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

[AnotherNC12345]

… 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.

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.

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?

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.

Because lots of the public see them as spongers

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.

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.

I imagine that many people have concluded that if there weren't people willing to enter countries illegally, there wouldn't be criminal gangs organising it. We're not all hapless victims. Ultimately we are all responsible for the choices we make.

It costs ££££ to get smuggled across borders. Then there are the obvious dangers of capture, crime, injury, & death.

🤔 the individual would have to be willing in the first place. Obviously from there you can fabricate any pipe dream....

Some are enacting vigilanteism. They see the people as law breakers that the law isn't dealing with so are taking matters into their own hands. Some want to make the experience of being here unpleasant to punish, and deter others.
Some believe that if they destroy the arrangements in place then alternative ones will have to be made.
Some are doing it as part of a scatter gun approach that also includes protesting government, believing disruption at multiple levels is a stronger protest.
Some don't understand the concept of the game not the player.
Some enjoy bullying and terrorising other human beings.

It's all on tiktok, no need to look on a government website. And I think the anger is spread throughout, not just to the asylum seekers?

Because a lot of people have no critical thinking skills I guess.

Picture yesterday of people pushing a boat back as it arrives.
Can't blame them. Got a joke now.
They wouldn't like it if we keep pitching up on dinghy.

Canarys didn't want tourism last year and that was for people paying for a break, not trying to live there.

I don't think people are angry at asylum seekers for coming. I think they are angry when their housing + benefits are being paid for by the taxpayer.

You've not seen people on the news being interviewed by reporters...faces obscured... saying they want to make it to the UK for the better benefits here?

Because I have.
They are either told that is the case by those that came before them, or by traffickers.

Either way.. its not our responsibility to take on everyone in the world who thinks this would be a better place to live. I fancy Canada but I'm pretty sure I cant unilaterally decide that and turn up.

I don't think people are angry at the individuals (maybe they are I'm not an expert), but what I think they can't cope with is the sheer volume of people.

If once a year a desperately struggling family washed up ashore I think people would be absolutely horrified at their situation and actually be desperate to help them. However when it's 31,000 people in small boats so far this year then it quickly becomes overwhelming and a huge problem. People who may be from a very different culture, where women may be treated as second class citizens, who may have had difficult and traumatic lives with all the issues that brings, who may not speak English, who have no identification......the possible issues go on and on. That's of course not to say that many aren't well educated people who just want to make a future for themselves and their families or people that have just had to escape terrible places.

The problem is we can't afford to look after out own people, the NHS is falling apart, no one can afford housing, get a dentist, university now means huge debt. It's hard for people to want to give a warm welcome to huge numbers of people from other countries when you feel like you're already really struggling in your own country.

I think also the question is, why the UK when there are lots of safe countries in between? I don't believe for one second that the people smugglers demand they go all the way to the UK and insist they don't stop at any point before that. Much more likely that the smugglers will agree to take them to the UK, make them pay and then dump them at some point before they ever get here - and then they have to find someone else and pay again.

Well, the impression I get is that they believe that most of them aren´t asylum seekers, just economic immigrants who want to get on the UK gravy train which just isn´t available in any of the previous countries they have travelled through.

Because the 20 year old man is not an asylum seeker and is actually an economic migrant who may or may not come from a country with the same cultural values?

Hope this helps.

Because they make the choice to come. They pay the smugglers. They claim the benefits and take the hotel rooms.

And also what @ColdSaladssaid. It's an absolute piss take.

What's the difference?

He's still turned up illegally

Hope that helps.

Because xenophobes are too narrow-minded to see the bigger picture.

Which is?

For what feels like the millionth time, asylum seekers are not entitled to claim benefits.

I can be angry at the smugglers, the economic migrants, and the politicians and lawyers -- simultaneously!