Some despairing reflections on the attitude of the 'civilised' world toward refugees

Something which might in the past have seemed horrific has to happen again and again, and then it will be accepted as 'normal.' Human beings, labelled as 'asylum seekers', starve to death in a state of illegal limbo, are 'detained' as if they were criminals, and are left to drown at sea. And none of this, it seems, is any of our responsibility. Our country is too 'full' , it is the fault of 'people traffickers', it is caused by 'failed states' (which we helped to destroy, and then walked away from). In fact, it is the responsibility of anyone but us. (By a terrible irony, this is one area in which we are faithfully following the policies of the EU's member states). Above all, these desperate, impoverished people are 'threats'. They have to be seen as a policing, not a humanitarian, problem. They are 'economic migrants', and so inherently undeserving of anybody's help. This is institutionalised callousness, and is accepted by miost people because refugees have been labelled as less than human. However, by denying other people their full humanity we cauterise and maim our own. What makes these people so threatening ? It is the fact that they are impoverished, and have claims on our humanity. If they were rich, could purchase exclusive properties in Mayfair and perhaps own a newspaper or two, they would be given a peerage and become honorary members of the establishment.

We deceive ourselves if we think that this is an aberration. Britain did not want to offer succour to the Jewish victims of Tsarist progroms. We accepted far fewer victims of Nazi persecution than we could have done. We hesitated before taking in the Ugandan Asian refugees from Idi Amin's rule of terror. This policy follows a pattern, and is not exceptional.