What Signifies Foreigner Integration?

I've had many interesting conversations around integration over the years, both in Finland as a foreigner, and in Australia as a local, who was often considered as a foreigner. These have been held with friends, family, and strangers, and everyone has an opinion. I do too. Though I also think that the world has changed significantly over the last few decades and this has upended a lot of the conditions of integration.

In Finland, the expectation is that in order to be integrated, a foreigner needs to learn the language. And while I understand this in many respects, I don't think it is a key component at all. Yes, ideally a foreigner in a country should learn the language, but there are also many reasons why they don't, or can't.

For instance when I came to Finland and knowing I was only going to be here a year, I still tried to learn Finnish, but ran into a problem. No one would speak to me in Finnish, only English. Even when I tried, they would answer in English. Some gave the excuse of wanting to improve their (already great) English, but it was most likely because it was easier and we could speak in depth about things, because Finland has spent billions of Euros and decades educating Finns to learn English. It is because of this last bit that I think it is ridiculous that when someone comes into the country as a refugee, they have to learn Finnish before they can get a job - even though they already speak English.

But the job is another issue for learning Finnish, because lots of companies are actually international and have a corporate language of English. This means if coming in for work, a person doesn't necessarily have the opportunity to learn Finnish there, but they also have no social network outside of the workplace. And integration services for learning Finnish aren't given to those who already have a job. A catch-22 situation. Over time, the social network builds an English-speaking affair.

But these days, in a world that is not only globalised but also has an increasing range of innovative tools to circumnavigate language differences, is language really a good indicator of anything? After all, all the drug addicts and alcoholics hanging around the middle of the city speak Finnish fluently, albeit with an angry slur and filthy words. I just don't think language is a good indicator of integration these days, even if it is an uncomfortable situation for those who believe it is vital to their identity. In the future, I believe that it is going to matter very little, as it will be like in Star Trek where they have a universal translator.

Personally, I think that it makes more sense to look under the surface of what someone says and instead consider how they behave. I think behaviour is a far better indicator of "who we are" than the words we speak. Is the person working or actively looking for work, are they trying to add value to the community and country, are they building a family that will add value to society, are they interested in the governance, are they building a social network? Essentially, are they are net positive for the country?

Being foreign doesn't automatically come with a value-add, there has to be action to increase practical impact for the better. And "for the better" has to be more than just paying enough tax, right? It has to be of the sort that not only creates value today, but encourages value to be generated in the future also. That means that the family, and the behaviours of family members matter too.

I find all of this interesting, because from my observations and experience, I don't think any foreigner is every fully integrated, if it means that they have to get approval from all locals. It doesn't matter how many tick boxes are checked and how much value added, they will always be foreign. And what this means is that there is no chance to actually integrate, no matter how well the language is spoken, if being accepted is the metric. However, it is possible to integrate if it comes down to adding value to society, even if not accepted, and this can be done *without speaking the language at all.

I also think it would be interesting if there was an overall "integration score" that could be applied, where someone would have to get over say, 80/100 to be considered integrated. What factors would be included? And then, how many locals would not make the cut? Because while people can be born into a country and culture, it doesn't mean their behaviours align, nor does it mean they are a net positive. I suspect that a lot of locals are not a net positive, yet still benefit from acceptance. And perhaps locals shouldn't accept local people who have had all the opportunities to be a functioning and valuable member of society, but have chosen to be a cost instead, a problem.

I don't think social scoring is the answer and will cause a huge amount of problems, but the fact is that it already happens at the individual level, and in some part, at the government level also. We have our opinions when we walk down the street and see someone who doesn't look local, and we pass a judgement, making assumptions about their behaviours and the value they add or take away from society.

It doesn't matter what we say, or what language we say it in, we all pass judgements on others.

In that respect, there is zero diversity.