Apathy: a lack of interest, enthusiasm or concern – this word decided to perch itself on my mind recently; and who could blame it? It’s basically the standard M.O. of the UK. I can’t even say it’s a new thing, because even Kate Fox observed it in her book “Watching the English.”
“What do we want? GRADUAL CHANGE! When do we want it? IN DUE COURSE!” <– she wrote that, giving a rather exaggerated example of what an ‘English Protest’ would look like. The reality is (albeit a bit obscured by the fact that the media likes to hide such things from the rest of the general public), of course, far from apathetic.
During the Conservative Conference in Manchester, for example, some 80 THOUSAND people marched against austerity (according to estimates of those who attended said march)… and didn’t get nearly the coverage that one would think it should. 50 thousand marched in London last year and got more media attention. Though that, too, isn’t saying much.
Really, a part of me looks at the smoke and daily mirrors (see what I did there? You’re welcome) and wonders just how much of this facade is a fictitious image conjured by the elitists to maintain the status quo. But, then, I was always a bit paranoid to start with and that has only gotten worse in my time living in the UK.
As my dad would say, however: “just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean that they aren’t out to get you.” Being fearful that one might be caught up in a plot against them does not rule out the possibility that the fears may well be founded.
Take my newest bit of learning as an example: apparently, new rules require employers of immigrants holding visas with limited leave to remain on the family visa route (see: FLR M and FLR O) to not only see the passport/documentation of the immigrant, but that of their SPONSOR.
Why? Beats me. Seeing my sponsor’s passport proves nothing, as far as I can tell, beyond the fact that I have access to it. It is tantamount to hoop jumping, with the insinuation that, if one cannot get ahold of their sponsor’s identification, that they are somehow running afoul of the immigration system.
Basically: you’re guilty until you’re proven innocent, and even then you’re going to be looked at with suspicion. Quell surprise.
It’s just another way to give the public the impression that the Government is doing something about the boogieman (undocumented – aka illegal – immigrants) that they, themselves, used to scare the populous into believing existed. I.e. those supposed masses of people who come to take their benefits/jobs/homes/healthcare/love interests/dog Fifi… blah, blah, blah, bs, bs, bs, bs ad nauseam… while still not actually doing a damn thing in reality.
So there you have it, Immigrants get to jump a few more hoops because the Government is set on patting themselves on the back for solving a problem that never existed in the first place by using a tactic that doesn’t prove anything, all because they want to pacify the fears of the people they govern… fears that they stoked in the first place. Bravo.
No, really, bravo. You could turn this into an epic play and get a standing ovation for the muddled soup that it is. Sure as heck it’s only in entertainment and politics with this kind of crap manages to come into existence.