After the latest soundbites from mainstream Finnish politicians regarding their stance against immigration and their apparent lack of hard knowledge of the subject, I decided to set the record straight.

With the help of Statistics Finland (Tilastokeskus), it was not difficult to find the exact numbers of immigrants living in Finland as of end of last year.  The breakdown in the chart below.

As you can see, 155k people of foreign citizenship live here (2.9% of the population and one of the lowest proportions in Europe).  Of those, 34k are refugees, i.e. 22% of all foreigners in Finland and 0.64% of the total population of the country.  Therefore, it is ridiculous to keep on mixing refugees with immigrants if they are only one fifth of the total amount of foreigners living here. By the way, that most demonised group of all, the Somalis, are less than 5k people in the whole country.

Now, after a little dose of facts, let’s tackle the 3 statements that have caught my attention lately:

• “Maassa maan tavalla”: This phrase, part “In Rome do as the Romans”, part “Love it or leave it” was uttered to great effect by the leader of the Finnish Social Democrats.  She went further on to talk about the need for foreigers to obey the law and learn the language.  My first problem with this statement is not its content, but its patronising tone.  When you move abroad you know you will face new situations and have to adapt to your environment, which does include learning at least some of the local language.  Following the law is also part of this process (who wants to move thousands of kilometres at a considerable cost only to end up in jail?).  Furthermore, my second concern is related to the fact that Finnish laws and Finnish customs are not the same thing. Are we a tolerant enough society to accept people who look, dress and sound different as long as they contribute to society and pay their taxes, or is there an ideal of Finnishness they need to adhere to?  Have we agreed on what that ideal is?
• Immigrants coming to Finland take jobs from Finns:  Eero Heinäluoma, another SDP figure, took this cheap stab recently in an interview, further saying that if there is racism it’s because there aren’t enough jobs around.  Let me get this straight: first we’re worried that foreigners (that “very homogeneous” group including e.g. IT workers, PhD students and people with low education from all over the world) don’t contribute to society and live off social security, then we’re worried because they have jobs?  Furthermore, Mr. Heinäluoma doesn’t seem to have a firm grasp of elementary economics: the amount of jobs available is not fixed, it fluctuates with supply and demand. In a functioning market economy such as Finland’s the more people employed means an increased demand for other products and services, generating a ripple effect accross the market.  As one of the Ilta-rags joked, the only thing he was missing was saying that “foreigners steal our women“.
• Ville Rydman’s views on immigration: I’ve been meaning to comment on the platform of this young National Coalition Party leader for some time.  He mentions that recieving skilled migrants is challenging as Finland would be depriving developing countries of talent, while opening the doors to unskilled migration will create an uneducated underclass.  He’s wrong on both measures: skilled migrants earn experience in Finland that can later be transferred to their countries of origin, while unskilled ones have here educational opportunities probably unavailable for them otherwise.  I personally know examples of both.  He then reveals his true colours by saying that immigrants should integrate “fully” to Finnish laws (which is fine) and Finnish ways (discussed above) while expressing that multiculturalism is both wrong and dangerous, without amplifying much further on either statement.  If you simply don’t want people coming here, then why don’t you say so straight up and stop the posturing?

These are only 3 recent examples from 2 mainstream parties, but also certain Centre candidates share the same views (Paavo Väyrynen anyone?) and obviously our “friends” the True Finns are the reason why this whole brouhaha started, after their critical stance of immigration won them many votes in the last elections.  With the economy in the doldrums we knew immigration, with its demostration of the fear of otherness, was going to be an easy target to fish votes and unfortunately were not proved wrong.

Finland deserves better politicians (and politics) than this.

Es interesante ver que algunas de las semillas de la presente situación en México fueron plantadas durante el llamado “milagro mexicano” de 1940-1971.  Clientelismo, monopolios y falta de valor agregado en las actividades económicas  son vicios que se hicieron fuertes durante esa época.  Algunos otros se fortalecieron más tarde, especialmente el narcotráfico, el descuido del sistema educativo y el enfoque exclusivo en Estados Unidos.

En las últimas semanas han llamado mi atención una serie de artículos en los que se manifiesta la preocupación de algunos sectores dada la situación actual de México, especialmente en comparación con nuestros vecinos latinoamericanos.  La diferencia nace, a mi parecer, de la decidia de la clase política y de la falta de una cultura democrática en la sociedad que complemente nuestro sistema político.  Somos buenísimos para quejarnos y para asistir a manifestaciones, pero díganme quién le ha llamado a su diputado o senador para pedirle que rinda cuentas.

Viendo desde fuera el número de oportunidades perdidas en los últimos 10 años por el exceso de politiqueros y la falta de verdaderos estadistas, y el estado de nuestra inversión en el desarrollo de recursos humanos a través de la educación, por desgracia no me sorprende el estado del país.

Por desgracia, como es más fácil armar mitotes que ponerse a trabajar, no soy tan optimista como quisiera. Espero estar equivocado.

Mexican public finances are not in the best of shapes given the economic crisis and the extremely difficult year so far for the country, so in their budget proposal for the next year Congress has proposed to raise taxes on pretty much everything instead of trimming down public spending further and closing useless ministries and bureaucratic institutions.

One “small detail” that has gotten pretty much every Mexican netizen riled up is a raise of 3% on telecommunications, including the use of internet, as Congress considers it a “luxury good”.  Great way of stifle the development of the nation even further, especially when comparing it to what is going in in places like Finland where brodband access is a right (which doesn’t mean it’s subsidised by the state).  Here in Finland it is understood that connectivity brings economic advantages and growth, unlike our prehistoric Mexican politicians.

According to the Finnish media, politicians seem stuck in the past with their antiquated language competences (the videos are priceless, click on the names) and lack of understanding of the immigrant situation.

I wonder what would they do if the had disgraceful politicians like this one. If you want to understand why a country with 5 million people, in the middle of nowhere, with terrible climate for a big part of the year and with no natural resources is developed while others are not, please notice that here they invest in their human capital.  That’s what they have and it makes all the difference.

Yo ya había visto esta reflexión en un e-mail, pero ahora me encontré con el video.  Como un mexicano radicado en el extranjero, orgulloso de mis orígenes pero que también ha aprendido de la cultura del lugar donde se encuentra, me da pena.  Y rabia.

Via Vivir México.

You know that the times are a-changin’ when terrorists armed with paper cutters are a serious menace to the world’s largest superpower, unpaid networks of developers can build an operating system that is now used in enterprise-grade IT solutions and when strategies designed to erradicate a problem such as terrorism or poverty add more fuel to the fire.  While this book is geared towards an American audience and focuses on the ramifications  of this phenomenon in foreign policy, I have been thinking about what kind of lessons this can provide business.

The author introduces in this book the concept of resilience, where instead of trying to have grand monolithic strategies to anticipate every single scenario we should instead focus on having different approaches towards a problem, “gardening” our way to ride the ever-coming waves of change and take advantage of them.  This idea resonates on many levels with many concepts I use as part of my daily life, which I will make a list of (and no, I’m not Chinese =P):

• One of the main lessons in aikido, which is using the forces of others to your own advantage.  You don’t oppose a force with another force, you channel it so that it goes where you want to.
• Systems intelligence, where an individual accepts that life is a set of interdepentent relationships where there are feedback mechanisms that can be tweaked to one’s own advantage with huge effects due to the non-linear character of the system.
• Social media,  technological convergence, creativity and other related professional interests of mine.

The interesting conclusion to which the author arrives, which I also find very appealing, is the need for empowering diverse change agents who can drive different approaches to solving a problem to work as a sort of “immunity system” for an organisation, be it a country, a company or the world.

It’s not a complicated book (in reality, I found it a little bit too light as I would have wanted a few more examples from other fields and more detail on the conceptual framework) but definitely a recommended read.

You might have heard of peak oil, the idea explaining the point in time when we have reached the maximum amount of oil produced, after which starts a decline that affects the world as we know it (and yes, I’m using this phrase on purpose).  Jeff Rubin, a Canadian economist, took the issue head-on in this book, explaining not only why in his view the current economic crisis is at its source one huge oil price shock, but also how will the world economy change once oil is not so plentiful, more expensive and there are more economies hungry for it.

Basically, what he predicts is an end to the current version of globalisation, where you have distributed value chains, cheap travel and products from all over the world at your doorstep.  I don’t know about you, but even if I live more or less ecologically, use renewable energy where possible and don’t have a car, such a future would wreak havoc with my lifestyle as it would be impossible for me to find the food I want and be able to visit my family over the holidays.  The subtitle of this blog is “musings from a child of globalisation” after all, isn’t it?

I think it is time to sweep this issue under the rug every time it is brought up and start thinking about what kind of innovations are needed.  Who’s with me?

A summary in English of this topic in this note from AP.

Nos tocó estar en México justo antes de que tuvieran lugar las elecciones para el Congreso de la Unión, presidentes municipales y uno que otro gobernador.  Además de la contaminación visual, por lo que pude ver la calidad de las propuestas era francamente patética.  Para la galería del horror teníamos varios ejemplos:

• Un partido autodenominado Verde que proponía la pena de muerte (WTF?).
• Un candidato delegacional del PRI cuyo lema de campaña era “Seguridad o Renuncio” (¿para qué votaría por tí, si vas a hacer las maletas inmediatamente?).
• Una ex-deportista sin experiencia, con poca educación  pero aún así se postulaba a una delegación del D.F. (Me caes muy bien Ana, pero no es suficiente para que votara por tí).
• Un partido de derecha sin liderazgo, con pocas propuestas creíbles y que no supo movilizar a sus simpatizantes.

Con semejantes alternativas, no me extraña en absoluto que se haya registrado un crecimiento tan fuerte del voto nulo.  Como dice el siguiente afiche:

Y sí, trágicamente para muchos fue su mejor opción.

Como todos sabemos, el gran ganador de estas elecciones fue el PRI.  Tanto cacarear durante años con sacar al PRI del poder para terminar regresando a lo mismo.  Sólo espero no le hayamos terminado de dar en la torre a nuestra naciente democracia.

• In the United States, social media helps elect presidents.
• In Iran, social media helps organise protests against the government.
• In Mexico, social media helps candidates smear their opponents.

When I realised Martin-Éric had already done a better job of listing the same points, in slightly more colourful language.