The role of the elementary school at Colonia Finlandesa, Argentina

As Finland’s foreign-born population grows in the following years, the role that the elementary school will play in integrating the children of immigrants as members of Finnish society will be vital.

A good example of the key role of education was the small elementary school at Colonia Finlandesa in Argentina, which opened its doors in 1922. For many of the children of the Finnish colonists, the school was the first place where they not only learned to speak Spanish but established bonds with Argentina and other national groups that lived at the former Finnish colony founded in 1906.

For some of the children, going to school the first day was a traumatic experience since they could not speak Spanish.

Taking into account that Argentina’s 1914 census showed that the country’s foreign-born population reached 30%, the government founded elementary schools in far-flung colonies such as Colonia Finlandesa to integrate the children of immigrants. Apart from learning a new language, they learned new customs that caused friction at home.

Helga Niskanen de Heino, whose parents settled Colonia Finlandesa in 1912, sheds light on the cultural friction that the elementary school caused:

At school we learned the customs of this country and it caused a lot of confusion at home. At home we were taught that girls curtsy and boys bow when greeting a visitor. At school the teacher prohibited (her brother Jalmari) from bowing. We told mother that bowing and curtsying were not Argentine customs. This made mother totally hapless and she said: Do as you please. I no longer know how (to educate you).

Conclusion: It is a comforting matter to know that Finns prize education and that we have one of the best education systems in the world. This gives hope that the children of immigrants will be able to reap the benefits and become valuable future citizens of our country.

Elena Laukkanen, whose parents moved to Argentna in 1909, holds a picture of when she attended the elementary school at Colonia Finlandesa in the early 1930s. (Photo by Enrique Tessieri)

Building of a just society in Finland with immigrants

One of the interesting matters that has caught my eye through the hundreds of comments in this blog is confusion over what the term racism, or discrimination, means. In my opinion, racism is discrimination because of a person’s background. Discrimination is not only attributable to race, ie racism, but can encompass other background factors.

The Equality Act of 2004 defines it pretty well: Discrimination can be defined as unfair treatment of a person or class of persons in comparison to others. An example of direct discrimination is if a member of a restaurant staff refuses to serve a person because of his or her ethnic origin.An example of indirect discrimination is if an employer demands that a prospective employee has a perfect command of Finnish even though this is not necessary for the job.

The term “ikärasismi” (age racism) is incorrectly used. Age is not a race but people can be discriminated because of their age.

What does the Equality Act say with respect to discrimination? It prohibits discrimination based on age, racial or ethnic origin,citizenship, language, religion or belief, conviction, opinion, state of health, disability, sexual orientation or other personal characteristics (such as financial position, pregnancy, and family situation).

What are the consequences of discrimination? The loss of time and opportunities. In many respects discrimination steals time from people since we as humans do not live forever. The time lost are the opportunities to participate and contribute to the society you live in. So, those who practice discrimination, rob you of opportunities and one of the most important matters that we do not have in infinite quantities — time.

What is my view of Finland in the future? I believe that Finland is up to the task of creating a society where opportunities are available with the least amount of loss of time since discrimination is not an issue any longer.

It is for this reason that we should strive, like the law clearly says, to build a society on mutual respect and, most importantly, where everyone can find and build a sense of home and societal belonging.

In that home and society we have alienable rights and obligations.

A response on the Jews and Nazi Germany

Here is a response from a Holocaust site about comments made by Tiwaz that Jews were not German “natives.” I will not name the source because I was not given permission to do so. Below is a good English translation of the original text by JusticeDemon. Many thanks to him!

Kirjoittajan teksti on äärinationalismia puhtaimmillaan eikä sellaisen aatteen kanssa voi varsinaisesti käydä keskustelua. Totta kirjoituksessa on se, että juutalaiset (niinkuin romanitkin) olivat ja ovat onnistuneet säilyttämään kulttuurisen omaleimaisuutensa Euroopassa. Se on tapahtunut kautta historian luonnollisestikin jonkin asteisen eristäytymisen kautta. Mutta jos kirjoittaja on sitä mieltä, että omaleimaisen kulttuurinsa säilyttäminen oikeuttaa tuhoamaan, mitä siihen voi sanoa? Hänelle voi vain
esittää kysymyksen: Kuka sitten on se jolla on valta vetää raja sille mikä on hyväksyttävää valtakulttuuria, mitkä piirteet ovat oikeaa eurooppalaisuutta, saksalaisuutta, suomalaisuutta jne.? Mitäpä jos jonain
päivänä päätetään että vaikkapa vegetarismi ei sovi eurooppalaisuuteen, vaan on pikemminkin aasialainen piirre. Kasvissyöjät on integroitava valtakulttuuriin tai eliminoitava. Moninaisuutta ei voi hyväksyä. On
oikein että enemmistö vihaa vähemmistöä. Tätähän hänen ajatustapansa on.

Lisäksi voi kysyä, kuinka moni euroopan tuhotuista juutalaisista oikeastaan oli lähtöisin Lähi-Idästä? Eivätkö kaikki olleet eurooppalaisia, yhtä eurooppalaisia kuin kaikki muutkin täällä? Kuinka kaukaa historiasta kulttuuristen juurien täytyy juontua ennekuin tämä äärinationalisti suostuu pitämään niitä aitoina kansallisina (“native”) piirteinä? Jos Euroopan juutalaisuus on ollut Euroopassa puolitoistatuhatta vuotta, niin milloin siitä sitten tulisi aito eurooppalainen kulttuurin osanen, niin että kirjoittaja voisi sen kelpuuttaa? Mistä asti sitten nykyiset eurooppalaisten kansallisuuksien ominaispiirteet juontavat juurensa?? Luuleeko hän että saksalainen kulttuuri oli saksassa hamassa historian alkuhämärässä muotoutunutta? eikö koko kristillinen kulttuuri oli Lähi-Idässä syntynyttä? Nämä ovat kriittisiä kysymyksiä joita kirjoittajan kaltaisen “pohdiskelijan” tulisi pohtia ennekuin luo omaa filosofiaansa, mutta kuten sanottua: ei näiden ihmisten kanssa yleensä voi keskustella periaatteellisella tasolla.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

The writer’s text is the purest form of extreme nationalism, and is not an ideology that can really be engaged in dialogue. It correctly points out that the Jews (like the Roma/Sinti) had and have managed to preserve the distinctive character of their culture in Europe. This has occurred throughout history, even quite naturally, through some degree of isolation. If the writer believes, however, that preserving one’s distinctive culture justifies annihilation, then how can anyone answer this? You can only ask the writer a question: Who is then empowered to decide what the acceptable mainstream culture is, what features are truly European, German, Finnish etc? What if someone decides one day that something like vegetarianism is not suited to the European character, but is rather a characteristic of the Far East? Vegetarians must be assimilated into the mainstream culture or eliminated. No diversity can be accepted. It is right for the majority to despise a minority. This is the way the writer thinks.

One may also ask how many of Europe’s annihilated Jews were really from the Middle-East? Weren’t they all Europeans, as European as everyone else here? How far back in history must one’s cultural roots run before this extreme nationalist agrees to regard them as genuine national (“native”) characteristics? Given that European Jewry has existed in Europe for one and a half millennia, then when does it become a genuine element of European culture that the writer could legitimate? How far back do the present characteristics of European nationalities go then?? Does the writer suppose that German culture took form in the dim and distant early history of Germany? Didn’t the whole of Christian culture originate in the Middle-East? These are some of the critical questions that a “thinker” like this writer should think about before formulating a personal philosophy, but as the saying goes: you generally can’t debate first principles with these people.

Is racism a minor problem in Finland?

It is pretty surprising that some in this blog consider racism a minor problem in Finland even though they cannot back their affirmation with any empirical study. But if I were very sincere with you, I think it is one societal hang up that we have to deal with and work at.

Finland has come a long way from the post-1984 Aliens Act. We have today the Equality Act, the possibility of dual citizenship as well as other laws that defend foreigners’ rights. On the legal front, Finnish society is ready to accept and work with foreigners. Even so, aspirations sometimes lag far behind reality.

Even though Strange Days, a book edited by Greg Moore and Adrián Soto published in 1984 by Guadeamus, some of the questions it asks are still valid today. In an article written by Steve Huxley in the book, he explains his disappointment with Finnish society:

How many time I have listened as my dark-skinned friends tell of the Finns’ awkward, insulting and violent behavior towards them. Almost every time I walk through the streets with one of my more “foreign” looking companions, some Finn figures out a way, more or less grossly, to emphasize our otherness, our foreigness. Therefore, the fact that I have white skin has definitely helped me survive here; however, my disillusion has definitely grown since I became aware of this.

Some Finns’ obsession with the “us” and “them” continues to surprise me. Racism is a social ill that exists in varying degrees in all societies. In all fairness we must acknowledge that Finland has taken important steps in the passage of new laws to fight against this ill.

I hope that future generation of Finns will live in a dynamic society where ethnic relations will contribute to the betterment of this society. The least I hope for this country is what I saw in the United States in the 1960s. Our elementary school in Hollywood was going to have its first black student. Since the school authorities did not think we were prepared to have a black child as a student, the principal summoned the whole school to the auditorium and broke the news to us. He said that we should treat the new student well.

Nothing of the sort happened. Like a bunch of voracious piranhas, most of the students hurled racial insults, nibbled at his pride and self-respect and stressed to the extreme his otherness. The poor student lasted only two weeks with us and had to be transferred to another school.

Is this the type of society we want?

The numerous debates and courses on multiculturalism offered in Finland remind me vaguely of that elementary school principal in the auditorium a long, long time ago telling us that we should treat the new black student with respect.

It is pretty incredible that we are so unused to foreigners in Finland that we need courses to educate us on this subject.

Barak Obama – a new president and era

Today was a memorable day in the history of the United States. The world’s strongest military and economic power, humbled by reckless wars, hubris, corporate greed and economic turmoil, took the oath of office on Tuesday as the first US black president. Times have changed dramatically. It was not too long ago when blacks were segregated from whites.

The 44th US President not only instilled hope in his words but was bold enough to admit that the United States faces some very difficult times. To some who still think that they cannot find any strength in cultural diversity, I offer them an excerpt from Obama’s speech.

We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and nonbelievers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth.

And because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

Do you think he stands a good chance at succeeding as president? Will he be able to untangle the mess left by the Bush administration?

A blast from the past: The “Foreign Student” of Finland (March 1981)

Here is a neat editorial that appeared in the March 1981 edition of the Foreign Student.

Friends or foes?

What type of foreigners does this country want? Does it want quiet, subservient beings who stand passive as their basic rights are trampled upon? Will it consider citizenship only for those who “behave” accordingly while living in Finland? Are we then, who refuse to sit down with our arms crossed, friends of foes of this society?

In speaking of foreigners’ rights we must not forget to expand the question out of Finland. We must not forget to mention the tens of thousands of Finns that emigrated abroad. The Finns that went to the deep cooper mines of Michigan striked demanding better rights so they too could compete (more) equally in American society… Where these Finns then, and all those who championed for better working conditions and better pay, friends or foes of America?

Foreigners in Finland are taking a new stand concerning their rights here. All of us are asking: why such a tough stand concerning us while the Finnish Authorities are hypersensitive about the way Finns are treated abroad, for example in Sweden? Many of us want to do something constructive with our lives in this country. We want to offer a service to Finland. But how can we ever spire to compete equally if there is only a decree governing our rights here?…

Lastly, are we friends or foes of this country because we are ready to stand up for our rights, and maybe later in the future when Finnish citizens… help advance this country?

A blast from the past: The “Foreign Student” of Finland

The Foreign Student was the newsletter of the Foreign Student Club of Helsinki. The humble publication existed from January 1981 to January 1982 and lasted for 11 issues. It was probably the first-ever publication in Finland that spoke out critically against Finland’s then draconian immigration policy.

Why wipe the dust off an old-and-forgotten issue of the Foreign Student? Because Finns, foreigners, Finnish expatriates and their children did voice their opposition on how matters were run under Eilä Kännö, the former cantankerous Aliens Office head.

In Kännö´s book, “Naisena miesten maailmassa,” published in 1990 by Otava, she attempts to show without luck that she was not such an awful official after all. She did what officials did back in those days: only gave her version of things without taking on board any other ones. For example, what is incredulous in the book is that she does not make any mention about foreigners marching on October 19, 1982 for the first time in Finland’s history demanding basic human rights.

She was quoted a day before Ilta-Sanomat as saying that if the foreigners organized the march, they would be thrown in jail. The march was organized by the Helsinki Student Body Association (HYY).

The march was the first news story on the 8:30pm news and received wide coverage in Finland and in countries such as Sweden.

Here is an interesting story that was signed by Ahti Tolvanen and John Witter in the first-ever issue in January 1981:

Have you ever worried about your civil rights or had trouble with work and residence permits? Many foreign students have had difficulties due to a tightening-up policy by Finnish officials. The Association of Foreign Students in Finland decided to speak up for its members at the annual meeting on Dec. 13th.

The meeting voiced its support for the immediate improvement of information services so that foreigners would be more aware of their rights. A petition will also be circulated among students and other foreigners, urging the Minister of Interior to speed up approval of an Aliens Act on the status of foreigners in Finalnd. Ministers and the government have been dragging their feet for months without finalizing the wording of even a draft law.

Meanwhile an antiquated presidential ordinance dating back to the early 50’s, which gives the Aliens Office power to cancel permits and deport us almost at will remains the only regulation concerning foreigners. The Association of Foreign Students in Finland sent a delegation to make recommendations to the Mininster, Mr. Uusitalo in March 1979 but without any concrete results…

Old versus new racism in Finland

If one looks at the hundreds of comments in Migrant Tales, one will note a new form of racism that has started to take hold in many industrialized societies such as Finland.

So-called old, or old-fashioned racism had/has its roots in ethnicity. Thus people are incompatible because they are ethnically different. Even if we have seen less of old racism we are today seeing the same strain mutated through what sociologist call “new racism.”

If before people were incompatible because they looked different, now the favorite argument or excuse is that such a group is incompatible because of culture and religion.

One of the favorite targets of new racists are the Muslims.

Here is an interesting article by AFP that writes about a man that won a $240,000 lawsuit against an airline that forced him to cover his Arab t-shirt.

Could this happen in Finland?