Thursday, 17 April 2008

Day four: considerations of quitting create moral controversies

I cannot believe it.

I woke up feeling so sick and had almost zero energy to get out of bed. Once I reached the library I wanted to vomit (I wonder what) and just sat on my chair and waited. I was completely ready to give up on the fast because of academic aspirations, but slowly, everything changed to better and at the moment I truly understand what it means to achieve a body that is on the fasting mode. No hunger, no interest to eat, feeling great and energetic, i.e. no problems.

But at the moment I was ready to give up, I felt quite bad. Because I can choose. This is just a small experiment in my life, and once hunger becomes a problem, I can toast some bread. Similarly, I have always found immersion journalism a bit hypocritical, when a journalist researches for example the homeless and lives with them for week http://www.jou.ufl.edu/sji/1997/stories/f1.htm
or just me going to Cameroon to live in a village in the midst of the rainforest very ascetically. To then speak as if you’d know how their life is is ridiculous. Even if one would spend there forever, it would not be the same. Because for us, it is a choice and it is much easier to be if one possesses the power to stop ones situation at any point. I am not even trying to say that with this fast I will understand how it is to be starving (actually at the moment, not too bad:) but I do hope it makes me appreciate more what I have.

We have become so distanced of the lives of the poor that it is so easy to not care. The rich have less and less of an idea, what it is to be poor and have no interest in contributing to their misery.

People have gone crazy in Finland recently. Our city has now beggars. But not just any beggars, foreign beggars imported straight from Romania. This might sound weird, but until now, Helsinki has had no beggars and that’s how the people like it. They want to continue shop in their H&M without having someone reminding them of the inequalities of the world. So what are we to do? Media and the authorities declared with the same mouth that no one is to give any money to any of them. This would only increase their amount. They were shipped back to Romania and a fund was created to help them in their villages of origin.

http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Helsinki+sends+beggar+mothers+back+to+Romania+on+child+welfare+grounds/1135233973925

But are people not expecting too much when they want no beggars in their doorstep. Wouldn’t it only be a good reminder also to the Finns that their consumption and choice of how they use their money affects people further? How long, with our constantly growing inequalities are we to expect to have a beggar-free Helsinki in the first place?

By allowing Romania to join EU, the old EU countries have agreed to promote the development of Romania. I agree that the people in the streets of Helsinki should be helped in more profound ways than just the occasional coin, and I understand that it is not easy, since they come to Finland with no language skills and no professional skills. But why is a SOL cleaner for example required to speak Finnish? Finland is in dire need of more labor. If the people from Romania, who actually reach Finland, would be allowed in a system of integration including work, I wonder what the huge loss of Finland would be. In the long run, probably rather the other way around.

1 comment:

blu mar ten said...

fast soul music

:D