AIBU to think the reason why many Asylum seekers come to UK is...

[SmallBoats]

a direct result of our imperialist past? People come to the UK in many instances because they are English speakers. English is widely spoken due to the massive British empire which used to exist. The British empire milked its territories, greatly increased its wealth despite causing massive human suffering in the process. The direct result of this is that English became a widely spoken language worldwide. It therefore isn't surprising many people seeking refuge from war torn countries try to get to the UK as they already speak English.

It doesn't suit the "Britain is the absolute worst and everything is our fault" narrative that so many, including OP here, want to push.

Ah, the good old "Daily Mail" riposte. We need a new Godwin's Law for that.

Several posters have mentioned that traffickers tell migrants that UK is a land of milk and honey with free houses and work and then not surprisingly once they arrive here they are disappointed with the reality.
However do none of them have friends or family already in UK who can tell them what it’s really like?

Have you not noticed how a post truth world works ?

Have you not noticed how a post truth world works ?

I’m still in the dark as to why migrants’ friends and families can’t tell them the truth.
I had to google ‘post truth’ and I’m afraid it’s beyond my intellectual powers. This was part of the Wikipedia definition and the only bit I understood was ‘dishonesty in politics’.

Some scholars argue that post-truth has similarities with past moral, epistemic, and political debates about relativism, postmodernity, and dishonesty in politics.

In what way does that apply to @Barbadossunset pp?

They were asking why asylum seekers aren't put off by "the truth".

But as we have now seen, "the truth" is what people want it to be. Which it always has been, really.

Facts ? What are they when they are at home ?

So those people who chose the UK because they allegedly have family and friends here, decide not to listen to said family and friends regarding what life in UK is really like?

I think traffickers are likely incredibly persuasive

They are sellers for their business and in many ways what they’re selling is the case. If you get here we have a high grant rate and against somewhere like Calais.. well it’s not that

I‘ve noticed that type of narrative too (especially on MN), and as an immigrant myself I find it so odd.

Pretty much.

As Paul Simon predicted :

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest".

Language is a very big part for sure. The triumph of English has a lot of perhaps unexpected consequences. Many immigrants to eg , Denmark , are reluctant to bother learning the native language. No point in their view , since they already speak English.

But people from Commonwealth countries are bound to feel some lingering attachment to Britain , however unrequited ? They might even resent immigrants from Eastern Europe etc.

Often - both in legitimate scenarios where people have come on genuine visas, or in trafficking scenarios - families have clubbed together life savings or borrowed vast amounts for the passage of a young male relative with the anticipation that he will send lots of money home and then sponsor other family members to come to the U.K. as well. Having to admit to your entire family that there is no big house and monthly allowance from the government and you’re living in a room and washing dishes in a shitty restaurant for a pittance rather than owning your own business and driving a big car as you were told you’d be is enormously shameful. So it gets concealed, pretence kept up that the money will come soon, the government are dragging their heels etc.

Courtesy of ChatGPT

Also do desperate people want to listen to the truth and give up dreams of reaching safety and building a better life?
not really - it’s not human nature.
And there are loads of examples of humans still making dangerous decisions to do things that harm them despite knowing the truth. Smoking is one. We’re a highly risk tolerant and optimistic species! And it’s often better to take a dangerous choice - eg put your life in the hands of an exploitative people trafficker - than not make any choice and stay and rot. At least you’re moving forward even if a positive outcome is doubtful.

as I said upthread - peace building, conflict prevention, trade and development for the countries people are fleeing, are the only real solutions. But they don’t make for very clickable Daily Mail headlines or dog whistle political sound bites.

Asylum rules and who can claim it needs to change. We cannot house the entirety of the third world in Europe.

Millions of people fall under the category of being able to claim. It was ok when it was difficult to travel the world, but now with people trafficking the situation is untenable.

We need far stricter rules. This many people shouldn’t be having asylum granted.

Good Lord. I think maybe you need to broaden your reading material a little

Sorry, that was meant to be addressed to Clarabell77, not you

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest"
You mean all the posters on this thread, who despite a number of posts quoting statistics proving that the UK is nowhere near the top of chosen countries to flee to, continue to go on about how UK attracts so many refugees due to the language and so generous benefits?!

Straight from the horse's mouth: https://x.com/thenewsagents/status/1708436603499433997?s=46&t=1F3_GXoDvLPajCYTYkHKGg

It’s interesting to see the sales element, make up a story of persecution, four star hotel etc and how much they make per boat, £100k

But the interviewer had a strong view from which he led, unfortunately.

If the answer is as pushed that it’s for legal routes he’d need to answer how many would want it: he might have a problem there.

That's one facet, yes ....