In conversation with Soraya Post
13 October 2014
The recently elected Feminist Party MEP and lifelong Romani activist, Soraya Post spoke to Bernard Rorke about rejuvenating representative democracy, defending the rights of women, and plans to create a European parliamentary intergroup to combat anti-Gypsyism.
Bernard Rorke: Congratulations on being the first Feminist party candidate and one of only two Romani MEPs to be elected to the new European Parliament. I read something very interesting about your grass roots election campaign of 'house meetings' - could you tell us about that? Do you think there are lessons to be learned to increase Roma participation in political life?
Soraya Post: Well, the house meetings were actually called house parties and they were a way of making ourselves available to people´s curiosity and interest when it comes to feminism and issues of discrimination and the rejuvenation of representative democracy. Making oneself available heart and soul is always the best way of making sure your message comes across.
BR: How did you get involved in the Feminist Initiative? To what extent do you think mainstream feminism has addressed the multiple discrimination faced by Romani and other ethnic minority women?
SP: They contacted me. I hesitated at first but then I went for it. Parliamentary politics and activism are quite different things. Accepting such a mission is not something anyone should take lightly. My reasons for joining answers your question: The Feminist Initiative and its politics is all about addressing discrimination and the safeguarding, or rather treasuring, of human rights – whether they be those of the Roma or any other discriminated group like, for instance, women. Instead of simply repairing the damage done by contemporary society, feminism tries to change the structures that repeat the habitual damage.
BR: The new intake in the Parliament includes a rag-bag of extremists, racists, homophobes and misogynists, some plain stupid, and others decidedly sinister. It simply beggars belief that the Polish MEP Janusz Korwin-Mikke can say publicly that “women are dumber than men and should not be allowed to vote ... Evolution has ensured that women are not too intelligent. After all, no intelligent being would last more than an hour a day with a baby and all its goo-goo ga-ga gibberish”. Do you think there is a significant enough constituency for this kind of nonsense to pose a real threat to the status of women in society?
SP: Absolutely, these sort of statements are simply the most manifest part of the tip of the iceberg. Today we´re seeing abortion rights being questioned in Europe. We know that fascist and racist parties throughout Europe (even in Sweden) want to infringe on the rights of women. I am however quite fearful of these extremists giving general society a ticket out of its responsibility when it comes to gender equality. That racists are worse than public opinion is no matter to take pride in – we need to move forward on equality in our communities.
BR: Some commentators have questioned the need for a Feminist party in the European Parliament. After all, they say, the main party groupings seem to fully endorse a gender equality framework, there seems to be a healthy consensus about gender equity and that it is fully mainstreamed in policy making. How do you respond to this?
SP: What good is a "healthy consensus" when nothing happens? We can all agree on a lot of good things but when it comes down to it we all have a different idea of that particular good. What we do not need is another left/right mainstream party responsible for the kind of world we see today. We can not move forward paying respect to the almighty middle-aged man in a suit. He needs to sit next to people who do not look just like him to get Europe out of its current situation.
BR: Some say the best defenders of human rights are those who have never been able to take such rights for granted. Could you say a little about the history and experiences of your family and community in Sweden?
SP: My little brother was taken from my mother in the seventh month of her pregnancy – during the forced procedure they sterilized her. It was a combined abortion and sterilization ordered by the state. The Roma in Sweden have lived in an environment where the aim of the state has been to render life unbearable for Swedish Roma - the objective being to make us leave on our own accord.
BR: Could you explain the situation for Roma in Sweden today. On the one hand, Swedish Integration Minister Erik Ullenhag described the history of Sweden's Roma as "an unknown and dark part of Swedish history, maybe even darker than what I thought when we started the work with the white book." On the other hand at the launch of the White Book, Diana Nyman, the chairman of the Roma Council in Gothenburg, was forced to drink her coffee in the lobby of Stockholm's Sheraton hotel after staff stopped her from entering the breakfast lobby. More recently I read that four men were denied service from a Max outlet in Kista, northern Stockholm, by staff who told them the restaurant did not serve Roma. This seems odd and and contradictory, could you tell us what the reality is for Roma in Sweden today?
SP: Roma in Sweden suffer daily discrimination in the workplace or at school. Unemployment is high due to these circumstances – many Roma hide or fail to mention their heritage outside of the family fearing societal retribution in the shape of being passed over for a job or social context. For the Roma coming from Romania, in search of a better life, the situation is absolutely dreadful. They are being used by the racist party the Sweden Democrats in their campaigning for parliamentary seats and the public opinion is swinging towards a very hostile tone. We are seeing arson attacks and violence directed towards these EU citizens every week. It is horrible to witness.
BR: Could you explain a little about the background to the White Book, and do you think there is a lesson for other EU member states when it comes to facing up to history?
SP: When you talk about experiences you need common ground to depart from. The White Book is a collection of Swedish Roma stories and experiences published by the Swedish Government. This means that we can share a common version of what has happened and what has not. It is absolutely necessary to start from the same place when you need to start a journey towards a common goal. The White Book will be a vital tool towards re-discovering and understanding the Swedish Roma on their own terms. I recommend it, but I would have preferred a truth commission going to the bottom of what has been done and who is to blame. This would have enabled damages to be repaired in more than print. Canada is a better example to turn to when it comes to how to deal with perpetual wrongdoing.
BR: Your campaign slogan translated something like 'Out with racists and in with feminists.' What should be the strategy of anti-racist MEPs toward neo-fascist parties like Jobbik and Golden Dawn? And with regards to Romani issues in the European Parliament what will your priorities be? How you think the EU may address the Roma ‘problem’ better? Will you be suggesting/advocating any policy change on Roma matters to the European Commission? Do you plan drafting any resolution proposals? If yes, on what?
SP: We need to highlight the issues, look at the causes and turn to those responsible and those thirsty for change. It is not as much a challenge of working against the racists but as working with, influencing and inspiring mainstream politics. When it comes to the Roma I have to say that someone else is often the problem. Articulating that problem is at the core of the challenge because we need to make the problem as "acceptable" as possible without stepping on too many toes. With time I will suggest policy changes to the Commission. First off we´re creating a parliamentary intergroup against anti-Gypsyism. This will serve as our parliamentary platform.
BR: The European debate about migration has been distorted by sensationalist media reporting and a lot of anti-Gypsyism, with tragic consequences in France most recently. There has even been attempts by some Member States, especially the UK, to attack the Free Movement Directive. What is your position on this debate?
SP: I believe that free movement should be the right of all. The European Roma are simply being used as a front for racist parties to shut down Europe, make it into a fortress and increase national authority. Their end game is a Europe of ethnic nations - blaming Roma is but a means of getting there.
BR: Sweden’s EU Minister Birgitta Ohlsson recently expressed outrage and disappointment at the breakdown of closed door talks with the Romanian government on the Roma issue. The Swedes urged their Romanian counterparts to put EU funds to better use in helping the country's poorest citizens, many of whom belong to minority Roma communities. "It drives me mad to see the lack of interest they have in the matter," she said. What could you do with the other Romani MEP, Damian Draghici, to urge the Romanian government to take inclusion issues more seriously?
SP: I do not know what I could do with Damian, we will see. For the moment the Romanian government is very defensive and apparently quite uninterested in applying available funds. Why that is, is something I will have to inform myself of in the near future. The case of Romania appears to be at the heart of the "Roma problem", but it is apparent that with free movement Roma internal economic refugees are becoming a shared issue for many countries. Instead of banging our heads against the Iron Gates of Romania perhaps there are other possibilities to explore.
