I am biased, because I don't speak Finnish.
I have been in the country for over twenty years and a permanent resident since 2006. And while I can do basics in most cases, I am nowhere near proficient enough with the language in order to work in Finnish. This seems a pretty big problem, especially in todays climate, where nationalism is running rampant in populist politics. It has very little to to about what is best for the country or the citizens, it is all about grabbing support for one side or another in order to further narrow agendas. However, the companies that need people often have English as their corporate language, because not only are their offices and employees global, their markets aren't in Finland either.
But the language question is interesting, because I do miss a lot because my Finnish isn't good enough to do what I do socially, meaning that Finns have to move into English to accommodate me. However, learning languages as an adult is a skill, and not everyone can do it successfully. What if other skills were prerequisites for permanent residency, like math, the ability to run 100 meters in under 15 seconds, or paint a recognisable portrait? My father was talented with languages and spoken around a dozen, as is my daughter - but I am not. Similarly, I don't remember song words, even if I have heard a song 1000 times. Should that also be a prerequisite?
Of course, when "welcoming" potential new residents into a country, language is a big part of the equation, as it is a key component of communicating, learning the culture, and becoming part of the community. However, speaking the language is also no guarantee that this will happen either, as evidenced in Finland (and other countries) by the employment discrimination faced based on colour of skin, or even origin of name. Language or lack of language is a part of the issue, but it is not the only issue.
However, this is 2025 and we are in the decade of artificial intelligence as a consumer product, and there are plenty of applications that are able to translate speech into multiple languages on the fly, and they are only going to get better. So, in the near future, how much does any language really matter? Essentially, countries will be able to become language agnostic and become far more productive. For instance in Finland, there are three official languages, with Finnish and Swedish being the main ones, and Sámi being the third. Nearly all can speak Finnish, six percent are considered Swedish speakers (with 90% of them speaking Finnish too), and Sámi is rare. The cost to do everything in three languages, is pretty immense.
Language should soon be a irrelevant discussion, shouldn't it?
It has been heading this way for a very long time already, as the internet has driven a more globalised understanding and English has become the dominant language. But, English needn't be the only language spoken internationally, because in this day and age, people can speak whatever they want to speak., and it can be translated on the fly into any other language. The skill of having a language is no longer such a selling point, so why demand it to be so for citizenship? Translation services for text and speech are now good enough, and they are only going to get better with the continued support of AI, and at a faster pace.
It raises some interesting questions though, because what does "national culture" become when no matter what people speak, there is a common language through translation. What is "national culture now" when it is pretty bloody obvious that there is massive extremes in cultural belief within people of the same nationality, with generations in country under their belt? Just look at the political situation in the US and tell me about national culture again.
Language is an incredible technology that we have developed to communicate and collaborate to organise ourselves, to be able to evolve and innovate, with us even making entirely new languages to describe the world, and to build from, like math and the coding languages. Yet interestingly, now it is becoming a factor that slows us down, because we are unable to progress as fast with our language learning as we need to to effectively operate in a rapidly shifting technological environment.
Yet, our limitation is self imposed, because we are holding onto traditions that we didn't even build or agree to. You speak your mother tongue because of your parents and where you grew up - you had no choice. If you had been born somewhere else, at a different time, in a different culture, not only would your language be different also, but your entire belief system might be opposite to what it is now. You might be incredibly racist - or perhaps the opposite.
Your choice?
I didn't choose whether I am talented at learning languages or not, in the same way that I didn't choose the colour of my skin, or my height or intelligence, or lack thereof - yet daily, I am judged for it. Now that there are alternative workarounds for language, is having it as a prerequisite for residency considered discrimination? And then consider that countries like Finland want skilled immigrants, but expect them to also invest into learning another language in order to have residency security, even though it is irrelevant for their employment. It seems like systemic prejudice, doesn't it?
There is a lot of value in learning a language, but the "communication with others" is of less value than it once was. There is benefit in the process of learning and the effects it has on thought patterns in the brain, but not having a second language, or a third, or fourth, doesn't mean a person doesn't have other skills to offer. Language for communication is lessening in importance, and as such, we should recognise it in our culture, that there are other values that are more important at this point in time. But importance and need don't matter. Language is just another differentiator to be used to separate and control the masses.
But since I don't speak Finnish, I don't have anything to say.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
