained moron, and are able to get away with it.

      In progressively developed countries like Canada, Australia (and I hate to say this), USA, politicians have experienced the wrath of the judicial system when they have dared word out any comment that remotely sounds racist or encourages xenophobia amongst the masses. Unfortunately, it seems the nationalistic politicians probably sauna with the judiciary system, which is why they are still enjoying the benefits of a tax payer payed salary.

    • PS voter

      Marshall Niles:

      “My opinion. Finland should keep open borders, process each immigration request individually, without being biased.”

      If the borders were open, there wouldn’t even be immigration request and processing them. Having that kind of system implies that the borders aren’t open, but controlled. And Perussuomalaiset is not against controlled and work based immigration, no mater where that person is coming from.

      “Finland should also work with the rest of EU in debating and discussing a plan that would ease the refugee influx burden on all countries and also provide a humanitarian solution to people who are crying for help.”

      No we shouldn’t. This would be extremely expensive to Finland, it would encourage much more persons from development countries to come and would eventually lead the collapse of our social security and healthcare systems as we couldn’t afford to provide those services for enormous number of persons who cannot really effectively employ themselves here.

      “If done right, most refugees are able to give back more to their country of solace, provided they are given a stable foundation to stand on, and the right guidance, and of course respect.”

      This is pure fantasy. On average, persons from third world countries with little or no education will never provide net profit to this country, which places emphasize to high education. It has been estimated in Sweden and Norway that on average, such person costs about 1 million euros during lifetime (it is about the same sum that is estimated as the cost of marginalized native Finn). And persons coming from certain countries, have illiteracy rate of 90 % and quite often they don’t speak even English. Of course, there are some exceptions to this, but it doesn’t change the big picture.

      “I dont remember Africa turning down Europeans when they came plundering for oil.”

      It is no use to try blame Finns for colonialism, slavery etc. We Finns haven’t been taking slaves and going on colonizing. It has been others who have taken us slaves and colonized us.

      And as far as I know, the African countries get market value of the oil deals. It is not our fault if the Africans don’t select better leaders. They should select leaders who aren’t so corrupted and would spend the oil money more wisely, for the benefit of the whole country instead of just the kleptocratic leaders.

      “True Finnish blood”

      I don’t see Perussuomalaiset going on saying things like that, so this seems to be a strawman.

      “In progressively developed countries like Canada, Australia (and I hate to say this), USA, politicians have experienced the wrath of the judicial system when they have dared word out any comment that remotely sounds racist or encourages xenophobia amongst the masses.”

      They haven’t seemed to be that interested in taking in the huge number of (economic) refugees from Africa/Southern Europe to their countries. I wonder why… Australia even sends every single one of boat refugees to refugee camps outside Australia, in some third world countries. This has stopped the human trafficking and also drowning at sea. So far, this seems to be only policy that seems to work and is not just wishful thinking.

  3. PS voter

    “Or why not look at it this way: Development aid is important for countries that need it.”

    Money does not grow on trees and at the moment we are broke. Besides, Finnish money is just a drop in a ocean in any case and we are not responsible for them.

    During better economic times I could support limited development aid, but it should be more intelligent than the current aid. For example, stopping spread of Ebola, eliminating Boko Haram, providing contraceptives to stop unsustainable population explosion and spread of AIDS etc. And of course, promoting mutually beneficial trade.

    “At least it may give people in such countries an opportunity to improve their lives and not have to flee in perilous conditions to Europe, where they may die on the way.”

    So far development aid seems to have just accelerated the population explosion and made things just worse. It is totally unsustainable as we just keep getting more hungry mouths to feed although we have limited ability to feed them. And many people from developing countries feel that development aid is just making things worse. Nur Mohamed is one of them. Economist Dambisa Moyo is another example.

  4. steve

    Good and balanced writing from Mushis Azizi. There has been a lot of talk (or lot of noise) about this Lohela-case in this blog, and finally I see someone raise an essential thing in understanding it: free speech.

    Look, he doesn’t call Lohela a racist or a fascist, he doesn’t attack her as a person, there’s nothing like the following:

    “Somebody who knew Lohela told Migrant Tales that she appears to be a sensible person until you slip the term Muslim in the conversation. She then turns into a Ms Hyde.”

    There is no mention of any ‘coded message’ of PS. There’s no nonsense about PS want to keep Finland white.

    Now this is a good example for you to follow in this blog, this is civilized discussion, this encourages dialogue.

    • Migrant Tales

      Azizi is a politician and speaks that way. The reason why I reported his opinion piece is because he questions Lohela’s election as speaker of parliament. Maybe you should read once again his opinion piece to get the meaning.

      If you fancy Lohela that’s your thing. I don’t and have no problem in saying this in the most precise and clearest language possible.

      Thank you for your suggestion but I can make decisions on my own. Moreover, there is nothing civilized about racism and Islmophobia. You do agree, no?

  5. steve

    “Maybe you should read once again his opinion piece to get the meaning. ”

    Don’t worry, I understood it correctly the first time.

    “If you fancy Lohela”

    Fancy her? Why oh why can’t we talk about this like grown ups 😉

    ” Moreover, there is nothing civilized about racism and Islmophobia.”

    Well, as much as there is in PS-phobia?

Leave a Reply