Critical Response To The Article On Migrant Crisis
I am writing to you respectfully in concern of Katie Hopkins’ article which was given the authorization to be published on your online editorial, discussing the censorious issue of the migrant crisis. Whilst I completely understand that in this modern day there is a right for freedom of expression and opinion, there are some substantial issues with this article and I am hoping this will persuade you to reconsider your consent of the publication of this article. In spite of the fact that Ms Hopkins is a noteworthy writer, this article displays nothing more than disgust and pity for those who read this outrageous article.
Although Hopkins claims her intentions as part of a freedom of expression, it is also a human right to seek asylum if fleeing persecution or even the right for freedom of movement between different states or countries. Hence her excuse or somewhat claim of freedom of speech becomes redundant, as she is simply opposing other human rights. The first issue I would like to discuss is the impudent title of her article, which substantiates the inhumane opinions of Kate Hopkins.
The claim of using ‘gunships to stop migrants’, portrays her intentions of resorting to violence to stop the flow of migrants. These migrants are going through treacherous times by either fleeing civil war, oppression or religious extremism, yet Hopkins exhorts on utilizing gunships to compel them back to their home countries. ‘The Sun’ has on average 33. 3 million monthly viewers, could you imagine the impact on all of your viewers reading this bold headline. Children. Young readers, who are educated to read the news, come across such a distasteful headline, could you possibly think of that undesirable effect we do not want to create. Similarly, the usage of sickening and foul language to describe these innocent refugees is another clear significant issue. For some absurd reason, Hopkins finds the right to state these migrants are like ‘cockroaches’ and dehumanize them. These refugees are fleeing persecution and are risking their lives by crossing the Mediterranean Sea and voyaging on a threatening journey, all to seek a more pleasant life. More than 3,000 migrants alone die yearly on the Mediterranean Sea, and Hopkins claims it’s acceptable to present these indefatigable migrants as an unwanted, disgusting pest.
The utilization of Hopkins’ language to describe these refugees is utterly unacceptable and distinctly displays how heartless Hopkins truly is. Envision your child as one of those drowning, helpless refugees, wouldn’t you do something to help? These refugees should be treated as equal as they are also human, the use of offensive and ill-mannered lexis refugees is utterly unacceptable, and distinctly displays how heartless Hopkins truly is. Another problem that can be effortlessly deduced, is the lack of economic knowledge Katie Hopkins has on the British economy. This is first as of evident as when Hopkins asserts how when boats are in short supply it’s a ‘good thing’, however, we could create more jobs by increasing the supply of boats.
In 2015, there was an unemployment rate of 5. 4%, if we could increase the supply of boats, the unemployment rate would fall and prices would be cheaper. Hence Hopkins wouldn’t have to ‘passionately’ care about British taxpayers, as the prices for boats are cheaper. In similarity, many economists suggest the attraction of migrants will result in more skilled workers for the community, and therefore as a whole result in a better British economy. Thus these refugees can be deduced to be extremely valuable for the economy as a whole, as well as saving these precious lives. It wouldn’t be ideal for me to go through this entire article and point out the notable flaws with Hopkins’ unacceptable and poor ideology on these refugees. Although on the occasion, there are some abnormal cases where refugees could be actually portrayed pessimistic due to their actions, the entirety of these migrants shouldn’t be stapled with the same name.
For example, “aggressive young men at Calais”, which Hopkins states, this doesn’t infer to all migrants and refugees. Not all migrants are perfect. But tell me are you perfect. Is there such human, who has no flaws? We have to learn to treat these migrants equally and respectfully, as in the end, they are the same as us: human. Hopefully, it is now also quite evident, that ‘The Sun’ has been negligent in not reviewing this article. This appalling and dreadful article wouldn’t just outrage not just the migrants or liberals but towards any rational human being. In conclusion, there is no simple solution to immediately stop this global refugee crisis, but rather we have to take a systematic, collective and organised approach to this problem. This problem can’t be solved overnight, over the span of a week or even a month, despite that fact it can be solved. It can be solved with: time and patience.
