YLE: True Finns Publish Election Manifesto

by , under All categories, Enrique

Comment: The first thing that struck me about the True Finns’ sixty-nine-page election manifesto was the first sentence. It states that the True Finns are a party  based on “honesty, justice, humanity, equality, respect for work and entrepreneurship as well as spiritual growth.” The terms that especially caught my eye  were “humanity” and “equality.”

When the True Finns speak of  “humanity” and “equality” they mean Finns. It doesn’t include refugees and immigrants never mind other minorities like the Swedish-speaking population. In their manifesto they state that they are ready to lower international aid by 200 million euros, tighten asylum laws, lower Swedish-language subsidies, social benefits to immigrants as well as tax the rich. If the True Finns had their way, Finland should have the right to decide under which circumstances a foreigner can move to this country.

Even though they do not directly demand Finland leave the EU, they are against “Finland’s EU membership” being mentioned in the Constitution.

The manifesto states that immigrants must respect Finnish laws and pay taxes (duh!). Don’t the majority of immigrants do?

They also argue, without giving any details, that immigrants must respect Finnish cultural norms. Does this mean that new immigrants must buy Koskenkorva on weekends and get drunk?

The manifesto, which only uses the term “multiculturalism” five times, says that it isn’t feasible to populate cities with unemployed immigrants because the same apartments could be rented to Finns with work. These jobless people would be moved to remote areas of the country.  Unemployed Finns could remain in the cities. See what Helsingin Sanomat writes (in Finnish) about the matter.

Here is the link to the election manifesto.One of our bloggers, Tuomas, has translated the section on immigration policy.

What do you think?

ET

__________

The populist True Finns Party has unveiled its manifesto for the upcoming parliamentary election. It advocates tax increases for the higher paid, opposes the mention of Finland’s EU membership in the country’s constitution and demands cuts in social benefits for immigrants.

To continue reading click here.

  1. William O'Gorman

    This is great news! Finally people can really see just how fantastic this party truly is. I mean what a great manifesto to take Finland into the 21st century. So proud of those Truly True Finns! ….I feel a small tear forming….great stuff…

    • Enrique

      Hi William, scary…I mean good stuff! But don’t worry, the True Finns are for equality. Ups! That does not include us. If we become unemployed and rent an apartment from the municipality we could be moved to some sparsely populated community. Yes, really, great stuff!

    • Enrique

      It’s pretty interesting to note that everytime I ask a Finn if they are worried about the True Finns they say no. Certainly they have nothing to worry about. It’s the immigrants and refugees that are going to be treated like second-class citizens if they had their way. That is explains why there is so much concern among some people.

    • Enrique

      One of the matters that I found especially disturbing in the True Finns’ election manifesto was the denial of cultural diversity, or multiculturalism. They claim that multiculturalism would not exist if there weren’t monocultures. Despite all this confusing double-talk about the difference between “multicultural” and “monocultural,” the manifesto does not even explain what the two are. They do this because they don’t know themselves nor understand the concept well enough.

      What does “monoculture” mean to the True Finns? In my opinion, “monoculture” is only a pretext for them to deny immigrants and minorities recognition and rights. They, as the so-called “monoculturalists” have the same equal rights to claim Finland as their culture and home.

      This is one of many good examples of how the True Finns would exclude immigrants, refugees and minorities from Finnish society even if they tell you in the first sentence that they are a party that upholds “equality.” The proper question is “equality” for whom.

      The way that the True Finns deny immigrants and minorities their equal rights is on dubious grounds like ethnicity, language and (mono)culture.

      It is incredible to note that some people still think this way in the twenty-first century.

  2. xyz

    It says: “Those immigrants granted a residence permit should not receive social benefits. ”
    Not that I am after social benefits, however I was wondering what those 600.000 first and second generation Finns (or 1,3 million third or subsequent) Finns would think if social benefits would be cut for them in the country they reside? (Compared to 140.000 immigrants in Finland).

    Finland is not an attractive country for foreigners. It’s hard to get a job, the language is difficult to learn etc. I mean who would like to live permanently under such conditions? If I wouldn’t have my girlfriend here I would think twice if I would come/stay here.

    My boss (a Finn) lived 10 years in London. After coming back to Finland looking for a job he was told that his Finnish is not good enough (over the period of 1 year hunting for a job). So I was wondering what the chances are to find a job if you learn Finnish as a second language? At least immigrants create jobs for Finnish teachers 🙂

  3. Tony Garcia

    “One of the matters that I found especially disturbing in the True Finns’ election manifesto was the denial of cultural diversity, or multiculturalism.”

    So did Ireland, Germany, UK and France. They are just caching up with the rest of Europe. You are the one lagging behind.

    “It doesn’t include refugees and immigrants…”

    Refugees? Not really. Immigrants? I does the good ones.

    “In their manifesto they state that they are ready to lower international aid by 200 million euros…”

    Not good enough, it should cut more. Finland can be a Finnish social welfare office. Finland cannot be a global welfare office.

    “…tighten asylum laws…”

    About time.

    “lower Swedish-language subsidies”

    I don’t care…

    “social benefits to immigrants”

    Never needed, I don’t care…

    “as well as tax the rich.”

    I think Perus should stick to immigration and leave the rest with Kokoomus.

    • Enrique

      –Refugees? Not really. Immigrants? I does the good ones.

      I think this shows, Tony, that you are even skeptical of assimilation. You know perfectly well that these measures can be challenged in court and are against the spirit of our society and the laws.

  4. Tony Garcia

    I think we already established here who decides what our laws and spirit of society are.

    “What is the first thing you must learn about a democracy? The minority respects the votes of the majority, always.”

    • Enrique

      –“What is the first thing you must learn about a democracy? The minority respects the votes of the majority, always.”

      What, are you now the majority? Don’t get too delusional by the True Finns.

  5. Willie

    I’ve got a little experiment going on regarding the upcoming elections- I sent the following email to the various political parties. A few responses have already come back. I figure once most of the parties reply, I’ll make a post on my blog (willielahti.blogspot.com) concerning their responses. For those of you who are Finnishly-challenged, I have put the same text in English below.

    Nimeni on Will. Sain viime syksynä Suomen kansalaisuuden, mikä tarkoittaa, että olen nyt oikeutettu äänestämään tulevissa eduskuntavaaleissa. En kuulu mihinkään puolueeseen enkä vielä tiedä, ketä äänestän. Siksi kirjoitan teille. Aion lähettää tämän viestin kaikille puolueille, joilla on ehdokkaita eduskuntavaaleissa. Maahanmuuttajana maahanmuuttopoliittiset kysymykset ovat luonnollisesti minulle tärkeitä.

    Mikä on puolueenne virallinen kanta maahanmuuttoon? Mitä mieltä puolueenne on maahanmuuttajien integroinnista suomalaiseen kantaväestöön?

    Maahanmuutto ja maahanmuuttajiin liittyvät asiat ovat olleet kuuma aihe mediassa viime vuosina. Usein vaikuttaa siltä, että keskustelut käsittelevät lähinnä pakolaisia ja pakolaisiin liittyviä kysymyksiä. Todellisuudessa suurin osa maahanmuuttajista on täällä kuitenkin rakkauden, työn, tai molempien takia. Itse muutin Suomeen mentyäni naimisiin suomalaisen naisen kanssa. Olen ollut oma-aloitteinen ja ahkera veronmaksaja koko sen ajan, kun olen asunut Suomessa. Sama pätee myös moneen muuhun maahanmuuttajaan: me käymme töissä, maksamme veroja ja kasvatamme lapsemme osaksi suomalaista yhteiskuntaa.

    Miksi tätä hiljaista enemmistöä ei ole huomioitu, kun on keskusteltu maahanmuuttoasioista? Miksi kukaan ei ole kysynyt meiltä, mikä olisi tehokkain tapa integroitua suomalaiseen yhteiskuntaan?

    Uutena Suomen kansalaisena olen äärimmäisen ylpeä siitä, että voin nyt osallistua täysivaltaisesti demokratiaan. Pidän itseäni hyvin asioista perillä olevana, ja seuraan politiikkaa eri medioiden kautta. En ole vielä päättänyt, ketä äänestän tulevissa eduskuntavaaleissa.

    Mitä siis oikeastaan haluan kysyä, taitaa olla tämä: Miksi minun maahanmuuttajana tulisi äänestää juuri sinua tai muita puolueesi ehdokkaita?

    Arvostaisin todella paljon, jos jollain puolueenne edustajalla olisi aikaa vastata kysymyksiini. Odotan mielenkiinnolla eri puolueiden vastauksia, jotta voin objektiivisesti vertailla vastauksia ennen kuin teen päätöksen ehdokkaastani.

    Kunnioittaen

    Will

    My name is Will. Last fall I was granted Finnish citizenship, which means I am now eligible to vote in the upcoming general election. I have no official party affiliation and I have not decided who I plan on voting for. This is why I am writing this letter. I plan on sending it to all of the political parties who will be fielding candidates in the coming election. As an immigrant, immigrant issues are important to me. What is your parties’ official line on immigration? How does your party stand on the issue of integration?

    Immigration and immigrant issues have been a hot topic in the years preceding the next election. All too often it seems like the discussion focuses on refugees and refugee issues. The reality is that most of us who have chosen to immigrate to Finland are here because of love, work, or a combination of the two. In my own case, I came to Finland because I married a Finn. I have been a productive, taxpaying member of society for most of my time in Finland. There are many immigrants out there who have had the same experience as I have. We work, we pay taxes, and we raise our children to be a part of Finnish society. Why has there been no focus this silent majority in the immigrant community? Why has nobody asked us what we feel would be the most effective manner in which to assist immigrants in the integration process?

    As a new Finnish citizen I am extremely proud that I am now able to participate fully in the democratic process. I consider myself well-informed and make a point of following politics in the media. I have not yet decided who I plan on voting for in the coming general election.

    I guess what I am really asking in this letter is: why should I as an immigrant vote for you or the other candidates in your party?

    I would appreciate it if someone in your party would take the time to answer my questions. I look forward to receiving a reply and promise to examine all the information that I receive objectively before I decide exactly who I plan on voting for.

    Sincerely,

    Will

    • Enrique

      Hi Will, great to hear from you and a very good email indeed. What parties and what kind of responses did you get? Were you impressed or disappointed?

  6. Klay_Immigrant

    This may come as a suprise to some but anyone who was willing to vote for the True Finns before this manifesto came out will not be shocked by what they are reading. Everyone knows where the True Finns priorities lie, therefore their supporters will not be fazed by their policies in this manifesto. From what has been highlighted I completely agree with it apart from further increasing taxes for the rich.

    Do you think it’s ok that people such as Iman Abu Hamza gets to live in a 6 bedroom house valued close to 700k pounds in a quite nice area of London without having to work 1 day whereas hardworking couples and families can only ever dream to live in a place like that? The cheapest housing should go to those who don’t work and are on benefits, immigrants AND FINNS INCLUDED. If that housing is remote then so be it.

    I concur with Tony let the True Finns worry about immigration and refugee/asylum issues and leave Kokoomus in charge of the rest. That would be the best scenario for Finland in a coalition government just like Denmark.

    • Enrique

      –That would be the best scenario for Finland in a coalition government just like Denmark.

      Your opinion does not surprise us at all. Some advice about writing. When you use lots of adjectives and adverbs to describe something it takes away credibility from your argument. In the news business we try to stay clear of adjuectives and adverbs. Use strong nouns and verbs to make your point. Moreover, that kind of stuff is a defamation of character and could get you in trouble.

      By the way, the Danish People’s Party has been accused for racism. Here is the link. Would you vote for a party which cannot even control what it says or when it opens its mouth insults and slams groups?

    • Enrique

      Do you really think the True Finns will have their way in parliament? I think you are living in a pipe dream and don’t really understand how democracy works. What do you think would be the legal consequences never mind the image Finland would have if it bussed unemployed immigrants to remote parts of Finland? This would only apply to immigrants NOT jobless Finns.

      The True Finns are appealing to the gut feelings of some Finns. Will they be able to carry out their campaign manifesto? Very slim chance.

  7. Juan

    The welfare state is not economically feasible anymore because too many Finns don’t work, too many Finns don’t work long enough hours, too many Finns take excessively long holidays or maternity leaves, too many Finns are on welfare, too many Finns retire too early on disability pensions (a lot of which are due to alcohol related illnesses).

    Now the Finns who do work, who start enterprises, who innovate, who invest, and who generally participate in the economy are taxed to the hilt.

    Such a situation is untenable in the long run. However, instead of addressing the problem which is primarily economic in nature, politicians pander to age-old biases of the population with the objective of generating votes.

    Thus, immigrants are being used by politicians as scapegoats for their own failures with respect to the economy. This is most convenient since immigrants cannot vote and politicians have nothing to lose by antagonizing them except maybe their sense of civility and decency. The immigration issue is highlighted to distract from the real issue of necessary painful economic reform.

    To quote Bill Clinton in ’92, “It’s the economy, stupid.”

    • Enrique

      Hi Juan, I agree with you. Here we have all these challenges in our society and a group of politicians are concentrating on a minor problem. It shows you how reckless and inept they are to even deal with our challenges. In Sweden we have about 14% of the population foreign and the Sweden Democrats got about 5%. Here in Finland we have 2.9% of the population foreign and the True Finns get about 16-18% in the polls? It is totally out of proportion.

      It is always easy for politicians to blame an easy target like immigrants for the problems. That is what the True Finns and other politicians are doing in Finland and in other parts of Europe. It is shameful.

  8. JusticeDemon

    xyz

    It says: “Those immigrants granted a residence permit should not receive social benefits.”

    I don’t think it does. The closest thing I found to any such claim was this:

    Itsenäisesti asuvalle oleskeluluvan saaneelle turvapaikanhakijalle maksettavan tuen määrää pitää alentaa, niin että se olisi korkeintaan 50 % normaalista toimeentulotuesta.

    Without going into the technicalities of how this could be achieved (for example in the context of integration allowance), it has the potential to cause some very serious general policy problems. Income support is defined as the income guarantee of last resort, and is intended to define the poverty line in Finland. If we suppose that a person can live on half of this amount, then we create a political precedent for reducing income support for everyone. If, on the other hand, we continue to insist that the standard rate of income support defines the minimum livable income, then we are deliberately creating a class of people who are expected to live below the poverty line. This will require a much larger raft of legislation, including changes in child protection laws. In a very real sense, it would no longer be possible to use the term welfare State when talking about Finland.

    I can find no way to formulate the required legislative amendments within the framework of section 19 of the Constitution of Finland:

    Section 19 – The right to social security

    Those who cannot obtain the means necessary for a life of dignity have the right to receive indispensable subsistence and care. Everyone shall be guaranteed by an Act the right to basic subsistence in the event of unemployment, illness, and disability and during old age as well as at the birth of a child or the loss of a provider.

    The public authorities shall guarantee for everyone, as provided in more detail by an Act, adequate social, health and medical services and promote the health of the population. Moreover, the public authorities shall support families and others responsible for providing for children so that they have the ability to ensure the wellbeing and personal development of the children.

    The Income Support Act allows for certain reductions in income support totalling not more than 40 per cent in the event of persistent refusal of work or training, but these reductions are of punitive and discretionary character.

    My question to any candidate standing by this manifesto proposal concerns whether the standard rate of income support really does represent the poverty line, and if so, then how the PS manifesto proposal could be implemented without repealing section 19 of the Constitution and dismantling the welfare State. Does the candidate believe that former asylum seekers have some magical ability to feed and clothe themselves and their children adequately at only half of the usual price, or that these people should not be fed or clothed?

  9. JusticeDemon

    Willie

    Interesting letter. I look forward to reading the replies.

    Purely en passant:

    Oma-aloitteinen veronmaksaja implies that you are self-employed or otherwise declaring your own income for taxation purposes (Google the phrase “oma-aloitteiset verot”). I’m not sure what it means to be an ahkera veronmaksaja. 🙂 Your translation says nothing like this.

    Kunnioittaen is an obsolete Swedicism.

  10. JusticeDemon

    On the topic of immigration regulations, I challenge readers to find anything in this manifesto that would require a change in the Aliens Act. So far I have only found demands for this law to be what it already is.

    For example:

    PS manifesto:

    Vakavaan  rikokseen  tai  toistuviin  rikoksiin  syyllistyneet  maahanmuuttajat  on  karkotettava  maasta.

    Aliens Act s. 149:

    Maasta voidaan karkottaa oleskeluluvalla oleskellut ulkomaalainen … jonka on todettu syyllistyneen rikokseen, josta on säädetty enimmäisrangaistuksena vähintään yksi vuosi vankeutta, taikka jonka on todettu syyllistyneen toistuvasti rikoksiin

    PS manifesto:

    Nähdäksemme  oleskelulupa  on  peruutettava  myös,  jos  käy  myöhemmin  ilmi,  että  se  on  myönnetty   valheellisten  henkilöön,  lähtömaahan  tai  olosuhteisiin  liittyvien  tietojen  nojalla.

    Aliens Act, s, 58, subs. 4:

    Määräaikainen tai pysyvä oleskelulupa taikka pitkään oleskelleen kolmannen maan kansalaisen EY-oleskelulupa voidaan peruuttaa, jos oleskelulupaa haettaessa on tietoisesti annettu hakijan henkilöllisyyttä koskevia tai muita päätökseen vaikuttaneita vääriä tietoja taikka salattu sellainen seikka, joka olisi saattanut estää oleskeluluvan myöntämisen.

    PS manifesto:

    Edelleen  katsomme,  että  oleskelulupa  on  peruutettava,  mikäli  sen  saaneen  henkilön  on  todettu  järjestävän   laitonta  maahanmuuttoa  Suomeen…

    Aliens Act, s. 149:

    Maasta voidaan karkottaa oleskeluluvalla oleskellut ulkomaalainen … jonka on todettu syyllistyneen rikokseen, josta on säädetty enimmäisrangaistuksena vähintään yksi vuosi vankeutta…

    and the offence in question is precisely of this kind:

    Finnish Penal Code, ch 17, s. 8:

    Laittoman maahantulon järjestäminen

    Joka

    1) tuo tai yrittää tuoda Suomeen tai Suomen kautta muuhun maahan ulkomaalaisen, jolla ei ole maahantuloon vaadittavaa passia, muuta matkustusasiakirjaa, viisumia tai oleskelulupaa,

    2) järjestää tai välittää 1 kohdassa tarkoitetulle ulkomaalaiselle kuljetuksen Suomeen tai

    3) luovuttaa toiselle väärän tai väärennetyn taikka toiselle henkilölle annetun passin, muun matkustusasiakirjan, viisumin tai oleskeluluvan käytettäväksi maahantulon yhteydessä,

    on tuomittava laittoman maahantulon järjestämisestä sakkoon tai vankeuteen enintään kahdeksi vuodeksi.

    and (for the quibblers)

    Aliens Act, s. 59:

    Oleskelulupa raukeaa, kun ulkomaalainen karkotetaan maasta…

    ***

    No political party is seeking to change these current provisions, so a manifesto commitment to introduce them or even to maintain them seems very odd. A bit like insisting that Oulu must be north of Helsinki or that it must be colder in January than in July.

    Demands of this kind either suggest that PS are unaware of current legislation or that they are hoping that the electorate is ignorant and will assume that PS has a real reform programme in relation to immigration regulations. Either way, this could be horribly embarrassing for their candidates in any informed debate.

    I repeat the challenge: can anyone find anything in this manifesto that would require an amendment to the present Aliens Act?

    • Enrique

      Hi JusticeDemon, you rasie a lot of interesting questions, which you sum up in the following manner: “Demands of this kind either suggest that PS are unaware of current legislation or that they are hoping that the electorate is ignorant and will assume that PS has a real reform programme in relation to immigration regulations.”

      One of the matters I found distrubring in the PS manifesto were their simplistic explanation on multiculturalism, which exists because there are monocultures. I would not be surprised if many of them still believe in the historical particularists’ view of the nineteenth century whereby all cultures are evolving to the same level of advancement as Europeans (the cultural benchmark). As you know, all this nonsense justified colonialism and even gave the Nazis their smoking gun to take part in mass murder.

  11. JusticeDemon

    Ricky

    The challenge is out there. Do PS have any concrete proposals to change immigration regulations? Based on this manifesto, it seems not.

    In terms of public ignorance, we can contrast the PS manifesto comment:

    Mitä  tulee  ns.  mummo-­‐kysymykseen,  on  mielestämme  täysin  vastuutonta  pyrkiä  haalimaan  maahamme   ikäihmisiä,  kun  samaan  aikaan  jonot  vanhustenhuoltoon  ovat  kasvussa  ja  väestön  ikärakenteesta  ollaan   huolestuneita.  Voimassa  olevaa  lakia  ei  pidä  siltä  osin  lähteä  muuttamaan.

    with a comment by Tony the lying Toby in the Tamara Suzin käännytys keskeytettiin thread on 2 December:

    For me this a typical idiocy from FIS (witch is probably run by lefties) – deport old and harmless grandmothers but let violent Somalis run free.

    The PS manifesto does include some laudable aims in relation to the administration of immigration, but these aims are not unique, nor has any attempt been made to cost them. For example:

    Tavoitteeksi  tulee   ottaa,  että  turvapaikkahakemuksen  käsittely  kestäisi  korkeintaan  90  vuorokautta,  kun  se  vuonna  2010  kesti   321  vuorokautta  pelkästään  Maahanmuuttovirastossa.

    For as long as I can remember, the Finnish immigration bureaucracy has been criticised over the unreasonably prolonged processing time of applications. FIS and its predecessor authorities have consistently argued that they are under-resourced and that increased staffing would reduce processing delays. At the end of 2009 the FIS had a total staff of 319.

    If PS have some magical solution to the problem of extended processing times, then they have not declared this in their manifesto. Increasing the staff of FIS to 1,000 would be one approach, but of course these staff would have to be paid. As the decisions in question are necessarily open to judicial review, the bulk of those additional staff would need to be legally trained, and would therefore not be cheap. Why don’t PS issue a firm commitment to increase taxes by the amount required to pay for a massive enlargement in FIS?

    Merely declaring the aim of reducing processing times is meaningless as a manifesto commitment. All of the political parties support expedited processing as such.

    • Enrique

      The questions you make are excellent. I posted a number of tweets on Twitter about your comments. Why don’t we try to get this stuff published elsewhere?

  12. JusticeDemon

    Ricky

    None of this is rocket science. Almost anyone familiar with the immigration system of Finland over the last two decades could easily spot these points.

    There are quite a few calls for faster processing of applications and appeals, for example in section 9.2 of the document, but not a whisper about the necessary resource allocation. None of these proposals are new and some of them are evidently based on a seriously distorted idea of the common practicalities involved.

    For example, the idea of 24-hour processing times for asylum applications filed by European Union citizens seems to be based on the idea that these applications will always be lodged promptly on arrival at the port of entry. Since an EU citizen is in any case normally entitled to enter Finland for a minimum of three months in search of employment or livelihood, there is hardly any question of lodging a manifestly unfounded and abusive application for asylum at the point of entry (in fact lodging any such application immediately on arrival would tend to suggest that there was some substance to it).

    The proposal therefore means that we should prepare for 24-hour processing of applications lodged at local police stations up and down the country. Please also note that processing must necessarily involve an individual examination of merits including an interview that satisfies basic legal standards (e.g. in relation to legal interpretation). Nobody who understands the minimum standards required under the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention can consider the proposal for 24-hour processing of such applications to be at all realistic.

    I would very much like to see a time and motion study of various immigration processes, as some of the delays that I notice in the cases that cross my desk seem quite frankly inexplicable. One recent citizenship application took nearly five months to forward from a local police station in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area to the Finnish Immigration Service. This was not because the application was in any way unclear, nor was the applicant asked to provide further details. How can it take nearly five months to send an application form and its attachments a distance of only a few kilometres? Where is the bottleneck in this process? These are the kind of questions that we should be asking about processing times, but you won’t find them in this PS manifesto.

  13. Klay_Immigrant

    An interesting article today from a suprise source The Observer paper in Britain (left-wing Sunday sister paper of the Guardian).

    ‘Searchlight poll finds huge support for far right’

    ‘Huge numbers of Britons would support an anti-immigration English nationalist party if it was not associated with violence and fascist imagery, according to the largest survey into identity and extremism conducted in the UK.’

    ‘A Populus poll found that 48% of the population would consider supporting a new anti-immigration party committed to challenging Islamist extremism, and would support policies to make it statutory for all public buildings to fly the flag of St George or the union flag.’

    ‘According to the survey, 39% of Asian Britons, 34% of white Britons and 21% of black Britons wanted all immigration into the UK to be stopped permanently, or at least until the economy improved. And 43% of Asian Britons, 63% of white Britons and 17% of black Britons agreed with the statement that “immigration into Britain has been a bad thing for the country”. Just over half of respondents – 52% – agreed with the proposition that “Muslims create problems in the UK”.’

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/27/support-poll-support-far-right

  14. Tony Garcia

    First we were told that there was no point in voting for Perus because the polls are all wrong and they just won’t make it. Now there still no point in voting for them, even if they do make, because they are not offering nothing that is not already law.

    Very well..

    The best way to see how well a party is doing is just to watch what those who pose it are doing. What they are writing about it, and most importantly, how often. With blogs like Migrant Tales having 2 out of 3 of its article about either Perus, Halla-aho or both, you can easily see that Perus is not doing that bad.

    However there is something very important in all of this. All those Finns who were afraid of voting for Perus because you some how believed in the theory that Perus would ditch our constitution and established an bloodthirsty dictatorship, once not even Migrant Tales believe in this anyone, you could rethink your position.

    • Enrique

      Tony, you are a mystery: A neoliberal that supports a populist party. What a contradiciton. It would be something like backing Hugo Chávez and being today a supporter of Ben Ali.

      I personally believe that the True Finns are threat to our democratic institutions. Yours and their arrogance are examples. If you read the manifesto (did you?), it is a poor copy from an autocratic state. The manifesto tells YOU (are you now the neoliberal or populist?) what you must like and think about things such as Finnish culture. As I mentioned, the True Finns are not a majority party and the polls and ballot box are two separate things. Let me give it to you from a published writer: writing you first book is difficult but the second and third are even more so. I am not worried per say about the True Finns because they will end up tripping over their policies. The big shortfall of the True Finns is that there are not enough immigrant targets for them to grow. And judging by their ignorance on the matter, there won’t be a lot of skilled people moving to Finland in the short run.

      Not all of us have the “intellectual” ability to be neoloibral and populist at the same time. It either shows that you do not grasp matters or something (Islam) obfuscates your judgement.

  15. JusticeDemon

    Tony the lying Toby

    You haven’t read it, have you?

    My observations above are confined to the subject of immigration policy. For all of the sabre rattling over the past few months, there seems to be nothing here except lamentable ignorance of the current system. The manifesto is thumping the tub for a system that we already have. This means that your recommendation to vote for them but don’t elect them falls a bit flat on the subject of immigration policy. Either this manifesto is flagrantly dishonest, or PS can enter into a coalition with any party whatsoever based on an undertaking to implement ALL of the immigration policies of the PS manifesto by making no changes whatsoever to our current immigration laws.

    ***

    Policy proposals in certain other subject areas have already drawn some considerable comment in the national media. For example, PS would like to support the “artistic heritage” but not “modern art”. They are evidently too thick to appreciate that all art was “modern” at some time and that it is chiefly the passage of time that turns the avant garde into the artistic “heritage”. Come on, now Toby – I’m sure that you can argue with that. Something along the lines of “the only good artist is a starving artist”, perhaps?

    Proposals concerning the content of public broadcasting display a similarly embarrassing degree of philistinism. Indeed in the sphere of culture the PS manifesto has been fairly described as resembling nothing more closely than the policy of the USSR during the Brezhnev era. The idea that a political party should seek to dictate the content of history lessons at school stands out like a large red flag on page 9 of the manifesto.

    The most glaring omission from the entire manifesto is the lack of any economic dimension whatsoever. I commented in relation to the immigration system that the PS manifesto repeats certain good intentions that have been heard many times before (for example as to processing times), but fails even to acknowledge that these things will cost money. It turns out that this failing is not confined to immigration, but affects all policy areas. In many ways this PS manifesto reads like the Christmas list of a six year-old.

  16. William O'Gorman

    http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/htimes/domestic-news/politics/14351-analysts-pooh-pooh-talk-of-prime-minister-soini.html

    Seems to be no one takes this crowd seriously and with good reason. Anyone who supports this party should keep their heads in that refreshing sand they frequent and let the real business pf politics to those who wish to make things actually happen.

    Annoying how (from what I can see) no other party has been running these guys down.

    In this article: http://yle.fi/uutiset/news/2011/02/centre_and_green_league_slam_national_coalition_agenda_2393375.html

    Other parties are going at it but no one seems to have contested the PS plans. Why is this? Is the PS plan so air tight? doesnt seem so.

    I guess the worrying thing is just how deep are Finns heads into this sand that they cannot see the stupidity of this. Thats scary if you ask me!

    • Enrique

      Hi William, I could not agree more with you. One thing is getting in put clinging on will be another ball game. Let’s wait for the final election results on April 17.

  17. Tony Garcia

    How about the believe that Islam in general, and Sharia in particularly, strength our democracy and promote equality? How about that for a contradiction?

    “I personally believe that the True Finns are big threat to our way of life.”

    That, my friend, very much depend on what “our” is, and that is exactly why we should vote for Perus this election.

  18. William O'Gorman

    Tony, seriously, what are you talking about? The discussion is about politics and actual ruling of a country not some demented projection of your personal fears. Do you honestly and I mean honestly mean to tell me that you think that the PS as a proportional member or ruler of Finland will make the country grow using the manifesto they have created? wake up for Allahs sake.

  19. Tony Garcia

    Dear Mr. O’Gorman, you have joined this blog not long ago so you have missed good part of my discussion with Enrique about what I think the rule of Perus in all of this should be. Please allow me to explain it to you.

    I’m a conservative, and as such, I have always supported Kakoomus (as conservative as you can get in Finland) and still do. I have made very clear more than once that Perus is nothing but a wake up call for the main parties. As you could see SDP had joined the “no multiculturalism here, please” speech short after Perus start to rise in the polls.

    I think many countries in Europe has gone down the path that all immigration is positive, now they are suffering the consequences. Finland hasn’t done that yet, but it’s close to it. When we see that thousands of illiterate Somalis, and God now how many terrorists, are waiting to come to Finland through family unification, you know that something must be done. And this election is the best time to do it.

    Let me tell you something, I’m an immigrant, so my parents, and my mom’s parents, and my wife and children. So, immigration is a family tradition. It really pisses me off when someone is saying that immigration is bad, as much as when someone is saying that immigration is good. I think immigration is neutral, it can either very constructive or extremely destructive. It all depends on how it’s handled.

    I believe there is positive immigration (like Italians in America) and negative immigration (like Islam in Europe). And the government should do all on its power to support the former and reduce the latter.

    I said here many times that I don’t believe Perus will get enough power to rule Finland, and I honestly hope they don’t. I my opinion, they should have enough power to put pressure on the main parties, so the main parties can then do something about the situation Finland is living today, before too late.

    So, Mr. O’Gorman, I hope I have made myself clear, and apologies for my bad English.

  20. William O'Gorman

    Good luck with that Tony. I find your point of view sad but it is your perogotive to think as you wish. I am sure you have your reasons. I think that the PS represent more then just a way of putting preasure on other parties and that the case of immigration is not based on reality but on good old racism and fear. What of the other policies they preach and how they will, in time, both morally and economically bankrupt an otherwise thriving nation? Your view is small and the road is long. At least you are one vote less come April.

    The PS represent a form of rot and dissention that is being driven through the medium of fear and ignorance. I am not merely talking of their immigration issues but more the atmosphere they are speading…an atmosphere that is founded in the most minor of minorities but which can be blown up to meet their needs. This is not true and it is lieing to the Finnish people who are otherwise blind to see it (why? media, vested interests, who knows..). Accetance and tolerance are important not fear and hatred.

    You fear the picture of Islam, I fear the picture of ignorance and the future it will bring to this great little country.

  21. Tony Garcia

    Dear Mr. O’Gorman thanks for your reply. We all have our opinion and believes and I welcome yours.

    You have said something very important – “this great little country”. I agree with you 100%. Finland is an amazing country and it should be preserved as such. That’s why I oppose efforts to social-reengineer it.

    My point is simple – immigration isn’t either good or bad, it’s neutral. Many governments in Europe has had its head stick in the sand believing that if they waited long enough suppressing any debate about immigration, in time, everything would be fine. Now they are seeing the results of such a reckless attitude.

    Finland needs policies that makes immigration a positive force, taking into account the best interests of Finland. I believe Kokoomus can delivery such policies, they just need to fell the heat.

    You are also right about the problem being the minor of minorities, but we can’t sit and watch the problem grows. After this minor minority becomes 4+ million, like in Germany, the problem becomes unsolvable.

    Very importantly, acceptance and tolerance only works when it comes from both sides.

  22. William O'Gorman

    Now you seem to be contradicting yourself. You say immigration is neutral….if you are not black skinned, hold Islamic beliefs or represent some form of paranoid threat. Immigration as a postitve force is a great way to put it but the precious PS dont seem to think like this..do they? You are making PS out to be some form of anti-hero, doing the bad thing for the benefit of the good. Please. Scaremongering, fear and hatred thats all they seem to do.
    Aceptance and tolerance DO come from both sides but if you are a PS supporter there seems to be only one side.
    Good luck.

    • Enrique

      The big problem with Tony’s suggestion of attracting only “good” immigrants is that it that is only an ideal. You can also get criminals and serial killers even if they are white and look “good.”

      Attracting the right people is a pipe dream. You can try but you will get a mixed bag.

      I believe that country’s make people. If you are an immigrant, some countries can bring out more greatness in you than others.

  23. Tony Garcia

    Dear Mr. O’Gorman.

    I’m sorry but I’m not contradicting myself. Immigration is neutral, it’s all about who is coming. When the right people comes, immigration becomes a positive force, otherwise it becomes negative.

    Sorry again but I’m not making making Perus anything. For me they are just something that can put pressure on the main parties to do what is best for Finland. As we both agreed, this “great little country”.

    “…if you are not black skinned…”

    Mr. O’Gorman I totally disagree with you. I see no reason whatsoever why a person with dark skin colour can’t be a positive immigrant. I have met black Americans very well integrated into the Finnish society, 2 are good friend of mine. I wonder if you haven’t met any yourself. I think you should rethink you position about this. Culture and religion is the dominant factor on how people behaves, not race.

    “Aceptance and tolerance DO come from both sides…“

    I’ll respectfully disagree…

    “Good luck.”

    Thank you, at this time we need all the luck we can get. I wish you all the best and tank you for this lovely debate.

  24. JusticeDemon

    Tony the lying Toby

    I believe there is positive immigration (like Italians in America)

    Well now, Italians in America were the first to organise crime on an industrial scale. Your own Italian ancestors actively supported the brutal military dictatorship in Brazil and so did you. Doesn’t sound very “positive” to me. No wonder you are trying to deflect attention onto Islam.

    I’m sure that Kokoomus are very grateful for your support. Keep up the good work. lol

    • Enrique

      Justice Demon you make an excellent point. Which immigration impacted society more: from Italy or Somalia? Ever watched the Godforther, Sopranos etc? A pretty long list.

  25. Tony Garcia

    “Which immigration impacted society more: from Italy or Somalia?”

    What a silly question, of course from Italy. But, once again, wrong question. The right question is – What kind of impact, positive or negative, the Somali and Italian immigration have?

    Enrique, are you tell us now that Italian immigration in America was a bad thing? Hmmm…

    “You can also get criminals and serial killers even if they are white and look “good.”

    Enrique, why do you love so much talk about race? You really should look for some help.

    But no group is perfect, of course, and no one is saying that, however we can have a far better outcome from some groups than others. Example – what is the employment rate among Americans in Finland versus Somalis? There you go…

    • Enrique

      Enrique, are you tell us now that Italian immigration in America was a bad thing? Hmmm…

      — You know very well my answer to that because I don’t like to look at people as groups but more as individuals. The point is that the Italians from the south brought the Mafia. Even so, the Italians played an important role in the economic development of the United States. So to go around and accusing one group of being mostly criminals is a bit dubious.

  26. xyz

    I have met black Americans very well integrated into the Finnish society, 2 are good friend of mine.
    -And you spoke Finnish with them? 🙂

    Culture and religion is the dominant factor on how people behaves, not race.
    -I think the issue is that you are just not able to deal with different cultures. Maybe you have never learned it and that’s why you get stressed? How do explain that I have 2 Muslim friends here in Finland who are working as Engineers? I mean according to your theory since they are Muslims they would not be capable to do such a job, or am I wrong?

  27. xyz

    “ECHA Finds Experts Unwilling To Move to Finland”

    “They change their minds because Helsinki is so far away from their homes,” continued Dancet. “Highly-educated non-Finnish speaking spouses also face difficulty in finding work in Finland, which is also a factor.”

    “We want the whole of Europe to be represented at the agency,” said Dancet. “We don’t want to have any departments where there are only Finns.”

    http://yle.fi/uutiset/news/2011/03/echa_finds_experts_unwilling_to_move_to_finland_2409167.html?origin=rss

  28. JusticeDemon

    xyz

    The interesting thing about that news item is the impact of reputation in an information society. The problem for specialised operations in the past was one of keeping qualified staff after they had experienced these practical problems, and in at least some cases it proved possible to find some solution that would encourage the specialist to stay in Finland.

    We have now moved on to a new situation in which the specialist will not come here in the first place unless the practical problems have been solved in advance. There are simply too many stories out there of bitter experiences suffered by professional couples who moved here.

    In some ways this is similar to a situation that has already existed in remote areas of Finland for many years. It is often not enough to advertise one specialist vacancy in these locations. Local authorities in particular have faced the problem of encouraging professional couples to relocate so that, for example, the council gets a new deputy chief accountant only if a vacancy can also be created for a history teacher at the local senior high school or a doctor at the local health centre.

    The next stage in this process will concern the risk of sudden involuntary unemployment, especially in the private sector. Businesses in Finland will find it increasingly difficult to recruit specialist staff if those businesses in particular and Finnish companies in general have a reputation for structural instability.

  29. Martin Sheridan

    Gents,
    An intriguing debate has raged here over the past months!

    Zealots of all colours, races and creeds would like to accentuate the differences between us. I come from a nation of roughly 4.5M people with a further 3M people with Irish passports living around the world, not to mention 2nd and 3rd generation Irish immigrants which number into the 10s of millions.

    We have had our own share of “terrorists” in that number so how is it that a farmer from Co Kerry would make a better immigrant than a farmer from Golol? The point I’m driving at is that labels made by zealots are dangerous, divisive, naive and quite often wrong. Meritocracy coupled with a far reaching model of a welfare state would seem as good a basis for governance as any I’ve seen, Finland isn’t that far off it!

    As for PS election result, if one goes around persuading all of the animals on the farm that “Four legs good, Two legs bad”, eventually the sheep will start bleating the same message!

    Apologies for the agricultural references!

    • Enrique

      Hi Martin Sheridan, you are a refreshing example to the rest of Europe. One problem with the True Finns vote is that it emphasizes the “us” versus “them.”

  30. Toni

    “I personally believe that the True Finns are big threat to our way of life.”

    So, you like UK multiculturalism where more than half of people, including immigrants, don’t like multiculturalism? So you belong to a minority with your thoughts. Perhaps your way is a way for quite small group.

    In Finland we have PS, SDP, KD and part of Kokoomus and it’s Youngs with our way and Keskusta, RKP, Vihreät and Vasemmisto to support your way. Which group is bigger? Which group ir “right”?

    Personally, I like multiculturalism but not this kind what we are having in Europe..

    • Enrique

      –Personally, I like multiculturalism but not this kind what we are having in Europe..

      In other words you don’t.

  31. Toni

    >–Personally, I like multiculturalism but not this kind what we are having in Europe..

    >In other words you don’t.

    Why do you think so?
    In other words, you believe only one kind of multiculturalism exists where everyone keeps their own manners and keep critizising others? And abuse, violence and crimes are accepted if they are made according to own manners and religion?

    • Enrique

      –In other words, you believe only one kind of multiculturalism exists where everyone keeps their own manners and keep critizising others?

      The anti-immigrant wing of the True Finns as well as other group think multiculturalism is the same in England as elsehwere. It is definitely not. So claiming that I support one type of multiculturalism is wrong.

      In order for us to begin a debate on multiculturalism, we’d have to speak about the social policy not as a demographic phenomenon. So what are you speaking of: social policy or simple demographics?

  32. Toni

    Enrique:
    >The anti-immigrant wing of the True Finns as well as other group think multiculturalism is the same in England as elsehwere. It is definitely not.

    Is it worse or better in UK? Where it is better?

    >So claiming that I support one type of multiculturalism is wrong.

    As wrong as saying I don’t. 😉

    >So what are you speaking of: social policy or simple demographics?

    What? I don’t know much of those but I think they are allmost same. Demographics(“väestötiede”) is a science of the social policy (“sosiaalipolitiikka”). Social policy shoud lissten to the science and science follows social policy and makes scientific observations.

    • Enrique

      –Is it worse or better in UK? Where it is better?

      I don’t know what variables you are using to decide what is worse. However, there is no such thing as a “perfect society.”

  33. Toni

    Perfect for who? Each person may have different opinion on that.
    Sure there is a perfect society, in theory.

    But please, tell me how multiculturalism is different in UK and here? Wich one is better and for who?

    • Enrique

      Toni, I have to dash out of the office and will continue this debate with you. For one, history and the fact that England is offically a multicultural country. Finland is not. Nowhere does it state in the laws of our land that we are multicultural country.

  34. Toni

    I’ll wait your answer if you think UK has succeeded on it’s immigration policy and is a good example of multicultural country… when (more than) half of the people in UK are not happy with it.

    We are not officially multicultural yet but do you wish us to end up same kind of multicultural country as UK? I think it is not possible to become even close as good, even it is not very good in UK either… we would have ended up much worse without Halla-aho and PS whose influence already has had effects on our policy. Like you told, not all multicultural societys are similar. Some are worse than others.

  35. Duncan

    The people of a country have a right to choose a government that will make laws according to their wishes. That is democracy. And if those laws are to restrict immigration or the refugee intake, that is their right. It is THEIR country and they have the unfettered right to determine who to accept and the basis of that acceptance.

    The problem has arisen that many migrants choose to bring their baggage with them and do not wish to assimilate. They continue to fight their battles with the country/society that they left and in a distinct show of ingratitude, certain of them seek to destroy the culture and values of their ‘new’ homeland. Some even resort to violence. Small wonder attitudes are hardening.

Leave a Reply