Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Why is the public directing their anger at the individual asylum seeker that arrives at the shore…

882 replies

AnotherNC12345 · 17/09/2025 10:54

… rather than the smuggling / trafficking gangs that are responsible for the journey?

I think it’s very extreme to put all of the blame and the anger at the individual that arrives, rather than the people responsible for orchestrating the whole process. These individuals are often ‘sold the dream’ and hooked in by organised crime groups who direct them to the UK. I’ve looked at sample routes from different parts of the world (screenshots may be pending) and these are complex and would need local people, as well as law enforcement, customs officers and other government officials to turn a blind eye involved in smuggling across multiple borders.

It’s no secret that these crossings likely cost a lot of money, and I think it would be safe to assume that refugees would often be in crippling debt to the OCGs who will put pressure on them to pay it back, by threatening them and their families and I would go as far as to say they could then be coerced in to further committing crimes when granted asylum in order to pay back their debt.

These OCGs are likely involved in other trafficking / crime, not just of asylum seekers but likely drugs, weapons and sex as they have the connections across those borders.

I think it’s very unlikely that an asylum seeker is sitting there looking at all the European government websites and shopping for a country with the best benefits package and approaching a trafficker with a brochure like they’re picking a Jet2 holiday. But this is the narrative that’s often put us and fuelled in the media.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have a better system and want to control our borders better on a whole, but this sheer anger and blame placed at the human in front of us seems very misplaced, when they were likely manipulated in to thinking they can have a better life in this particular country and not another, and the problem is way way bigger than an individual.

Why is the public directing their anger at the individual asylum seeker that arrives at the shore…
Why is the public directing their anger at the individual asylum seeker that arrives at the shore…
OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
AnotherNC12345 · 17/09/2025 11:14

Paganpentacle · 17/09/2025 11:05

So... can you explain why are they risking channel crossings and not staying put?

What is the lure of attempting something so dangerous when they are clearly safe in France? Why do you think that may be?

Well you could apply this to the first European country they reach. From every corner of the world, France wouldn’t be the first European country they enter. It will be the second to last if the final destination is UK.

Which brings me on to the point in my OP - and that’s because it’s likely to be the route that’s dictated or sold to them by the gang in the first place, as opposed to them being born in to deciding the UK is their ultimate aspirational goal.

OP posts:
CanSeeClearlyNowTheRainHasGone · 17/09/2025 11:14

AnotherNC12345 · 17/09/2025 10:54

… rather than the smuggling / trafficking gangs that are responsible for the journey?

I think it’s very extreme to put all of the blame and the anger at the individual that arrives, rather than the people responsible for orchestrating the whole process. These individuals are often ‘sold the dream’ and hooked in by organised crime groups who direct them to the UK. I’ve looked at sample routes from different parts of the world (screenshots may be pending) and these are complex and would need local people, as well as law enforcement, customs officers and other government officials to turn a blind eye involved in smuggling across multiple borders.

It’s no secret that these crossings likely cost a lot of money, and I think it would be safe to assume that refugees would often be in crippling debt to the OCGs who will put pressure on them to pay it back, by threatening them and their families and I would go as far as to say they could then be coerced in to further committing crimes when granted asylum in order to pay back their debt.

These OCGs are likely involved in other trafficking / crime, not just of asylum seekers but likely drugs, weapons and sex as they have the connections across those borders.

I think it’s very unlikely that an asylum seeker is sitting there looking at all the European government websites and shopping for a country with the best benefits package and approaching a trafficker with a brochure like they’re picking a Jet2 holiday. But this is the narrative that’s often put us and fuelled in the media.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have a better system and want to control our borders better on a whole, but this sheer anger and blame placed at the human in front of us seems very misplaced, when they were likely manipulated in to thinking they can have a better life in this particular country and not another, and the problem is way way bigger than an individual.

Probably for the same reason that MN blames the men that look at porn rather than the sites that show it, or the OCGs that enable it.

One is identifiable and the other is not.

People have been complaining about the abstract principle to politicians for years now and had the pleasure of being called "that bigoted woman " (thanks Gordon Brown). It's not surprising they've moved on to directly protesting those few they can actually connect with.

Ablondiebutagoody · 17/09/2025 11:10

Because lots of the public see them as spongers

mindutopia · 17/09/2025 11:06

First response nails it.

Because most people are more comfortable blaming the individual rather than the system (that most people also a little bit benefit from). It’s easier to be angry at the brown person taking your jobs and your benefits than to be angry at the society that has stacked the decks against your education and employment opportunities while feeding you stories about how it’s the immigrants holding you down.

Paganpentacle · 17/09/2025 11:05

So... can you explain why are they risking channel crossings and not staying put?

What is the lure of attempting something so dangerous when they are clearly safe in France? Why do you think that may be?

AnotherNC12345 · 17/09/2025 11:01

MrsSkylerWhite · 17/09/2025 10:57

Because people having a difficult time are always looking for someone to blame. It ought to be the succession of failed governments but unfortunately for a lot of them it’s far easier to point and blame that brown person on the boat.

Agreed, which is why I find this so frustrating. If the outrage was about the situation as a whole, the protests would take place outside the parliament, not in front of the places these people are housed.

OP posts:
MrsSkylerWhite · 17/09/2025 10:57

Because people having a difficult time are always looking for someone to blame. It ought to be the succession of failed governments but unfortunately for a lot of them it’s far easier to point and blame that brown person on the boat.