To. Mrs. Hopkins, Recently, I have read your controversial and callous article ‘If Britain is prepared to provide an all-inclusive resort service for asylum seekers, the least they can do is wear a bloody wristband.’ From a student with a family member who has experienced being a refugee, I know that the issues regarding asylum seekers and refugees are critical in the modern society. Therefore, I feel that your article, mostly oversimplified and prejudiced, could mislead lots of readers to have undesirable views on those people who are in need. Although most of your arguments are either factually incorrect or oversimplified, some of your points are undeniably true. For instance: a normal worker from the UK who ‘might earn £30K a year’ has …show more content…
Of course, some people did commit crimes when they came to the ‘land of plenty,’ but the refugees and asylum seekers had lots of positive contribution to Britain. Also, the repetitive use of ‘land of plenty’ has pleasant connotations which conceal the magnitude of the issue. Considering that you are accusing them that they lack dignity, I cannot help but to question if you have actually regained your dignity. I do not think ‘cleaning my own toilets’ suggests that you have reclaimed your honour; are you being hypocritical? Mrs. Hopkins, I cannot bear with your euphemistic assertion of ‘I will remind them there is exceptional dignity in defending your own country’. Yes, I fervently agree that these people should be protecting their own country in some extent as it is their country. However, your prejudiced view of these people throughout the article (including the quote I just embedded) creates negative imagery of the refugee and asylum seekers. Clearly, you have not thought from refugees’ point of view from your bigoted viewpoint towards these people. Did you think these people wanted to leave their country? I think not. I simply cannot condone your statement, disparaging the refugees as it is either over-simplistic or falsified; it is our duty to help those people who are desperately in need. Sincerely, Hamin
Argumentative Essay Why do we still have an immigration issue? After all most of the immigrants live in the fear of being deported and torn away from their families. Even though they are just trying to live the American dream. This is not how our ancestors were treated since after all America is a country founded by immigrants. So undocumented immigrants should get a pathway to citizenship in America.
The author uses patriotism as a technique when stating, “There was a time when it would have been unthinkable for Australians to stand by while an elected government physically and psychologically mistreated people whose only crime was to arrive by boat without an invite.” By criticising his target audience, he appeals to their sense of patriotism in a pursuit to make them feel guilty. This argument is connected to Letch’s illustration in the top left corner, which features a figure holding a sign, which reads ‘GO BACK’. Gittins provided his target audience with a visual reference on his argument by showing Australia as the villain with a frowning and disapproving facial expression and the refugee looking upset sitting in a puddle of water with his head down. In relation to the mistreatment of welfare precipitants, the author uses the technique of mocking when he referred to the Australian Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull as “Mr Harbourside Mansion” to provide a preliminary opinion before stating his argument.
1a. The target audience for this article is United States citizens, particularly those who side with Democratic political views. I believe this because the article is about how the United States of America is responding to the Paris Attacks in regards to the admission of Syrian refugees into our country. The main focus of this piece is on the ideas some Republican leaders have shared that they believe to be the best way to handle this issue. By selectively shedding light on these chosen responses, the authors shows that he is writing to those who don’t agree with these Republicans, which is most commonly Democrats.
Why do asylum seekers still take the high risks to come to Australia by boat or some illegal ways while they know the journey is dangerous and will possibly get them expatriated? I am writing to you with the concern about the rights of refugees and asylum seekers and how harshly Australian Government treated them. The documentary “Go Back to Where You Came From” Series 1 has presented a deeper insight of how desperate and harsh conditions of life are as a refugee by six ordinary Australian participants of varying ages and backgrounds, with strong opinions about the issue of refugees and asylum seekers. The issue of asylum seekers is an important issue of human rights. The main parties of the Australian Parliament are currently engaged in a heated debate on the issue of the refugees and asylum seekers.
The magic of symbols is that their meaning of something depends on how people interpret, use it or respond to it (Stone, 2012). The Government can use narrative stories in this particular instance and play the hero in their story as they place themselves on a pedestal for ‘saving the asylum-seekers from harm’, although the mistreatment of the asylum-seekers in the immigration centres are not much better than the country they were fleeing (Silove, Austin & Steel,
The treatment of refugees and asylum seekers in Australia is unacceptable and with mandatory detention it makes matters even worse. The treatment that families and children go through is a monstrosity. All of the reasons that have been listed is why ‘If I could change one thing about Australia’ it would be changing the way refugees are treated here and making them feel safe in Australia by connecting them to the
Introduction Australia is said to be a multicultural and multiracial country. So why can’t we, as a country and as a nation, say yes to immigrants fleeing from a different country? As immigration to Australia is supposably apart of our history and it would be wrong not to continue on with the actions of our ancestors. Paragraph 1 As of 2014 – 2015, Australia accepted 13,750 refugees in total. Paragraph 2 • What are refugees and asylum seekers?
I can’t imagine all the people struggling in the US not being able to get a job, because the day that one person in the household who can work loses their job, they have to go back to their
Australia has been labelled as the country of mateship, fair-go and tolerance, but the mistreatment of Asylum seekers in Australia denies these values. In our anthem we sing “For those who’ve come across the seas, we’ve boundless plains to share”. It ironic isn’t it? As when Asylum seekers arrive in Australia we do not offer a hand of mateship instead we use punitive matters such as sending them to mandatory detention, which shows how xenophobia is manifested in Australia (Ariyawansa,
http://vimeo.com/74987092 8. The 1951 Convention relating to the Status on Refugees and its 1967 Protocol defines a refugee by: a. A person who is not in the country of their origin or their
In Australia, refugees and asylum seekers are treated like the enemy in a war: the target of a highly resourced, military-led “deterrence” strategy complete with arbitrary detainment, detention camps, guards to terrorise them, forced deportations and the violent suppression of those who protest. Australia is failing to meet the standards required when regarding the treatment of asylum seekers. It is fact that asylum seekers make up less than 3% of Australia’s annual immigration yet the idea is being distorted to that of which they will overpopulate a country that prides itself on being a multicultural society. I want to shed light on the misconception that asylum seekers are not ‘legal’ when in actual fact it is a human right to seek freedom.
This comprehensive annotated bibliography discusses about the poor mental health of the refugees and asylum seekers under detention in developed countries. This sits within the “Social Work Practice in Mental Health” and “Social Work with Refugee Survivors of Torture and Trauma” categories of Social Work fields of practice (Alston and McKinnon, 2005) and uses sources from Australian publications on these issues. The sources cited suggest that due to the large number of refugees and asylum seekers, governments of developed countries have implemented policies to deter people from seeking asylum such as immigration detention policies, strict visa restrictions, rigorous border checks and the stopping of voyages of vessels suspected of carrying smuggled asylum seekers (Silove et al. 2000). The refugees and asylum seekers go through tremendous amount of mental suffering and the worst affected are small children and adolescents.
Not only that, but they do it by the millions, moving in independent crowds step by step on the grounds that there is security (Acuesta, 2017). The explanations for their movement include issues such as social, racial, religious and political persecution, war, climate change, hunger and gender orientation. These vulnerable refugees have no other choice than to seek protection and we are denying their human rights and stripping away their human dignity. A United Nations Refugee Agency survey conducted in Australia in 2011 showed that 35% of people favoured turning back boats or detention of arrivals and deportation, while only 22% favoured eligibility for permanent settlement. Clearly there is much controversy surrounding this issue as it can create many effects within a nations, both positive and negative.
In October 2013, a boat carrying refugees from Libya to Italy sank near a Greek Island, killing 368 people. Despite this, refugees continue to make the Mediterranean crossing in increasing numbers. ‘Step 2: Convince the world to act.’
According to Laurence Peter’s article “Why is EU struggling with migrants and asylum?” published in BBC News in August 2015, the number of refugees in Germany this year is at about 800,000! I find that to be almost too many, but I also agree with Taylor on some levels. Of course, we should treat the immigrants with respect and respect their feelings, but I think it’s all becoming a bit excessive if we can’t even call them immigrants anymore. I think that we should maybe be more strict with the people we let in to our country, but also not too strict like in Australia. For example in Australia, they’ve made a campaign video against illegal refugees on youtube called “General Campbell 's message to people who travel illegally by boat to Australia” and was published September 2014.