Hmmm... just when I thought this thread was winding down...
sammy wrote:daryl wrote:Discussion of the policies of other countries is, of course, beside the point. The definition does not exclude policies on the grounds that they are not unique ("unless everybody does it")
Daryl, I also agree with you on many points that you presented in the example cases. Those particular returnees should not perhaps have been allowed to come to Finland in the first place, at least not with such a flimsy "motive". (depending on how you look at things, however, saying
that may be regarded as racist...)
My US citizen friend took advantage of the returnee regulations both to enter Finland and then to resist expulsion from Finland. If those regulations had included an iota of cultural content, then this would not have been possible. Germany, I am sure, would not have accepted someone like him under their corresponding rules.
I have yet to find any other country in which the DNA qualification for immigration privileges is quite so direct. In the case of Ingrian returnees (technically: returnees from the former USSR) Finland has now adjusted this policy in a sensible direction (although the underlying discrimination remains). However, the policy remains unchanged for returnees from elsewhere. My US citizen friend is free to return (with his dependents) as and when he needs the benefits of the Finnish health care system or a pension or basic social security.
sammy wrote:However, I think rather that it is not completely beside the point in the present discussion whether other countries have (or do not have) similar policies. It is blindingly obvious that "the definition does not exclude policies on the grounds that they are not unique". And yet: at least when I think about why I personally reacted to your message in the first place, and also maybe Hank - it was not to "deny" that we have such a returnee policy. Rather it's been a reaction to the fact that other countries in fact do have similar policies combined with the underlying contemptuous tone in your rhetoric [my italics]:
I'm afraid I must ask you to bite the bullet: do you agree that Finland's returnee policy (as now applied to foreigners of Finnish descent who are citizens of countries outside of the former USSR) grants privileges based solely on ancestry? This is a yes or no question.
If you answer this question yes (as I think you must), then I would ask you merely to confirm that granting privileges solely on the basis of ancestry falls within the meaning of "racial discrimination" as defined in the UN Convention.
Is it then your view that this racial discrimination is somehow more acceptable if it is widely practised?
Would it be more acceptable, for example, to exclude coloured people from bars and restaurants in Helsinki if all or most establishments did so? Should the District Court of Helsinki "jättää syytettyä tuomitsematta" on the grounds that the criminal offence in question is very widespread?
sammy wrote:
daryl wrote:From the remainder of the posting and the poster's name, I suspect there may be some Finnish ancestry in there somewhere. If so, then you may be able to take advantage of the racist element in Finland's immigration legislation by coming to Finland as a "returnee".
I should stress that this is purely a matter of biological origin. If you have acquired your name and Finnish language skills without Finnish ancestry, then the racist privileges do not apply to you.
If you are recognised as a "returnee", then you can bypass most of the bureaucratic nonsense that third-country nationals have to endure.
(the "bureaucratic nonsense" is largely there to protect both the Finnish national interest and the interests of the applicants)
I love the word "largely" in that sentence!
However, you will also note the obvious corrollary that in the case of returnees the "bureaucratic nonsense" is absent, and that the Finnish national interest and the interests of the applicants therefore remain unprotected. In other words, Finland thinks it has nothing to fear from returnees and it also doesn't give a damn about how the returnee manages after arrival.
This was very much the attitude of many senior civil servants (thankfully now retired) back in 1990.
sammy wrote:Now, I'm letting of steam from this discussion a bit. At least as far as I'm concerned your words quoted above sound downright patronising, as the tone of your message implies that "only in Finland...". Oh well. Maybe it's just me, but I'm echoing Hank in saying that (as a Finn on this forum) I am sick and tired of reading about how each smallest detail of Finland's policies, be they policies on immigration, language, student admission, etc etc are screamingly labelled as "racist! racist! racist!" as soon as some foreigner does not immediately get what he or she wants, or has to fill in some kind of a form, or has to attend traditional Finnish Christmas feasts at the school, or notices that some things maybe are easier to arrange if you happen to be a native Finn. In fact, I occasionally feel like shouting, in Basil Fawlty style, WELL HOW FRIGGING PERFECT DOES FINLAND HAVE TO BECOME TO SATISFY YOUR INEXHAUSTIBLE DEMANDS, EH?
(In case the last few sentences raise a few hairs... well, deliberate, you see? The way one oversimplifies and "puts things" may often be the issue, not what is being said. If, as you said, you've had many people hopping up and down in discussing this subject, it may actually be the choice of words, or rhetoric if you like, that's largely to blame. As you know, "racism", besides being a real and tangible issue in itself, is quite a heavily laden word which is bound to cause disagreement and uproad if used provocatively)
This reminds me of the response given by the late Knud Möller during an election debate in the early 1990s. We foreigners were grilling a bunch of politicians from a wide range of political parties in a public meeting and I asked whether Finland's returnee policy amounted to racial discrimination because it granted privileges based on national extraction. Möller was hard of hearing at that stage of his life, but he seemed to be the only person on the stage who had heard my question. His answer was:
"Well, I suppose it is, a little bit."
I have met very few politicians and civil servants with this degree of honesty.
After nearly 20 years living in Finland by choice and participating in a long-sustained reform process, I am probably the wrong target for your frustration. The flaw in the returnee policy is one of the few remaining problems from what was originally a very long list of shortcomings in Finnish policies concerning foreigners.
Let's just say that the State sets a bad example when it offers privileges based on ancestry while trying to espouse and uphold a criminal law and a constitution that outlaw this very practice. You would not be allowed to open a bar in Helsinki that only admitted people with at least one Finnish great grandparent or that charged them less for drinks.
sammy wrote:
Would/do you like being called/considered a "foreigner" all the time?
I am a foreigner? Where's the stigma? In your mind, I think.
sammy wrote:
...
In any case, despite the often flame-inviting subject the discussion has this time been fairly civilised which I appreciate. On the other hand I also hope that you understand that racism-fuelled Finland-bashing -be it direct or implied- does not always motivate us Finns (well, at least not myself) very much to provide advice to "foreign" people on this forum. Respect is not a one-way street, personally or culturally.
Hmmm... you certainly seem to be motivated.
I think it is fair to say that more people are shocked and offended by the idea of being considered racist than actually understand what racism is and how it is manifest.
One of the biggest problems is even recognising our own racism. I grew up in the South of England - in the crucible of British Empire loyalism. From before I learned to talk I was surrounded by racist views espoused by people who considered themselves entirely respectable.
It is, I think, more or less an inevitable consequence of certain social systems that racist modes of thinking can become commonplace, and that these modes of thinking can give rise to discriminatory social and legal policies.
sammy wrote:And by the way, as it has been politely suggested by someone earlier on this Forum, Finland has no culture; ergo, we can not have cultural toes...
I would like to have 5 cents for every time a representative of one culture has pointed to a representative of another culture and said "you've got no culture".
And on a lighter, but still connected note:
Scratch a socialist and you'll find a liberal.
Scratch a liberal and you'll find a moderate.
Scratch a moderate and you'll find a reactionary.
Scratch a reactionary and you'll find a fascist.
Scratch a fascist...
and you'll find yourself in hospital.
daryl
