Could you expand on that? As a foreigner I don’t understand why refusing to speak a language would prevent “the system” from benefiting of it.
And could you also explain what you consider poor treatment? In my country we have this image of Finland as a super advanced, super ideologically liberal, happy country
I’ll try, keep in mind that this is my personal view and likely only partially represents society at large.
Background: Finland has a Swedish speaking minority, roughly 8 % of the population. Teaching the whole population both languages has a stated (no source) aim of uniting the country and securing the minority governmental services in their native language. Additionally Swedish is/was seen as opening deeper nordic cooperation. While there are some cultural differences between the Swedish speaking minority and the Finnish speaking majority these, in my view, seem insignificant and the vast majority speaks fluent Finnish.
In practice due to small number of hours and the general unwillingness of the majority to learn Swedish these goals are poorly achieved. Lack of motivation stems from both deep rooted political believes ( in practice false ones) and from the fact that Swedish is not needed as well as a backlash against the mandatory teaching of it. In all encounters I have ever had Finnish has been used as it is spoken well by both parties.
So 15 year old me thought that it was a waste of my precious time and I decided to never speak it.
After my school years technological developments have made it even more a waste of time. I should note that politically I would support removing the mandatory teaching and language requirements of civil servants if it wasn’t supported by far tight autocratic forces.
I have heard stories of language based discrimination, though only few. On average (not sure about median) the minority lives longer and is wealthier, though not by a large margin
All of the above must be seen against the backdrop of me being a part of the majority and well off even within it. So in a position were it is quite easy to be liberal but also not to see problems.
Could you expand on that? As a foreigner I don’t understand why refusing to speak a language would prevent “the system” from benefiting of it.
And could you also explain what you consider poor treatment? In my country we have this image of Finland as a super advanced, super ideologically liberal, happy country
I’ll try, keep in mind that this is my personal view and likely only partially represents society at large.
Background: Finland has a Swedish speaking minority, roughly 8 % of the population. Teaching the whole population both languages has a stated (no source) aim of uniting the country and securing the minority governmental services in their native language. Additionally Swedish is/was seen as opening deeper nordic cooperation. While there are some cultural differences between the Swedish speaking minority and the Finnish speaking majority these, in my view, seem insignificant and the vast majority speaks fluent Finnish.
In practice due to small number of hours and the general unwillingness of the majority to learn Swedish these goals are poorly achieved. Lack of motivation stems from both deep rooted political believes ( in practice false ones) and from the fact that Swedish is not needed as well as a backlash against the mandatory teaching of it. In all encounters I have ever had Finnish has been used as it is spoken well by both parties.
So 15 year old me thought that it was a waste of my precious time and I decided to never speak it.
After my school years technological developments have made it even more a waste of time. I should note that politically I would support removing the mandatory teaching and language requirements of civil servants if it wasn’t supported by far tight autocratic forces.
I have heard stories of language based discrimination, though only few. On average (not sure about median) the minority lives longer and is wealthier, though not by a large margin
All of the above must be seen against the backdrop of me being a part of the majority and well off even within it. So in a position were it is quite easy to be liberal but also not to see problems.
Thanks for the detailed explanation!