site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 14, 2022

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

12
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

CULTURE WAR IN FINLAND: THE GREAT SÁMI SHOWDOWN

I haven't posted these in some time due to being busy with kids and stuff, but this one serves as a good writing exercise for me to organize my thoughts as well.

The Finnish government has spent most of the last weeks squabbling about a topic that is obscure even in Finland – Sámi issues. Most Finns, of course, know about the Sámi, ‘EU’s only indigenous nation’, but when it comes to the actual political affairs concerning Sámi, the common reaction is “I’m not touching that with a 3.048-meter pole”. Since I don’t know much about it either, I’ve tried to learn more about it by reading a fair bit of stuff concerning the topic. Here’s an overview.

WHO ARE THE SÁMI?

The Sámi are an indigenous nation in the northern regions of Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Russia, stereotypically thought of as nomadic reindeer herders though of course these days working in numerous modern professions. There’s a total of 70 600-100 000 Sámi, most living in Norway. Approximately 7 000-10 000 of them live in Finland.

The Sámi generally differ from the national populations of these countries by culture and language, there being 9 living Sámi languages, three of which (Northern Sámi, Inari Sámi, and Skolt Sámi) are spoken in Finland. These also correspond to distinct Sámi peoples, though due to assimilation not all Sámi speak Sámi languages as their primary language. The Sámi have extensive and visible cultural markers; joik style singing, distinctive costumes including the gákti coat etc.

Sámi languages are Finno-Ugric, like Finnish. Linguistically they’re closer to Finnish than, say, Hungarian – the relation is easy for me to see – but still fully mutually unintelligible with Finnish unlike, say, Estonian. The ancestral population giving this language to Finns and the Sámi arrived to the area ca 3500 years ago, mixing and matching with previous populations, and there used to be Sámi in a far larger area, but the current formal ‘Sámi territory’, or the Finnish part of the general Sámi area Sápmi, now consists only of a few northern municipalities.

The Finnish Sámi have an organ called Sámediggi (in Northern Sami, the biggest of Sámi languages), the Sámi Parliament, that is funded by the Finnish state and is empowered to conduct activities for sustaining and bolstering Sámi languages and culture; there are similar organs in Sweden and Norway, though not in Russia. However, their powers are rather limited.

(It should be noted that this is a barebones definition, and even this much is not necessarily accepted by all factions in the debate. There exists a claim to a fourth Finnish Sámi nation, Forest Sámi, or Kemi Sámi. We’ll come to that later)

SO, WHAT MAKES THEM INDIGENOUS? AREN’T ALL EUROPEAN NATIONS INDIGENOUS TO EUROPE?

Anyone who has spent any time looking into indigenous issues will of course soon realize that the concept of “indigeneity”, as commonly used, is more than just being a people that has lived in some region for a long time. The concept of “Indigenous nation” is, in short, connected to European colonialism the conquest of the New World and all that; the whole idea of terra nullius led to a process which, stereotypically at least, did not led to the inclusion of the conquered nationalities to the new colonial societies rather than the colonial societies being built on, around and despite them.

Thus, there was later a push for specific forms of governance taking this process into account by countries like US, i.e., the various tribal agreements and governance processes; essentially, “indigenous nations” are those considered to be in a similar position to Native Americans, Australian Aborigines etc.

Are the Sámi in such a position? Well, their northern lands were some of the last lands in Europe to be brought under regular state authority (taxation etc.) with this happening during the general age of colonization, they do indeed form minorities in their traditional areas of living due to the settlement of those areas by peoples from down south, their livelihoods were until recently nomadic or seminomadic etc. As such, there is indeed a comparison to be made.

Of course, their situation is not completely analogous to Native Americans – one large difference would be that all sides acknowledge there has been considerable assimilation and intermarriage between Finns and Sámi, with many northern Finns having considerable Sámi blood and many Sámi families likewise possessing Finnish ancestry.

Perhaps most importantly, the governments of Finland, Sweden, and Norway themselves discuss the Sámi as indigenous and acknowledge themselves as such in some way – though only Norway has signed the ILO 169 convention on indigenous rights. As such, it’s small wonder that Sámi themselves have easily seen themselves as analogous to many other conquered nations; both sides of this ongoing affair frequently refer to indigenous rights to bolster their views.

WHAT’S THE ONGOING AFFAIR?

The Sámi issue is the consistency of the voter rolls of Sámi Parliament. However, behind this issue are wider questions of Sámi ethnicity, Sámi relations to the Finnish government and Finnish nation, and concept of indigeneity itself.

Basically, Sámi Parliament maintains a separate voter roll of people who can participate in electing the Sámi Parliament. There are currently ca 6000 people in this voter roll. The concept originally used for drawing up the voter rolls was speaking Sámi as your first language or having a parent of a grandparent speaking it. Later, an additional criterion was added – the so-called “Lapp paragraph”, stating that someone that could demonstrate their ancestor had been marked as a “Lapp” in state tax registers they could be potentially added to the rolls.

It’s this paragraph that is the source of the main controversy, with the majority of Sámi Parliament advocating for a new law regulating Sámi Parliament removing the Lapp paragraph. (“Lapp” used to be the word used to describe either Sámi or reindeer herders/nomads in the Northern/Eastern territories in general; in modern parlance it tends to be considered a slur.)

At first it wasn’t that controversial, since there was an implicit understanding that this paragraph would no be used for cases where “Lapps” have been registered prior to 1875 (it was considered that after that the livelihoods had settled well enough), but in recent decades the Finnish courts have adjudicated cases where people had sued to get to the voter rolls on the basis of farther-reaching “Lapp” ancestry, and some hundreds of people have thus been added to the voter rolls. There are some other issues here as well, but the Lapp paragraph is basically the central question.

The Sámi parliament majority (13 out of 21 Sámi Parliament representatives) is supported by the Finnish left, forming the majority of the Finnish government, and the Swedish People’s Party, which similarly represents a linguistic minority. However, an oppositional faction in Sámi Parliament (8 out of 21 members), along with the center-right governmental party Centre, oppose this, and the Centre has been threatening to bring down the government if the left pushes through the Sámi Parliament reform without the Lapp paragraph, or something like it.

(continues)

WHAT’S THE LARGER ISSUE, ACCORDING TO SÁMI PARLIAMENT MAJORITY FACTION?

According to the Sámi Parliament majority, this is a conflict between Sámi indigenous self-governance and a group of anti-Sámi Finns who wish to take over the Sámi Parliament, supported by the Finnish courts. (Note: this view is also the one that you can read more about in English in, say, this article or this one

To Sámi Parliament majority, who is Sámi and who is not is clear – the North Sámi, Inari Sámi and Skolt Sámi are Sámi, while the “Forest Sámi” or “Kemi Sámi” are quite evidently not Sámi at all. In fact, in this view, while there once was a Kemi Sámi, it has long since gone extinct; the current "Kemi Sámi" claimants are then a group of mostly Finnish settler origin who have essentially created an identity to themselves out of whole cloth (by portraying common Lapland ‘Sámi-style’ work jackets as gákti etc.), in collective Rachel Dolezal style, either because they feel themselves distinct from other Finns due to their life in the hardscrabble North, or for devious purposes, believing that taking over Sámi Parliament would give them power over the considerable land use questions in Lapland. (The Sámi parliament doesn’t have formal powers over land issues, but has an advisory role, and there has been a push to grant it a more extensive role.)

To the majority faction, the issue in question is urgently recreating the voter rolls without the “Lapp paragraph”, i.e., utilizing a language-based criteria, to prevent small, organized groups of LARPers from exercising their power to take over Sámi Parliament. In this view the great danger is that this would essentially defang and implicitly assimilate the one institution working for Sámi culture, language etc., thus being a part of the general process of assimilation of Sámi to the Finnish majority. In the majority’s claim, the “Lapp paragraph” has never really recorded cases of Sámi identity but rather has been an economic moniker assigned to those working with reindeer or otherwise living a non-farming lifestyle, without reference to ethnicity.

Otherwise, Sámi Parliament majority considers this a straightforward case. Reforming the voter rolls without the Lapp paragraph, and implicitly removing the wrongly added people, would protect indigenous rights and self-governance, bring the definition to the same standard as used in Sweden and Norway, and quite importantly being in accordance with the UN’s opinion on this issue, admonishing Finland for not passing the Sámi Parliament reform act. Likewise, Sámi Parliament majority claim is that the actual Sámi are greatly united, apart from individual oppositionists who have their own reasons for contrarianism and who are bolstered by votes of the non-Sámi Finns already wrongly added to the voter rolls.

To the majority, the Finnish government’s inability to resolve this issue by passing the reform is a case of conscious foot dragging, in hopes that eventually the Sámi Parliament constituency changes lead to a new more pliant Sámi Parliament majority. This, then is considered to serve the interests of landowners in Lapland, who do not want the indigenous people of the land interfering with land use rights – particularly ones that might prevent lucrative but polluting mine development.

WHAT’S THE LARGER ISSUE, ACCORDING TO OPPONENTS OF SÁMI PARLIAMENT MAJORITY?

This is much harder to piece together – unsurprising, since there seem to be many different minority viewpoints here, they tend to be advocated by – shall we say – dissident types that may often get rather fervent about their views, and they don’t seem to have the same resources as Sámi Parliament to make easy-to-read materials. However, one general narrative I’ve seen is essentially this:

The whole topic is not as much a conflict between Sámi and Finns but one between different Sámi groups, riven apart by the actions of a small, elite radical Sámi nationalist faction ruling Sámi Parliament. According to this view, Forest Sámi are indeed a real group, and moreover one that, when properly viewed, would also include Inari Sámi and the Skolt Sámi, though the first group is divided and the Skolt Sámi are tactically allied to the ruling faction.

The claim is that Northern Sámi elites ruling Sámi Parliament – indeed, who formed it as a pressure group which then gained official recognition as the representative of the Sámi – represent large-scale reindeer herding interests also supported by the states, because it’s easier to tax large-scale reindeer herding than hunting/fishing/gathering/small-scale farming and herding style living that (according to this view) had thus far characterized life in Finnish Sámi territories.

In this view, the more southern, originally Finnish Sámi groups have (naturally, due to settlement) gone through extensive assimilation, language death etc. and thus seem “less Sámi” to outsiders; nevertheless, in this view, the ‘Forest Sámi’ are an actual group, formed by descendants of assimilated families who have nevertheless maintained some parts of their traditions, like keeping around gákti, having memories of Sámi being used in their past etc., and the voter rolls have failed to include many Inari Sámi, as well.

Furthermore, in this view, Sámi Parliament is an organ of Northern Sámi hegemony over other groups, and the whole process of ‘cleansing the lists’ is meant to remove inconvenient, popular Inari Sámi oppositionists from the rolls and otherwise prevent this hegemony from being disrupted electorally. Moreover, in this view, Northern Sámi are not indigenous to Finnish land, but rather migrants from the currently Norwegian areas, pushing the native Sámi groups aside. Thus, in this view, there's also a land issue - but it's the one of Northern Sámi claiming lands from other Sámi for reindeer-herding purposes.

To the opponents, the Lapp paragraph has been essential for finding such cases, since proving an ancestral language is considerably harder and such languages haven’t been sufficiently registered anywhere. As such, they believe they’re the true protectors of indigenous rights – and the UN’s statement otherwise is simply a result of extensive lobbying by Sámi nationalists, and not as binding anyway as claimed.

Note that the question of how legit the Kemi Sámi seemingly are controversial even among the oppositionists, and the general legal argumentation concentrates on the voter roll removals affecting the Inari Sámi members currently in the rolls; furthermore, there seems to exist a controversy about whether the planned voting system (too complex for me to really understand) treats Inari Sámi fairly and so on.

CURRENT STATUS OF THE DRAMA

The government’s program included a mention that the government will advance the Sámi Parliament reform, interpreted as a mandate to pass a reform law during this period. There exists a committee proposal for a reform law without the Lapp paragraph, but the actual process has been extended several times, of course, the government has had a lot on its plate with COVID and Ukraine, so it’s not surprising many other questions would take a backseat.

Now the time is running out, the government’s period ends next Spring and a failure to bring the law to the Parliament now might just mean there’s simply not enough time to process all of this. The Centre party is refusing to advance the law without the Lapp paragraph and asking for still more time to discuss it – stalling for time, other parties claim. PM Marin has promised to nevertheless bring the law to the parliament, leading to a potential situation where the government parties would vote against each other, which would of course be bad, possibly fatal, to the government’s stability.

CONCLUSION

Well, it’s obviously a complex issue. Perhaps the best summary is that both sides leave me with suspicions based on their own materials – the opposition does not really argue its case particularly well and particularly the ‘Forest Sámi” activists really give the sort of a feeling I’d guess you generally get from guys whose identity is not on a particularly stable ground and might very well indeed be engaging in some sort of an extended LARP. So, overall I sympathize more with the Sámi Parliament majority view.

However, I’ve also heard from various sources near the situation that the conflict between North Sámi and Inari Sámi is more real than the Parliament claims, a book I read defending their view and heavily promoted by their activists written by a North Sámi professor) also discussed the Inari Sámi in a way that seemed to concentrate mostly on their assimilation and “Finnishness”, and thus gave the impression that there might indeed a certain assumed hierarchy, and division against the Sámi groups, here, or at least more so than the people claiming the Sámi are fundamentally united around the reform are claiming.

(edit: somewhat extended edition of this on Substack)

Can someone explain to me why the International Labour Organisation has a convention on indigenous rights?

I mean, my priors are distinctly that a group gets to determine its own membership- if the Sami prefer to be defined by language, I’m totally fine with that. If they’d rather define themselves by blood quantum, the way most Amerinds in North America do, that’s also fine. What I don’t think is ok is the idea that the Finnish parliament gets to tell them who does and doesn’t count as Sami when they are, as far as anyone can tell, not gaining anything from that Finnish government.

a group gets to determine its own membership

Isn't the problem that this is circular? In order for the group to make a determination, you have to ask the people in the group. But knowing who gets to contribute their opinion is exactly the question you're trying to answer in the first place. The "simple" answer is freedom of association, where you can have multiple groups that do or do not overlap, or include each other as subgroups, and which have their own rules that may come from consensus, democracy, a charter, a dictatorship, etc, and members can come and go as they please. But this doesn't work when one group has special privileges that are being fought over.

It kind of seems like that group has a consensus as to who counts as a Sami- a person who speaks a Sami language as a first language and has a recent ancestor who is the same. The lap paragraph looks like a distinctly peripheral group and if a group wants to exclude a periphery, that’s fine, they can be their own thing and it’s up to them to convince the Finnish parliament they should get whatever privileges the Sami get.

that group has a consensus as to who counts as a Sami

Yes, but Democrats and Republicans have very distinct ideas about who counts as a "real" American.

If you asked either side to define US citizenship, you can bet a bunch of their outgroup ain't gonna make the cut. And that in turn means the citizens who then vote on US policy are a subgroup of an already biased sample.

While I can't speak to the facts on the ground in this particular case, this seems like a good way to end up with a few people speaking for all of the group, and encourages the leadership to exclude as many as possible to reduce competition. I think if the Finnish government is going to do this, it might be a good idea to be more precise about its official Sami representation. For example, if the periphery is excluded, then (if possible) the parliament's scope should be re-assessed to make sure it isn't being given credit for that periphery's population, land, language, unique cultural aspects, etc.

Yes, that's the Sámi Parliament's view. Blood quantums would be very hard to establish anyway.

Of course the opposition's view is that if the Sámi Parliament does not represent all the Sámi - ie. purposefully shuts a part of them out - it does not have the legitimacy to define Sámi-dom on everyone's behalf, either.

A very well done write up.

I only say that judging by what I've heard, the Finns and Sami have had historically amicable relations and the imposition of brain-rot anti-colonialist narratives has created a granularity of identity which previously did not exist. (How many Finns went off into the wilderness over the centuries? How many Sami settled and became identical to their neighbors over the generations?)

Isn't this a fairer, more egalitarian way of things? Bothering with blood quantums, with ancient lists? Why impose a progressive view on race where the historical arrangement was of no controversy whatsover? Are we supposed to enforce a strict separation of ethnicities, that people cannot pass from one group to another by marriage and blood? Is that not racist?

They are neighbors of linguistically similar language isolates: they have literally been kissing cousins for thousands - if not tens of thousands - of years. The Sami are not Amerindians! It's stupid. It's very stupid.

Even then, it would be a nomad/farmer relationship, which has generally tended to mean the farmers expanding their territories and the nomads losing them, which has indeed happened in great stretches of Northern and Eastern Finland. (Apparently the Sámi call this "Lapland retreats, the Land gets thicker" - 'the Land' ('lanta' in Finnish, this also (coincidentally?) means 'manure' in Finnish) being a term for non-Sámi in Sápmi in general.)

But the land that was in dispute (and correct me if I am wrong) can be described to be 'cold as balls'. Finns were not moving en masse into the north, so the relative population densities were low enough for coexistence to be a possibility.

The Amerindians were OK with Europeans for a while until they realized they wouldn't stop coming. Grumbling about those damn farmers encircling another bit of prime pasture is one thing, but massacring and scalping is another.

Although doing a bit of research into the overall situation, it does look like they did go through the whole residential school and discrimination of language phase - but Wikipedia doesn't mention anything about Finnish policies to such effect: only Norway and Sweden. Since you're our resident Finnposter, could you look into it? Were there any particular programs to intentionally displace them in the 18th and 19th centuries?

Finnish policy towards the Sámi was highly assimilatory until the 1970s and boarding schools were used, as mentioned here, for example.

Again, I don't have anything to contribute to this discussion but I would like to thank you for posting, as it is interesting and I wouldn't know anything about it otherwise.