I ran a session today from the sofa, with my legs up on a cushion, and unshowered. Blah... I hate not showering, but I have been told I can't until tomorrow. What a grot. Still, it was a good session and we spent the time talking about immigrants, integrating and intolerance.
Typical business conversation.
Well, it does have some connection, because there are problems with immigrants in Finland, because while they are needed, there are also challenges in how they integrate. As I mentioned to my clients today, there is so much ambiguity around what "integrated" means as while many talk about culture and language, there is far more to it than that.
While language is relatively homogenous here, even that has dialect differences to the point that some words used in one area are not understood by those in another, unless they have already been exposed to it before. So, does "learning the language" really need to understand all the nuance, because of so - Finns haven't learned their language well enough. Sure, these differences are minor - but as I asked the other day, where are the boundaries?
But the problem I was talking about with integration to my clients today was that not only is there no definition of what is integrated, but there is also differences amongst Finns - so people born here, not working, on social security, only taking value - are they integrated? They speak the language, their parents and grandparents and great grandparents are Finnish, but are they a net positive for society? Since they have had all the same culture and opportunity as other Finns, with free education, healthcare and social support - should they be deported because they cost too much?
I don't know what the current figures are, but about a decade ago it cost about 500,000€ to educate the average Finn from start to end of first degree. There are people with many degrees they never use. Oh, and a report that came out yesterday noted that "third country" students (those from outside the EU) completed 20% more courses in a year and graduated earlier than Finns from university. Education is expensive - but people are not as motivated when they aren't paying for it.
Back to one of the many problems with the integration though, is that while Finns say they want immigrants to integrate and live like Finns do, it really isn't the case. They don't want them to be equals in position, or salary, or wealth, yet they want them to integrate and act like Finns. How is it possible to be like Finns, if only earning 70% of what Finns do, only able to get apartments and houses in places where other foreigners are, and unable to afford the same kind of lifestyle as the average Finnish person?
It is a systemic problem.
And a cultural problem.
And it isn't handouts or "integration programs" that will solve the problem. It is a *change in culture, where people who want the country to reach its potential economically and as a society, recognise that they are going to have to be part of the solution. they are going to have to support other people's successes - people that don't look like them, sound like them, or walk like them. It is in everyone's best interest to have everyone do increasingly well in the system of society. But the problem with not accepting this, means that the average will "naturally" come down.
It is pretty simple to illustrate.
Rich country A has a population of 1000 and a quality of life score of 100. Person comes in from poor country B that has a quality of life score of 50. With the shittiest job in Country A, they are still able to improve their relative quality of life to their home country to 75, less than the locals. Now, with a population of 1001, the average quality of life score has dropped to 99.975.
Just a smidge, but a decline nonetheless. Yet, the person who caused the decline is working and has a better quality of life than in their original country B. At first, none of this is noticed of course, since the fractions are so small, but over time as more and more immigrants come into Country A for a better life, the average keeps going down. Not only that, the longer they are in the country, the more integrated with it they become, yet their ability to actually be fully integrated takes multiple generations, if ever, because they aren't given the same opportunities to live the same quality of life as locals.
In many places, they end up in communities that are segregated from the "local" society by colour, language, religion, and income. And because of the disconnection and the lack of opportunity, many more problems form over time. And ultimately, the locals are going to blame the immigrants for not performing as well or adding as much value to society, as well as causing lots of problems that threaten the local way of life or culture - whatever "culture" actually means.
For a funny example, while the girl next door is two years younger than my daughter, they play together often due to proximity. She is a lovely, talkative kid who has a big spirit. The other day she said to my daughter,
"I was worried about playing with you at first, because I thought everyone with dark hair is a thief. But, I don't think you are now."
She isn't yet seven.
So, where did she learn to have such opinions and beliefs? The family next door has been there for about two years now and we don't really know them. However, I have the sense that when they moved into a nice house in the suburbs, they didn't think they would be living next to a coloured foreigner who doesn't speak Finnish.
When I asked my daughter about how she felt about what the girl said, she said that she has learned from us "not to care what others think of her". And when I asked if she has heard anything else similar, she said "yes, at school some people tease me by saying your dad is black".
These are kids whose parents are mostly of the youngest Millennials ages in their early thirties. Yet, it seems that they are teaching the same kind of prejudices to their kids, that their parents, and their grandparents had taught them. Save the culture?
Immigration is a problem!
It is a massive problem, because the majority of countries in the world that need immigrants, don't want those immigrants to be as successful, or the gods forbid, more successful than they are. They want the immigrants to fill the job gaps, but also to "know their place" in the pecking order of society and stay at the bottom. It is a "cut off your nose to spite your face" mentality, and everyone suffers and ends up with more problems, less potential - and a lower quality of life.
But, for lots of those immigrants, the quality of life is still better than they would have had in their home country, and they can still lose a lot of quality and still be better off than they would have been. So, with not being treated or really welcomed into society fully, the average foreigner also has less incentive to add more value to society. And again, just like people who undermine other's potential to save their own ego, they too are cutting off their own noses by not looking to improve society as a whole.
We all carry prejudices, because we all have preferences for one thing over another, one style over another, one hobby over another, one colour of another, one butt shape over another - we all have our likes. But, when the preferences that drive our behaviours are actually making ourselves worse off as individuals and communities, we really, really have to question if that is the kind of person we want to be.
We should all ask ourselves that often.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Be part of the Hive discussion.
And you may be rewarded.
