Boundaries of Citizenship –
the Case of the Roma and the
Finnish Nation-State
© Camilla Nordberg 2008
Swedish School of Social Science
University of Helsinki
Emerging policy agenda
 Reason to consider the 1990s as the decade
in Finland when debates on multiculturalism
and the particular needs and rights of minority
ethnic groups clearly escalated on the public
agenda: increasing immigration & the
internationalisation and judication of Finnish
politics
 Triggered a political debate on the
multicultural society
Minority ethnic groups in Finland





Swedish speaking Finns (300 000)
The indigenous people, the Sámi (4 000 - 7 000)
The Roma (approx. 10 000)
Small Jewish and Tatar minorities (approx. 1 000)
The Russian minority (the old minority, approx. 5 000)
In- and out-migration
 Large population movements in the 1860s and in
1960-70
 During the 1960s and 1970s other Western European
countries attracted labour migrants but the Finns
moved to Sweden and North America to search for a
better life
 Only during the last twenty years greater relative
numbers of refugees and asylum-seekers (more than
600 per cent increase since 1989)
Inflows of foreign nationals as a percentage of
the total population, 2004 (OECD)
Foreign citizens in Finland, 1980-2006
StatFin 2007. The number of foreign born citizens was approx. 180 000 in 2005.
Foreign citizens in Finland by nationality, 2005
Citizenship and its boundaries
The three ’gates’ of citizenship:
 Territorial access
 Citizenship status (incl. denizenship)
 Substantial citizenship
The case of the Roma
 Long history of oppression
 Roots in India - left for Europe over a hundred years ago
 To Finland in the 16th century - harsh policies and systematic





assimilation
Still in the 1960s the best solution to the social problems of the
Romani minority was seen as the extermination of he culture,
e.g. by children’s homes
The approx 10 000 Roma (Gypsies) of Finland belong to the
Kaale (Kàlo) group
History to be interpreted in the light of social and human
transformation
Continuous need to define the boundaries of citizenship
The Roma - continuous position on the margins - yet not
isolated
Each and every grown up Finn, if you ask
them to tell you something unpleasant about
Roma, they all have a story. Every single one
has a story. If you ask all of them, to tell you
something nice about the Roma, it might be,
that every fifth says, that yes, Hortto Kaalo
was a great band.
The citizenship frame
 Exploring the citizenship of Roma in
contemporary Finland; citizenship understood
broadly as the relation between the Roma
and the nation-state
 Citizenship as an exclusive and excluding
category;
also citizens with a full citizenship status may
experience exclusion and non-participation
(e.g. Lister)
 Rooted in the regime of the nation-state
Data
 Four different studies of ‘claims-making’
 Parliamentary debate (top-down perspective)
 Interviews with Romani activists (bottom-up
perspective)
 Newspaper stories (top-down and bottom-up
perspective).
 Romani activists and majority elite claimsmakers
Taking position
 Citizenship as claims-making
 ‘collective action which mobilises political
demands into the public domain’ (Statham
2002)
 Citizens not solely objects but agents
 Citizenship defined in the interaction between
actors, structures, institutions
Questions of the day
 What image of the Finnish nation-state is then
constructed by the different actors?
 In which way has the national culture enabled
or constrained certain claims?
Dimensions of citizenship in activist
interviews
 To be a Finnish citizen
 To be excluded
 To be a Rom
Also other identities emerged (being a woman, nurse,
son etc)
 Narrative perspective
 None of our identities is always present – they are
activated in specific situations
To be a Finnish citizen
The primary group identity on the level of the
nation-state is that of being a citizen
 citizen: member of a political community,
state (civic participation)
 national: member of a nation-state, people
(belonging)
National attachment
Well, now immigrants arrive and we who have
been here for over 500 years /…/ we are Finnish,
we speak Finnish, the Finnish culture and all the
rest is ours, we’re a part of this. We’ve got the
same religion, which is very important.
National attachment
I am completely against it [a Roma Nation]. It
confuses the whole agenda of minority
politics, because it is a completely different
thing to talk about a Romani minority than a
Roma nation. /…/ when I consider that the
Finnish Roma identify with the Finnish society
and /…/ if we start to push through such an
idea, that we are a nation, then we will soon
be building our own territory.
National attachment
I guess when you see a person in need [Romani
asylum-seekers], you don’t just pass her like that; it
works on the individual level. But then, when it comes
to, say, state politics. Look, as we don’t know these
people better than the Finns, it’s not obvious that
some people belong to the Romani community.
Because in the end, we might not have anything else
in common than the awareness of the ethnic identity,
but it might be that we don’t have much in common at
all.
National attachment
 The Roma do not constitute their own
particular group next to the Finnish people
but...
 ...constitute part of Finnish identity
Civic attachment
When I have done my duty and worked
for this Finnish society and paid my taxes,
I feel that I have met the requirements set
by society, I have done my military
service and served this state in
accordance with public law and so on.
So, should I be given the right to be a
good Finnish citizen regardless of the fact
that I am a Roma, who has a different
ethnic background? Or what is the
criterion - are you a good Finn?
Civic attachment
The Roma /…/ take a very active part in
NGOs and in the parishes, and just think
about the care work they do for their old
people and their children. It is the kind of
work that is not noticed or valued by the rest
of the society, and is at least not measured
in any way.
Civic attachment
 In Finland a strong normative understanding of the intrinsic




value of paid work. Paid work has not only been a source of
income but also a measure of social competence. The weak
labour market position of certain groups does not only lead to a
weak economic position but also to a low social status (e.g.
Forsander, Weber).
While the participants are strong supporters of Finnish society,
they also try to raise a slightly broader understanding of societal
participation
Feminist critique: The devaluation of care-work stressed in
traditional citizenship
The political meaning of motherhood - the education and caring
of the young is part of political life (Lister 2003; Pateman 1989;
Siim 2000).
Traditional role differentiation within Romani culture
Iris Marion Young
 The bourgeois world instituted a moral division of
labour between reason and sentiment, identifying
masculinity with reason and femininity with sentiment,
desire, and the needs of the body. Extolling a public
realm of manly virtue and citizenship and
independence, generality, and dispassionate reason
entailed creating the private sphere of the family as
the place to which emotion, sentiment, and bodily
needs must be confined. The generality of the public
thus depends on excluding women, who are
responsible for attending the private realm, and who
lack the dispassionate rationality and independence
required of good citizens. (Young 1997: 258)
Excluded – socioeconomic dimension
We are not really inside this society, /…/ of
course, basically we are, but looking at any
field of life and comparing for instance Finns
and Roma, then no doubt we are much lower
than others. I talk about education, work and
all different kinds of problems that emerge in
life…
Excluded – socioeconomic dimension
But in my opinion there is a clear justness and the
Roma can certainly not complain about that, but in a
way we are in a sort of social trap; these differences
between the rich and poor have grown, and since we
live in this kind of consumer society, in a way we can
no longer cope with as little as earlier. So in one
sense the lives of the young ones, those who don’t
have a job or an education, for example, their lives
are limited to a minimal, narrow area/.../ So
psychologically it can sometimes be quite hard/…/but
I think/…/from time to time we can also be content
with how things are here in Finland; here people at
least have roofs over their heads and bread on the
table and so on as long as they have done the right
thing.
Excluded – symbolic/cultural
dimension
When I began my studies, I was far in my twenties, I
already had children and everything, and it was
extremely difficult for me, I thought, oh my God, what
is this, when I speak Finnish and these people speak
Finnish, but I don’t, like, get a thing, I somehow don’t
understand, that everything, like the literature and all
this, it was extremely difficult, because I had to do a
duplication of work, because I translated it to my own
language, not exactly to Romani, but to this my own
Finnish language, because the Finnish that we
speak, it is different from the language used by the
majority, and it is of big importance.
Excluded – emotional dimension
To already as a child be aware of the fact that in a
certain way you are wrong/…/ And even more so if
you haven’t got a solid home, background support, it
doesn’t have to be only parents, it can also be a
teacher, an adult or so who infuses a strong and
sound self-esteem into the child. A person easily gets
stuck in the mould that is cast for him or her. You
start to put into practice these people’s – what should
I say – these people have decided that you are a
certain kind of person, then a great deal of strength
and courage is required in order to show them that
‘hey, I’m not like that, what you assume me to be’.
Excluded – emotional dimension –
discriminated citizenship
I get extremely annoyed... Like when I go shopping
or just spend time, like most people sometimes do.
So, immediately I have a swarm of guards behind
me. I am walking there like some criminal. At that
point one really thinks that this is so hard, and it is
really wrong, and that it really violates my
fundamental rights. But, to us, it is somehow builtin. Perhaps we too often accept that, that we don’t
really /…/ although we might say that ‘this is wrong’,
that ‘you can’t act like that’ and that ‘this violates my
rights’, but then we don’t really, so strongly, believe
that this actually is the case.
Yet....
In the beginning of February, we got this new and
unique Act on Equal Treatment. When we also find
some good models for implementation I do think that
we will be able to eliminate such injustice in society.
And personally I really think it will open many doors.
So, when it comes to legistlation I am quite satisfied.
To be a rom - community
You know that in your own culture, among those
people, there you know all the norms and ways to act
and be, so then after all it is quite hard then when you
are in a completely different cultural environment,
when you’re not familiar with the norms and those
things, then it is exhausting in another way. When
you are among your own people you feel
comfortable.
To be a rom - community
Well, the status or position of a Rom is rather
based on how you get on in life, how you care for
your home and for your family, all those things...
Those are the first things in life, and then - of
course wisdom is valued - but this kind of
theoretical wisdom, it is like ’ this man has
studied himself insane’
To be a rom - community
….that families now live their own lives, one family
here and one family there, and that children no longer
have this close connection, for instance to other
Romani children /…/ There is a risk that if this strong
support and security provided at home no longer
exists, /…/ we fall through the safety net and end up
in no-man’s-land, if these our own roots are not there.
To be a Rom – community
 When the societal culture is exclusionary,
Romani culture provides an important sense
of belonging and security, particularly
compared to many other marginalised
individuals.
 Next to the communitarian identity, the
dilemmas and challenges of a more political
minority identity emerges from the material
 Are group rights beneficial?
To be a Rom – minority
I don’t accept the idea that some group is
strongly supported just because it represents
a particular ethnic group, regardless of its
history…
To be a Rom – minority
And now, there was this new directive from the
Ministry of Labour concerning the improvement of
employment for only Romani people, whatever that
will bring about. But I think this is quite bad somehow,
that if everything must be regulated by law, it will also
take people to an unequal position, wouldn’t it? Thus,
when my rights are granted through special
regulations, although both of us are Finnish /…/ It is
good that there is a period of transition /…/ but of
principle I don’t necessarily find it that good…
To be a Rom – minority
….like those sewing courses, certainly, someone
might even get a profession because those costume
makers are needed /…/ but considering this
development, well, it is perhaps not the best way to
promote change, which inevitably is coming and
happening, yet I still see those courses directed to
Roma as good, since the threshold is so huge for
many, even if they want to study, they don’t really
dare to go to those majority… because they feel this
inferiority.
To be a Rom – minority
Also majority children have the right to learn about
the minorities. I don’t understand why information
about Finnish minorities is not yet included in
teaching materials /…/ It is very tough to circulate in
every single Finnish school and talk about basic
things.
To conclude
 The benign category of the welfare state
 The ‘good state’
 The history of oppression a constraining
element for citizenship claims-making?
 Consequence: claims for group specific rights
and socioeconomic justice quite rare
Challenges to welfare state legitimacy
 How far can the particular needs of minority ethnic
groups be neglected without creating too wide social
gaps? One of the basic principles of the Nordic
welfare states has been to prevent too big differences
between different citizens.
 How far can group rights be developed without
threatening the traditional universalism of the welfare
state and without the majority experiencing a
decreasing sense of community/solidarity with an
increasingly heterogeneous population? It may then
become reluctant to finance the redistribution of
resources?
(Brochmann & Hagelund 2005)
Challenges to welfare state legitimacy
 Bhikhu Parekh makes the following statement about
social justice:
 The argument being that the welfare state is only
possible if we all have a sense of solidarity. Well
historically there is very little evidence for this.
Welfare state arises for a variety of reasons. We
share certain common interests. We don’t have to
share common values beyond a certain point … It’s a
collective insurance (Parekh 2003, 5).
Finnish context
 Strong social citizenship, weaker cultural citizenship
 Tolerance and acceptance of difference have been key words –
not necessarily imply active measures – the role of outsiders?
 Lepola (2000) From Foreigner to Finlander:
 ‘In the scope of a multicultural ideal, social democratization is
primarily protected, and only to some extent political
democratization and to a minimal extent cultural
democratization’
 ‘Immigrants are immigrants, there is nothing strange about that,
but we Finns, we are Finns’
(Lars D Eriksson)
The dilemmas of a politics of
recognition



Young (1997) Group specific rights for oppressed groups to undermine
oppression
Critique against Young’s allegedly essentialist stance on collective identities as a
prerequisite for a politics of recognition (e.g. Benhabib 2002).
A devaluation of identity-interests and an affirmation of subject positions at the
level of multiple belongings do, however, risk losing identification for collective
action.
Groups that have been oppressed and marginalised for a long time cannot
escape their economic predicament ‘unless they feel convinced that this is not
their fate or natural condition or all they are worth, and that it is within their
power to change it’. (Parekh 2004)

Lister (2003): Rights, respect, voice

Fraser (1997): while marginalisation entails symbolic as well as socio-economic
exclusion, its prevention requires both recognition and redistribution, and these
cannot be separated.
Measures in Finland (examples)
Cultural recognition
 Constitution: the right to maintain and develop Romani language and culture
 School legislation: teaching in Romani
 Day care legislation: the recognition of linguistic and cultural backgrounds and the
support of these together with the respresentatives of these cultures
 Yleisradio: services in Romani
Political representation and participation
 The Delegation on Romani Affairs
 Regional Delegations
 Participation in the development of educational strategies through the Directorate
of education
Dialogue
 Promoting cooperation: contact persons
 Teacher training
Yet...
 Multicultural citizenship (integration without losing one’s own
culture, group rights)
or
 Cultural citizenship (full participation in the national culture and
in the formation of this culture and its people)
•
•
•
Do not exclude one another, but is the ideal of multiculturalism
enough?
Multicultural policies and group rights in practice:
Who can represent a specific group? Those belonging to a
majority usually choose their representatives on the basis of
political preferences...
No group is homogenous, be it a majority or a minority…
Cultural citizenship
 A way out of the tension within identity politics is to
emphasise not the identity categories as such but
the process or practice of struggle and claimsmaking, a form of cultural democratisation
 Active measures to fully include stigmatised
identities: anti-discrimination practices, the
promotion of multiple representations in the public
sphere as well as the recognition of different
narratives and identities within public institutions.
 (Pakulski 1997, Stevenson 2003)
Nick Stevenson (2003: 152-153),
on cultural citizenship
[We] can only promote dialogue in conditions where
we have begun to realise the cultural complexity of
different positions and viewpoints. This requires not
only that we empower ‘minorities’ within public
conversations, but that we also seek to understand
the social processes that have historically promoted
some views over others. The recovery of the ‘other’
and wider questions of justice remain essential to
inclusive forms of citizenship. The key word here is
respect, not tolerance. To respect ‘the other’
supposes a level of engagement that goes beyond
mutual indifference.
Literature










Brochmann, G., Hagelund, A. (2005) Innvandringens velferdspolitiske konsekvenser:
nordisk kunnskapsstatus, Oslo: Nordisk ministerråd.
Fraser, N. (1997) Justice Interruptus, London: Routledge.
Lepola, O. (2000) Ulkomaalaisesta suomenmaalaiseksi. Helsinki: Suomalaisen
kirjallisuuden seura.
Lister, R. (2003) Citizenship: Feminist Perspectives, 2nd edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Marshall, T. H. (2000) Citizenship and Social Class, i: Pierson, C., Castles, F.G. (red.), The
Welfare State reader, Cambridge: Polity Press, 32-41
Nordberg, C. (2007) Boundaries of Citizenship: The Case of the Roma and the Finnish
Nation-State, SSKH Skrifter 23, Swedish School of Social Science, University of Helsinki,
Helsinki: University Press.
Parekh, B. (2004) Redistribution or Recognition? in: May, S., Modood, T., Squires, J (red.),
Ethnicity, Nationalism and Minority Rights, Cambridge: University Press, 199-213.
Ruhanen, M, Martikainen, T. (2006) Maahnmuuttajaprojektit:hankkeet ja hyvät käytännöt.
Väestöntutkimuslaitos Katsauksia E 22/2006
Stevenson, N. (2003) Cultural Citizenship: Cosmopolitan Questions, Maidenhead: Open
University Press.
Young, I.M. (1997) Polity and Group Difference: a Politics of Ideas or a Politics of
Presence?, in: R.E. Goodin & P. Pettit (Eds) Contemporary Political Philosophy, Oxford:
Blackwell, 256-272