Been seeing "Finland has eradicated homelesness" posts a lot from typically "socialism is when the government does stuff"-leftists or some AmeriKKKan Bernie lib and it has become such an angering thing for me. It is all neoliberal country branding.

That is all it is. Our shitty pseudo-leftist nato loving "modern left" party has gone around flexing about their progressive housing program. The party has no power, zero. It means nothing.

I work with homeless people, in Finland. Where almost all housing has been privatized. Where the state support has been cut to a level no poor person can meet. If ones rent goes over this state mandated limit, people are forced to move. This leads to movement into rural areas where there is no work or services, factually creating segregation.

If you have a mark on your credit, nobody rents to you. I spend my time trying to house these people and every time I see this meme/info floated on the internet I become more annoyed.

The next time anyone goes "oh look at that socialist finland eradicating homelessness" you can say that this neoliberal austerity hell has nothing whatsoever to do with socialism, never really did and they definitely have not eradicated anything.

  • Infamousblt [any]
    ·
    27 days ago

    Whenever libs talk about eradicating homelessness, what they always mean is eradicating homelessness that they have to see. If folks are struggling out in the rural areas then libs don't have to see them and therefore the problem is solved. To them anyway.

    • NoLeftLeftWhereILive [none/use name, she/her]
      ·
      27 days ago

      Pretty much. Happily doing brunches and signing petitions in their bubble inside the gardenlike cities they are able to live in. Which is literally what bigger cities are being turned into, by design. There is no affordable housing, there are no plans to make housing actually affordable. There is so much spending on high end stuff in the cities that is only meant for those who have the means to buy. The divide is wide and getting wider.

  • UlyssesT [he/him]
    ·
    27 days ago

    Sometimes "elimination" means not talking about it or reporting it. See what Burgerland does with covid. i-love-not-thinking

  • Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
    ·
    27 days ago

    My understanding of economics did tell me that it's impossible for capitalism to genuinely deal with homelessness systemically the way planned economies did/do so. Thanks for explaining what the situation is.

    • NoLeftLeftWhereILive [none/use name, she/her]
      ·
      26 days ago

      It really is. I have today again spent most of my worktime trying to fight the system of privatized housing to "allow" a client to rent from them despite having a credit marking and belonging to a group of people who faces a lot of discrimination. I can't do much because there is no lever I can push to force the landlords as they are operating just for profit. It's a farce, from start to finish.

  • wheresmysurplusvalue [comrade/them]
    ·
    27 days ago

    Just today I was telling an American coworker about Finland's "everyman's right" which includes the right to camp pretty much anywhere (not too close to someone's home). His response was "oh that's a thing in Oregon too", and me, being earnest, said "oh really? that's cool!" until I realized he was referring to the homeless population in Portland...

    • lilypad [she/her, undecided]
      ·
      26 days ago

      I mean, its kinda a thing on BLM land i think? But thats a far cry from allemansretten (im not familiar with the finnish equivalent)

      • GenderIsOpSec [she/her]
        ·
        26 days ago

        allemansretten

        a quick wiki search tells me this literally what we have here in finland. except we call it jokaisenoikeudet or jokamiehenoikeudet but the latter one has man in it, so it's falling out of use, apparentely.

        • NoLeftLeftWhereILive [none/use name, she/her]
          ·
          26 days ago

          It is sameish, but not quite. The "all mans rights" is in the term allemansretten, but in Sweden the rights are weaker. Iceland and Norway also have similar things. In Sweden they historically included things like a right to pick just a handful of hazelnuts if passing through and hungry.

          In Finland on the other hand forest or land was genuinely community owned/not owned by anyone before the Swedish rule mandated isojako (storskiftet). Living on the land via setting up on it from slash burning (kaskeaminen) was seen as an everyones right. Once people moved and the forest grew back, it was again open for anyone to dwell on. So "ownership" was tied to vacating a spot only and it didn't last. This is the history behind why we have the strongest most wide rights to roam to this day. The landowners/kulaks here have tried to do away with this right many times and hate it, but this is the one thing that was faced with so much opposition that they didn't dare do that.

          I personally have always thought that it is one of the material rights that explains some of the sameness myth in Finland between people as well, along with the nordic independent farmer myth. Everybody has the right to do it, so it renders the margins invisible.

  • GenderIsOpSec [she/her]
    ·
    26 days ago

    they definitely have not eradicated anything.

    except the reds during the 1920s and 30s sadness-abysmal