The home secretary's goal is clear when she denounces "invading immigrants": to paint fellow humans who are fleeing suffering that few Britons will ever experience as a hostile and dangerous army. National broadcasters have boosted the government's narrative by sending their own ships to feed live images of dinghies bobbing near English beaches, transforming some of the most destitute individuals in the world into contestants on a sick reality TV show. There is no examination of who they are, what they have experienced, or what they have observed. How did we get here?
The Media
The media has a significant impact on how the general population views immigration. Several media sources have been charged with fomenting anti-immigrant sentiment by portraying immigrants negatively and covering immigration-related matters sensationalistly. Media portrayals of immigrants are frequently negative, which might lead to their demonisation. Even though these prejudices are unfounded in reality, immigrants may be presented as criminals, welfare cheaters, or a burden on the economy. Such unfavourable depictions of immigrants might encourage xenophobic and racist attitudes towards them and further their social isolation. Immigration-related issues are frequently sensationalised in the media, which might lead to the demonisation of immigrants. For instance, even though immigrants are not disproportionately represented in crime statistics, the media may overreport on crimes perpetrated by immigrants. This may provide the impression that immigrants pose a threat to the public's safety, even if that impression is unfounded. The media's lack of diversity may also contribute to the negative portrayal of immigrants. When media outlets do not accurately portray the variety of the communities they cover, stereotypes and the marginalisation of minorities, particularly immigrants, may continue. By fostering echo chambers where people are only exposed to news and ideas that support their preexisting beliefs, the advent of social media and other online platforms has also contributed to the demonisation of immigrants. This may help propagate false information and negative perceptions about immigration and support anti-immigrant sentiments.
Immigration has traditionally been exploited by politicians as a wedge issue to energise their supporters and win over voters. This has occasionally meant stirring up anti-immigrant prejudice by taking advantage of xenophobic and racist rhetoric. Using anti-immigrant language and policies to energise their base and win over voters is one of the most frequent ways politicians contribute to the demonisation of immigrants. This may entail stirring up suspicions about immigration using xenophobic and racist attitudes, even if those fears are unfounded. Political polarisation in some nations has created a scenario where immigration is seen as a political issue rather than a human one. As a result, some politicians now denigrate immigrants in order to win over their supporters, while other politicians show more sympathy for immigrants in order to win over a different demographic. The demonisation of immigrants may also be influenced by national identity. Immigrants are sometimes seen as a threat to national identity and cultural values, especially if they are perceived as failing to assimilate or follow cultural standards. This impression may breed distrust and prejudice and help to demonise immigrants.
The Illegal Migration Bill
This bill is harsh and divisive, violates international law, tramples on human rights, and brings disgrace on the UK. It brings particular shame on the MPs and ministers who are purposefully and dangerously inciting hatred with dehumanising language. The bill calls for rapid deportation to a third country, imprisonment without charge or trial, treating asylum seekers unfairly in the eyes of the law, and capping the number of asylum seekers regardless of unforeseen wars, natural catastrophes, etc. Too frequently, people fleeing persecution and violence have no choice but to risk their lives aboard a boat as there are no legal options available, many who are looking to reunite with family already in this country. It is terrible beyond belief to confine them. A person running for their life will, by definition, almost certainly be unable to access a legal path. In its current form, the measure forbids victims of human trafficking from the UK from receiving assistance to free themselves from slavery. Compared to the average European nation, including France and Germany, the UK provides safety to significantly fewer refugees per capita. However, real people—humans with lives, families, goals, and dreams lie behind the statistics. Ministers are unconcerned despite the UN High Commissioner on Refugees' warning that this law will effectively ban asylum. They are developing new strategies to get around international law. The bill expressly grants them the power to disobey any subsequent interim decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. In other words, the UK may continue to hold and prosecute asylum seekers while the ECHR deliberates. The government is just interested in dividing, not in whether the programme is effective. For cynical electoral benefit, it is about inflaming culture wars and creating a confrontation with the ECHR. The people caught in the crossfire are unimportant to this government. If it were sincere about protecting the lives at risk from the small boat crossings over the channel, it would support measures like more lenient family unification rights and secure transportation options.
''no one leaves home unless home is the mouth of a shark... no one puts their children in a boat unless the water is safer than the land'' - Warsan Shire
Comments
Post a Comment