The Condition of Oppression and the Social Organisation of Homelessness in Finland

The concept of oppression has been used to describe large-scale systems or regimes that benefit a few while depriving many, including colonialism, capitalism, patriarchy and neoliberalism. It also encompasses hegemonic ideologies, discourses and mental structures that promote harmful patterns of reasoning, which manifest in social practices such as exclusion, racism, sexism and stigmatisation. The concept of oppression is also used to describe specific groups of people who experience these injustices in their everyday lives. In my inquiry into homelessness in Finland, employing the concept of oppression may appear contradictory, given the context of a relatively generous Nordic welfare state and the country’s internationally recognised success in reducing homelessness. However, approaching homelessness as a condition of oppression has the advantage of articulating social problems on normative grounds: homelessness is not not solely a result of ‘failures’ of the welfare state, such as poor service accessibility, lack of supportive housing or shortcomings in addressing clients’ needs, but is, more broadly, a manifestation of social injustice.

As de Montigny (2011) argues, empirical studies on oppression have often focused on the negative effects that oppressive social relations have on people rather than explicating these relations themselves. While recognising harms and suffering is crucial for identifying morally wrong practices, it is equally important to investigate the translocal social organisation from which oppressive conditions arise. In this institutional ethnography, based on 30 interviews with social care workers employed by various services for the homeless, I argue that oppression is not always actualised as concrete unjust practices, as much of the everyday interaction between clients and workers is based on mutually sincere respect and care. However, as I will demonstrate, the oppressive condition remains if well-intentioned practices can at any moment turn into harmful violations of recognition without adequate protection or means of redress.