A few clarifications about multiculturalism in Finland

I think it is important to clarify some things about multicutluralism in Finland. One of these is that we are legally such a society. This is upheld in the Constitution and Non-Discrimination Act, which is also known officially as the Equality Act.

This is what our Constitution says about equality in Section 6:

Everyone is equal before the law.
No one shall, without an acceptable reason, be treated differently from other persons on the ground of sex, age, origin, language, religion, conviction, opinion, health, disability or other reason that concerns his or her person. Children shall be treated equally and as individuals and they shall be allowed to influence matters pertaining to themselves to a degree corresponding to their level of development. Equality of the sexes is promoted in societal activity and working life, especially in the determination of pay and the other terms of employment, as provided in more detail by an Act.

If someone believes it’s unbearable to treat immigrants in the same way the majority culture is treated before the law and society, that person should lobby through our democratic institutions for an about-turn in the legislation. If he/she did, and miraculously succeeded, the changes would end up destroying an important part of the values and morals we cherish in our society.

What would be put in its place of Section 6 and the Non-Discrimination Act?

This, I believe, is the question that those who oppose equality for all in society are incapable or would dare to answer publicly. There is, however, a long sad list of countries in the world where they could find examples of where human rights violations are encouraged and where the word democracy can buy you one-way ticket to prison.

Certainly we do not want that to happen in Finland.

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.

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.

Finnish identity in the new century

Since humankind does not still have one flag to rally all the peoples of the world, until that time I hope that it will be the Finnish flag that will wave over this land.

Ever since Finnish independence in 1917, Finns have been forging a sense of national identity. The same tools we used in the previous century to build our national identity have come into conflict with people who do not fit the Elovena-woman prototype on the box of a popular Finnish porridge brand.

In the process of forging a national identity, we created a narrower view of who was entitled to be called a Finn. The dual-citizenship act of 2003 was one of the most important laws that changed matters and opened up the Finnish-identity playing field. Another important right worth mentioning that came into force in the 1980s, was when women were given the right to pass on Finnish citizenship to their foreign-born children.

In my opinion, a Finn is a person who feels he/she is from this land in his/her diverse way. This may include an endless combination of religions, ethnicities, and cultures. To single out people and exclude them from their identity is one of the worse forms of discrimination. It is the same thing that white Americans did to blacks and other minorities before the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. They were “Americans” but they were first and foremost blacks.

When a Finn states that a member of this society must accept Finnish values and customs in order to be accepted, what is he/she actually saying? The message is clear – we do not accept your diversity.

Due to the hundreds of thousands of Finns that migrated from this country in the past century, and the fact that more people are immigrating to Finland, it is clear that we have forged alongside the “official” view of Finnish identity another unofficial one.

Laws like dual citizenship and the equality act are important watersheds that allow our diverse Finnish identities to flourish and be defended by law in this country. A multiethnical Finland should not be seen as a threat, but as an opportunity for this country.

One matter is for certain. It will be the new bold face of Finland during this century.

The Equality Act and Finnish Independence Day

What better time than to bring up the Equality Act of 2004 during Finland’s Independence Day. One of the matters that makes me happy about being a member of this society is that after December 6, 1917, Finland did not become an autocratic country that had no respect for human rights. Despite all the challenges this country faced in the previous century, it still had the courage to build a society based on social justice.

One of the most important laws that have been past in recent years in this country is the Equality Act of 2004. You can also get acquainted with the law in other languages such as Swedish, Russian, Spanish and others. In a nutshell, the law states: The Equality Act 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).

It would be naive to think that one law can correct a social ill such as racism. However, it is a very good and bold first step. It offers hope not only to us, but also to future generations so one day we may build the foundations of a society that is based on good ethnic relations between all groups.