[ad_1]
Conservatives Andrew Scheer seem to bet that the way back to 24 Susbad Drive is paved with racial intolerance, xenophobia and fanning the flames of division.
Barbarian cultural practices 2.0 are more nuanced, but the intention is
Scare, fear, hate
It's a thing to have a debate about the politics of the world. Immigration is another to use language and images – as they did in recent social media – to promote racism
Consider the highly charged rhetoric of conservatives federal authorities regarding the increase in the number of asylum seekers crossing the Canada-US border.
Listen to him
They use the word "illegal" almost every time. This is deliberate, meant to show the government that it is doing nothing to stop the flow of these "illegals".
The facts? Well, they are missing
The Conservatives know that Canadians have no way of differentiating between a refugee who has applied at one designated point of entry and someone who does not. Did not do it. They know that someone who goes through an unnamed entry point always has the right to ask for asylum. They know and they do not care.
And those who cross unnamed entry points do not do so in order to sneak into Canada as the Conservatives let us believe, but rather to make an application for asylum [19659002] But they agree to ignite racism against refugees and play with facts and reality.
Related article:
Baloney Meter: Are the majority of asylum seekers asylum seekers? Canada is doomed
Michelle Rempel, Conservative immigration critic, conducted the investigation. His motion in the House of Commons at the beginning of the year called on the Government of Canada: "to resolve the crisis created by the influx of thousands of illegal cross – border commuters who cross our southern border between cross – border points. Entrance".
Yes. There is this word again: illegal.
When she called him, she rejected her critics by claiming that it was a question of semantics.
If it was just a question of semantics, it would stop using the word
It's more than just semantics. Given the American ban on Muslims, the recent crumbling of families on the US-Mexico border, and the heavy rhetoric about migrants, there are good reasons for people fleeing intolerable conditions, Feel that they now have a lot to fear in Trump America.
In addition to tearing families apart, the United States no longer considers gang violence or domestic violence to be reasonable grounds for obtaining refugee status. It is a very different state from the United States
. It also contravenes international treaties, including the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights and its convention on refugees. The United Nations defines a refugee as someone who is forced to leave his country for fear of persecution, violence or war. The convention that Canada has signed also states that refugees should not be penalized for seeking asylum by irregular means.
To be very clear, it is not illegal to seek asylum
The United States border has made it through a designated entry point, but the moving to an unnamed point does not take away the right to seek asylum.
However, it protects you from being returned to the United States by the following conditions: the Safe Third Country Agreement. An agreement signed at another time after 9/11 and when refugee systems in both countries were more comparable.
Many refugee advocates claim that the deal should be suspended given Trump's immigration policies. a claim in the first country they arrive at unless they pbad to an unnamed entry point.
Immigration Canada describes these pbadages as "irregular migratory trends", avoiding the use of terms such as "illegal" that stigmatize asylum seekers. In fact, the media should stop using terms like "illegal asylum seekers" or "illegally smuggled" pbadages.
As two Osgoode Hall law students who work with refugee claimants point out, they cross the border. requesting asylum at an unnamed entry point does not constitute an offense under the Criminal Code of Canada. Jesse Beaton and Kylie Sier noted that "refugees often lack access to the press and podiums, so their public image and identity tend to be defined by others. Stigmatizing labels embolden a populist policy that positions refugees as strangers, burdens and potential criminals. These labels in turn support problematic policies by facilitating the search for scapegoats for social problems for which they are not responsible. People with a high voice have a great responsibility not to prejudge and criticize asylum seekers as being "illegal".
Unfortunately, those who persist in labeling illegal refugees are more concerned about scoring political points and stirring up divisions.
They should consider who they slander – a group of human beings who, for the most part, are desperate, scared, vulnerable and fleeing violence.
Perhaps Scheer, Rempel and their followers should be wondering what makes them
Lana Payne is the Atlantic Director for Unifor. She can be contacted by email at [email protected]. Twitter: @lanampayne His column returns in two weeks
[ad_2]
Source link
