University professor says critical debate on immigration is taboo in Finland
Timo Vihavainen
|
Owing to political correctness, it is difficult to discuss Finnish immigration policy, estimates Timo Vihavainen, a professor of Russian studies at the University of Helsinki.
Political correctness refers to the excessively discreet language used in order that no one would be offended. Originally, the phenomenon comes from the United States.
”In Finland, immigration is a new phenomenon, and we are nowadays fairly international. It does not take long for anything fashionable to come here from America”, Vihavainen says, with some irony.
The interview of Vihavainen in Sunday’s Helsingin Sanomat (4.10.) has prompted an influx of opinions both in newspapers and on Internet discussion forums. The reactions have been 90% positive, Vihavainen describes.
In his new book Länsimaiden tuho ("The Fall of the West", Otava) Vihavainen criticises for example the debate on immigration so far. In his view, the discussion is muddled by the conscience problems of participants, a phenomenon of which Germans use a sarcastic epithet Gutmensch (”a good human being”).
”People are discussing the question of whether or not they are good human beings in every respect. All stereotypes are regarded as awful, even though they should be part of normal thinking”, Vihavainen argues.
According to Vihavainen, most problems relating to immigration are attributable to Islam, which in his view has a ”very aggressive” basic message. He predicts that in the future Finland will live more and more on Islamic terms.
Vihavainen also criticises Finnish intellectuals who emphasise pluralism, think that everything is of equal value, and hush all critical debate.
”We have naïvely believed that immigrants come here to take care of the elderly, to do other low-salary jobs, and to serve the consumer society without consuming much themselves”, Vihavainen noted.
In his interview on Sunday, Vihavainen noted further that unless immigrants learn the language properly, they remain second-class citizens and become bitter.
In spite of his criticism, Vihavainen thinks that it is entirely possible to successfully integrate immigrants into Finnish society.
”If there is a proper number of immigrants who really wish to be integrated, there will be no problem”, he believes.
”The goal is good, and attempts have been made to help immigrants to integrate. Moreover, we do not have similar problems to those for example in Sweden. Let us hope that we never will”, Vihavainen concluded.
Helsingin Sanomat asked some influential Finns to comment on Vihavainen’s opinions.
One of them agreed that it must be possible to have an open debate on immigration as long as the discussion does not label anybody.
Another criticised Vihavainen for ”selective humanism”, while one person disapproved of his definition of Islam, claiming that so far he has found no evidence indicating that Finns would increasingly live on Islamic terms.
Political correctness refers to the excessively discreet language used in order that no one would be offended. Originally, the phenomenon comes from the United States.
”In Finland, immigration is a new phenomenon, and we are nowadays fairly international. It does not take long for anything fashionable to come here from America”, Vihavainen says, with some irony.
The interview of Vihavainen in Sunday’s Helsingin Sanomat (4.10.) has prompted an influx of opinions both in newspapers and on Internet discussion forums. The reactions have been 90% positive, Vihavainen describes.
In his new book Länsimaiden tuho ("The Fall of the West", Otava) Vihavainen criticises for example the debate on immigration so far. In his view, the discussion is muddled by the conscience problems of participants, a phenomenon of which Germans use a sarcastic epithet Gutmensch (”a good human being”).
”People are discussing the question of whether or not they are good human beings in every respect. All stereotypes are regarded as awful, even though they should be part of normal thinking”, Vihavainen argues.
According to Vihavainen, most problems relating to immigration are attributable to Islam, which in his view has a ”very aggressive” basic message. He predicts that in the future Finland will live more and more on Islamic terms.
Vihavainen also criticises Finnish intellectuals who emphasise pluralism, think that everything is of equal value, and hush all critical debate.
”We have naïvely believed that immigrants come here to take care of the elderly, to do other low-salary jobs, and to serve the consumer society without consuming much themselves”, Vihavainen noted.
In his interview on Sunday, Vihavainen noted further that unless immigrants learn the language properly, they remain second-class citizens and become bitter.
In spite of his criticism, Vihavainen thinks that it is entirely possible to successfully integrate immigrants into Finnish society.
”If there is a proper number of immigrants who really wish to be integrated, there will be no problem”, he believes.
”The goal is good, and attempts have been made to help immigrants to integrate. Moreover, we do not have similar problems to those for example in Sweden. Let us hope that we never will”, Vihavainen concluded.
Helsingin Sanomat asked some influential Finns to comment on Vihavainen’s opinions.
One of them agreed that it must be possible to have an open debate on immigration as long as the discussion does not label anybody.
Another criticised Vihavainen for ”selective humanism”, while one person disapproved of his definition of Islam, claiming that so far he has found no evidence indicating that Finns would increasingly live on Islamic terms.
Helsingin Sanomat