By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Finns Party has reacted strongly to the stripping of Sarah Dzafce’s Miss Finland crown following a perceived racist gesture. MP Juho Eerola changed his Facebook profile picture to mimic Dzafce’s gesture, accompanied by the phrase “Je Suis Sarah” in solidarity. This move, along with criticism from other party members, reflects the party’s displeasure with the decision and broader concerns about social media “witch hunts.” In other news, Finland is projected to take on an additional 17.8 billion euros in debt this year, and, finally, Finland is awaiting its first extended sunshine of the month, with media outlets preparing live streams of the event.
Read the original article here
Finnish politicians in support of Miss Finland’s mocking of Asian eyes, and repeating the racist gesture on social media, has sparked a considerable amount of outrage and disappointment. The fact that elected officials, individuals entrusted with representing their constituents and upholding ethical standards, would engage in such behavior is deeply concerning, regardless of the individuals’ stated intentions. It’s a clear indication of a failure to understand, or perhaps a blatant disregard for, the impact of their actions.
The reactions suggest that the lack of an apology, and instead, the offering of vague, deflective explanations, further exacerbates the problem. The observation that this kind of behavior aligns with a pattern often seen in conservative circles globally is telling. This pattern suggests a willingness to downplay or dismiss the harm caused by offensive actions, which only serves to reinforce the perception of a lack of accountability and a failure to recognize the impact of their words and actions. It’s not just about the gesture itself, but about the message it sends to those who are targeted by it and to society as a whole.
The issue is made worse by the fact that these individuals belong to a far-right party currently holding a position of power. This underscores that their views, and the actions that stem from them, are not isolated incidents but reflect a broader ideology. This is because they have a platform to promote such harmful rhetoric. The fact that they aren’t “nobodies” but hold influence makes their actions even more damaging, as they have the power to shape public discourse and potentially influence policy. The assertion that they are “fishing for attention” and may have ulterior motives, such as currying favor with foreign political figures or seeking financial gain, raises further questions about their priorities and the motivations behind their actions.
The experiences of those who have been subjected to similar mocking and prejudice is also important to consider. The recounting of childhood experiences with the same type of ridicule provides a poignant reminder of the long-lasting emotional impact of such behavior. It highlights the deeply personal and damaging effects of racism, and it underscores the importance of confronting and condemning such actions. It’s also interesting to note the frustration with the broader negative response to this.
The comments also touch on the complexities of national identity and the dangers of generalizing about entire populations. The frustration expressed with overly broad generalizations about the Finnish people is understandable, and it is a crucial reminder that not everyone shares the same views. While the actions of these politicians are reprehensible, they do not define an entire nation. The call to focus on the actions of the politicians themselves, rather than making sweeping generalizations about Finnish people as a whole, is both valid and necessary.
Moreover, the discussions around this incident also reflect the broader political landscape and the challenges posed by right-wing populism. The assertion that right-wing populists share a unified message and tactic is worth considering. The ability of right-wing parties to gain traction in various countries, and the often-similar tactics they employ, underscores the need for vigilance and a critical examination of their rhetoric and actions.
The fact that the individuals involved in this incident are members of a right-wing party, known for its xenophobic tendencies, provides crucial context. It is essential to understand that their actions are not isolated incidents but rather manifestations of a particular political ideology. The emphasis on the “right-wing” label is not just about political affiliation, but about the specific set of beliefs and attitudes that often characterize such groups. The fact that the actions of these politicians were viewed as “embarrassing” and harmful for the country’s reputation highlights the need for accountability and for condemnation of such behavior, not just domestically, but on the world stage.