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.

Unbelievable- Trump did the deal to let the Taliban out and leave Afghanistan. This was not what was expected by those persuaded to help the armies there- they were promised protection.
Did you see the fall of Kabul.
I’m pretty sure you’re not British yourself - you have no Christian values.

But that’s the definition of a naturalised citizen. They have become a Briton.

In fairness, you were trying to insinuate that the ROI isn’t a different country.

I’m an atheist. I do not hold Christian values. I am most certainly a “Briton”. Please don’t conflate citizenship with religious “values”.

When I lived abroad and gained citizenship after six years, I became a citizen. I can’t claim to be just as French/German/Dutch as anyone born there, just by virtue of a passport. It wouldn’t be true, would it?

No, that’s something quite different.

The people chanting "Tommy Tommy Tommy Robinson" or "Send them back" have low education, low cultural exposure and low social mobility. They just want simple, basic slogans because this is their mentality. They can't really think further than this and these type of people, who feel bottom of the pile as it is, feel slightly better if they have someone to look down on and blame.

Cope with what?

Well I’m aware of other issues - some more reasonable I guess than others.
Just cash is always brought up and I just try to show that isn’t as big an issue as some say really.
My overriding concern is not that I have different views on immigration to others, that’s a potential reasonable discussion, but the lack of humanity to others right now, which is awful and worrying - and I think sometimes there are some misconceptions driving this so I try to correct these I guess.

Ok, if you say so.

Same old story. Dehumanise them and you won’t have to take the time or trouble to understand them.

If I went to the USA and got a US passport, then I decided I wanted to be a Native American, and I was accepted into a tribe. Would I actually be a Native American?

Much as some people dehumanise asylum seekers?
Pot/kettle.

I do, and I’ve explained why. You don’t seem to be able to understand why others disagree with you, but I’m afraid they do.

If that Tribe decided you were, yes.

Endless sympathy and support shown to one group, none reserved for the other. It’s interesting.

<laughs out loud>

They wouldn’t, because you quite obviously wouldn’t be - wanting something to be so doesn’t make it so.

I’m sorry you had to go through this. It’s a perfect example of why people are getting angry. I experienced similar when accompanying my aunt to her oncology appointments.

The Government in granting citizenship to applicants henceforth considers them Britons.

Laughs back.

But they’re not. They’re citizens. Historically subjects.

Knowing that Premier is a chain of corner shops, and OP talks of them going to the Cricket we can safely assume that the Indian folk who work / own said corner shop and presumably hold a British passport, possibly for generations will never in fact be “Britons”.

When I had cancer in 2016, my mastectomy was carried out by an Indian surgeon and an Eastern European Anaesthetist. My husband’s life was saved earlier this year by a Bulgarian gastric Surgeon and in 2017 by an Indian nephrologist.

This idea that anyone can be fully British is nonsense.

What, do you come from the same gene pool as the first fish that flopped onto the shore?

We are an island, in the middle of the sea, if you go back far enough you’re actually Viking, or Anglo Saxon, etc. Your ancestors likely arrived here too.

So again, how far back are we going to establish if someone is British. Is two generations enough? Four? Seventeen?

You’re either born here, or you have gained citizenship. That’s what British means.

’Our country’ holds Christian values - the King is the head of the Church of England- but aside from active religion, with which we are tolerant and have freedom - it happens that our history, culture and laws are mainly rooted in traditionally Christian values - that can also be small ‘c’ christian - things such as democracy, tolerance, freedom and compassion- which are traditionally British values, or maybe not any more.