Differences between Refugees and Migrants

Differences between Refugees and Migrants How do refugees differ from migrants? Is the distinction important? Why? In the current public frenzy and political debate, the terms ‘refugee’ and ‘migrant’ are perceived as synonymous and are used interchangeably by political leaders and journalists. People choose to travel across borders due to a variety of reasons and under different circumstances. While political instability due to ongoing civil wars in some countries forces people to leave their homes, others voluntarily choose to migrate to another country in search of better economic conditions. This distinction, although undermined, holds severe legal consequences that can have a dire impact on the people in question. According to the 1951 Refugee Convention, a refugee is someone who flees their home country, and is reluctant to return, due to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, (Castles, 222). Refugees are protected under international law, which includes the right to not be instantly deported to their home country and into harms way. On the other hand, a migrant is someone who makes a conscious decision to move to another country for economic reasons or for family reunions. Anyone who is not specifically fleeing war or personal prosecution is considered a migrant. The reason behind people’s decision to immigrate is one of the main differences between migrants and refugees; â€Å"while migrants may seek to escape harsh conditions of their own, like dire poverty, refugees escape conditions where they could face imprisonment, deprivation of basic rights, physical injury or worseâ₠¬  (Martinez). Creating a distinction between ‘migrants’ and ‘refugees’ is important since each has different implications for the host country. Under the regulations of the 1951 Refugee Convention, refugees cannot be refused asylum and sent back to their home countries where their lives would be in danger. Since refugees don’t have the option to return to their homelands, they are more likely to invest in the host country-specific trends and culture. This is done mainly through learning the native language, becoming naturalized citizens or by enrolling children into local schools. Since refugees flee from their countries due to political instability, they are unable to keep in contact with family members in their home countries, which makes it more likely for them to create social connections in the host country. â€Å"This line of reasoning suggests that refugee immigrants are more likely to assimilate into the earnings growth path of the native-born population,à ¢â‚¬  as well as the culture (Cortes). Economic migrants usually aim to simply earn money to improve their living standards and support their families. Since these migrants did not flee from their homes, they are able to maintain ties with their families in their home countries. The ability to maintain hereditary social connections prevents them from wanting to integrate into the local society. While the willingness of the refugees to assimilate into the society is very evident, their ability to do so might be questionable. More often than not, refugees stand as a starkly different section of the society and this hindrance in their ability could be subjected to their different social and cultural backgrounds. On the other hand, since the entry of migrants is more filtered, it could be easier for the government to ensure that these individuals are capable of integrating into the society. Many refugees who flee to the United Kingdom (UK) lack fluency in English, which is one of the main barriers to social integration. The UK government introduced English for speakers of other languages (Esol) classes, which provide refugees with eight hours of free English tuition in the initial year to help them overcome their language barriers. However, these classes have not weaved the results that were expected. This is primarily because refugees belonging to the same country are grouped together and as a result, someone who has never learned to read or write English ends up in the same class as someone with a University degree and intermediate knowledge of English. Conversely, migrants are required to have proficiency in English before applying for a UK visa, which essentially eradicates the language barriers for them, thus making it easier for them to be able to integrate into the British society. Since 2015, the European Refugee Crisis has induced a large-scale movement of refugees to the European Union (EU). Female women are often overlooked while devising policies to ensure proper integration of refugees into the host countries. While female refugees find it difficult to socially integrate into the society of the host country, female migrants find it harder to economically integrate into the host country’s labor force. According to a report published by the United Kingdom’s Survey on New Refugees (SNR), female refugees usually faired worse than male refugees in terms of literacy, health, housing and fluency in English. These drawbacks delay their integration into the British society by up to 21 months and marginalize them further. On the other hand, female migrants face challenges in the UK in terms of wage and job inequality. In 2018, employment figures published by public sector organizations in the UK reveal that â€Å"nine in 10 paid men more than women, with an overall gender pay gap of 14%† (Barr).   This pay gap is despite the fact that both male and female migrants are required to go through the same screening test, which deems them qualified to work in the UK in terms of literacy and fluency in English. These issues faced by migrant women prevent their climb up the social ladder. Thus, women belonging to both groups face recognizably different difficulties when they migrate to the UK and require different policies to target their specific needs.   Migrants that pour into a country often directly contribute to the labor force and easily assimilate into the society. Their skill sets often align with the needs of the economy and this not only lands them good jobs but also makes them independent. The picture might not be as rosy for refugees who are often ‘dependent’ on the government. In the UK, although, many of them are highly educated â€Å"(38% have a university education), unemployment is very high (82%) and of those who are unemployed, nearly all rely mainly on government support† (Betts). Those willing to work are limited to only serving at ‘low-end’ jobs due to lack of language skills and knowledge of the British labor market. Moreover, most of them â€Å"have been traumatized by war, and arrive in vulnerable conditions; these factors complicate their integration into local markets† (Rozo). Host countries are forced to invest their resources to fulfill the crucial task of reliev ing the suffering of the refugee community and ensuring their security by providing asylum and bearing the additional expenses of accommodation. In doing so, they divert manpower from the national developmental activities, thus pressurizing the local administration. However, migrants do not need special assistance from the host government to ensure their settlement and security. They contribute positively to â€Å"demographic trends, and – depending on their skills and willingness to work – improve the ratio of active workers to non-active persons (e.g. pensioners), whilst also contributing to innovation, entrepreneurship and GDP growth† (Karakas). The time gap between when the refugees are allowed to use welfare benefits and when their work actually begins to contribute to an economy’s productive potential is significant. On the other hand, one can see an immediate effect on the host economy’s output when migrants begin to work. Moreover, economic migrants tend to work at high-skilled jobs, in fact, migrants fill â€Å"one in five skilled British jobs† (Paton). While migrants occupy the higher level jobs in the labor market, refugees are confined to the lower strata of the labor market. Migrants earn more and contribute more in terms of taxes and utilize fewer welfare resources, whereas refugees pay lower taxes and utilize more social benefits. â€Å"Altogether, international forced migration may have drastically different implications than the integration of economic migrants through an established migration system in developed countries† (Rozo). Thus, the net economic impact of migrants is usually positive, while that of refugees is negative. These days, the definitions of the terms ‘refugee’ and ‘migrant’ are seen to converge to mean the same thing. This confusion may arise because the term ‘refugee’ has been defined by international law while there is no legal definition for the term â€Å"migrant† and so policymakers, media and the government do not pay attention to the difference in the denotations and connotations of the two varying groups of people in an economy. â€Å"Blurring the terms ‘refugees’ and ‘migrants’ takes attention away from the specific legal protections refugees require, such as protection from refoulement and from being penalized for crossing borders without authorization in order to seek safety† (UNHCR). Given the vagueness in definitions, the significance of seeking asylum within the two groups is also called into question. Particularly in today’s times with an increase in various refugee crises, public support f or refugees and the institution of asylum is becoming all the more necessary. While governments must ensure that the human rights of migrants, as well as refugees, are respected, the legal and operational response for refugees must be given more importance because of their higher comparative vulnerabilities. Refugees lack protection from their country of origin while migrants have a fallback in terms of national embassies that are willing to protect their rights in cases of possible infringements. While refugees are processed under the regulations of international law, migrants fall under the umbrella of domestic laws. Governments in the host countries can choose to deport the latter, while because refugees cannot be denied asylum, governments do not have the authority to send them back to their countries of origin. Having ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention, the UK is obliged to follow its protocols that define the responsibilities of nations that grant asylum to refugees. Due to this treaty, the recent decision of the UK to leave the EU will not have a major impact on the refugee movement. However, it will have a significant impact on migrants traveling to the UK. Brexit will allow the UK to modify its existing immigration laws and make them more stringent to make it exceedingly difficult for migrants to live in the UK. In this case, if the policymakers confuse a refugee as a migrant and deport them under the regulations of domestic law, they are in effect giving them a dea th sentence. Thus, the seemingly insignificant difference in the definitions of the two terms is, in fact, the difference between life and death for millions. â€Å"For this reason, United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees always refers to ‘refugees’ and ‘migrants’ separately, to maintain clarity about the causes and character of refugee movements and not to lose sight of the specific obligations owed to refugees under international law.† Understanding the difference between ‘refugees’ and ‘migrants’ essentially saves millions of lives by allowing people belonging to the two groups to be processed under suitable laws. Refugees and migrants follow different patterns of social integration into host nations. Lack of proficiency in the local language is one the main obstacles to the social integration of refugees. If the government blurs these two terms and formulates policies that don’t specifically address the individual needs of each of these groups, social integration of refugees will be extremely difficult, despite their unrelenting willingness to do so. Moreover, gender-specific policies are required to address the additional problems that are faced by female refugees and migrants. Despite their distinct initial needs, refugee women eventually face similar problems as migrant women do with economic integration. Economically, the situation for migrants is much better as compared to th at of refugees. Despite having high skill sets, refugees are unable to work at high paying jobs due to language barriers. As a result, they end up utilizing more benefits and contributing less to the economies of the host nations. Thus, refugees differ from migrants in terms of their impact on the host countries and this distinction is clearly important because it not only affects the lives of the two groups but also affects the host countries. WORKS CITED: Barr, Caelainn, et al. â€Å"Gender Pay Gap Figures Reveal Eight in 10 UK Firms Pay Men More.† The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 4 Apr. 2018, www.theguardian.com/money/2018/apr/04/gender-pay-gap-figures-reveal-eight-in-10-uk-firms-pay-men-more. Betts, Alexander, et al. â€Å"Talent Displaced: The Economic Lives of Deloitte US.†Ã‚  Deloitte, University of Oxford, www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/About-Deloitte/talent-displaced-syrian-refugees-europe.pdf. Castles, Stephen, and Mark J. Miller. The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World. 4th ed., Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Cortes, Kalena E. â€Å"Are Refugees Different From Economic Migrants? .† The Review of Economics and Statistics, May 2004. Karakas, Cemal. Economic Challenges and Prospects of the Refugee Influx. European Parliamentary Research Service, Dec. 2015, www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2015/572809/EPRS_BRI(2015)572809_EN.pdf Martinez, Michael. â€Å"Migrant vs. Refugee: Whats the Difference.† CNN, Cable News Network, 8 Sept. 2015, edition.cnn.com/2015/09/08/world/what-is-difference-migrants-refugees/index.html. Paton, Graeme. â€Å"Immigrants Fill One in Five Skilled British Jobs.† The Telegraph, Telegraph Media Group, 3 Nov. 2013, www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10424148/Immigrants-fill-one-in-five-skilled-British-jobs.html. Rozo, Sandra V., et al. â€Å"Blessing or Burden? The Impact of Refugees on Businesses in Host Countries.† 16 Feb. 2018. UNHCR.  Ã¢â‚¬ËœRefugees’ and ‘Migrants’ Frequently Asked Questions. 15 Mar. 2016, www.unhcr.org/hk/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2016/04/FAQ-ahout-Refugees-and-Migrants.pdf.pdf

Curley’s Wife: Floozy or Innocent Girl? Essay

Curley’s wife is a young, pretty woman, who is mistrusted by her husband, Curley. The other characters refer to her only as ‘Curley’s wife,’ which is significant as she is the only character in the novel without a name. She is a simple object or possession belonging to her husband and this shows the severity of the sexual discrimination in America in 1930s. I believe Steinbeck would have thought of her not as a person but a symbol. Almost everyone on the ranch is lonely and she symbolises this. The audience would come to believe she is a weak isolated character however, the men are fearful of her. She is the wife of their boss. She has power and this power creates fear among the ranch workers. She is both in charge and screaming for attention. When we first meet Curley’s wife, the description of her suggests she is clearly overdressed for life on a ranch. ‘Her fingernails were red’ and she wore ‘red mules, on the insteps of which w ere little bouquets of red ostrich feathers.’ The repetition of the red suggests danger. This could be a warning about trouble in the future. Danger creates fear and the workers on the ranch definitely fear her. She has the power to dismiss them from their jobs or even have them lynched as she is the boss’s wife. This ‘Miss Dynamite’ image is supported by the fact that George thinks she will be trouble. He calls her a ‘tramp’, ‘poison’ and tells Lennie (who has taken a shine to her) to ‘leave her be’. He sees her as a threat and doesn’t want Lennie to get involved with someone who could potentially lose them their jobs. The audience begins to dislike this woman. This highlights the prejudice against women at the time. She comes across as a confident flirt when in company due to her body language. The first description of her includes ‘..so that her body was thrown forward’. This gesture suggests that she almost throws herself at men. George called her a ‘tramp’ and her actions are beginning to fulfill this opinion of her. I think some would view this as disappointing. Women were mainly seen in whore houses at the time. The fact that Curley’s wife had found herself a husband, lived on a ranch and not in a whore house, suggests she is a ‘good girl’. We want her to be different from the general view of women at the time which had been brought about by prejudice. Unfortunately she comes across as no different. This continues in chapter 5, when Curley’s wife consoles Lennie. ‘She moved closer’ is repeated showing how she continuously reduces the distance between herself and Lennie. It suggests she is forward and flaunting herself at him. The audience could start to feel uncomfortable and anxious at this point. This could be the moment of danger that was foreshadowed in the beginning. She seems to be the powerful Miss Dynamite. However, there are so many implications that she is a lonely victim. After she is killed there is a poignant moment in the book. The long sentences emphasise the movement of peace, time standing still before the men find her body. All the negative aspects of the character disappear and we feel sympathy for her. She tries to convey glamour and sophistication when really she is just a sweet country girl. Steinbeck describes her as ‘very pretty’, ‘simple’ and ‘sweet’ when dead. The audience now realise the simplicity of her true self. ‘†¦the discontent and the ache for attention were all gone from her face’ shows that she is at peace. She doesn’t have to pretend anymore. She has been putting on an act. She had a dream which we only become aware of in this chapter to become a film star in Hollywood. One theme in the book is the American dream. Lennie and George have one. However, it is suggested that this is unreachable as George talks of them owning ‘red and blue and green rabbits’ which gives the American dream a fantasy quality. The fact that Curley’s wife still seems to believe in her dream gives her a naivety and we feel more sympathy for her and the audience warm to her. I think this is the point in the book (when Steinbeck reveals her true character) that the audience can look back over the book and think of her differently, as the lonely victim. For instance, she is constantly searching for her husband which could be an excuse to mingle with the other men. ‘I’m looking for Curley’ could have a hidden meaning and she could be desperate for some attention if she is lonely. The loneliness of her character is supported by the scene with Lennie in Chapter 5. She tells Lennie the about herself and her dream. She is so desperate to talk to someone and for someone to listen. ‘.. her words tumbled out in a passion of communication’ shows how desperate she is to share her story. This desperation continues when ‘she went on with her story quickly, before she could be interrupted.’ This could be seen as her being conceited. On the other hand, she could just be overwhelmed that someone is actually listening to her so she wants to say everything before it becomes too good to be true and Lennie loses interest. This implies she has no one to talk to which is saddening as it shows how isolated she must be. This isolation is emphasised further when she can’t even connect with Lennie. The one person who she starts to befriend turns out to be too good to be true. ‘Don’t you think of nothing but rabbits?’ shows that Lennie isn’t really listening. They lose what was a potentially beautiful connection. In conclusion, Curley’s wife dreams of being Miss Dynamite but is really only the lonely victim. Her dream was to be a film star in Hollywood but she finds herself living on a ranch. One of her strengths is her status in society as the boss’s wife but apart from this she seems to be the lonely victim through and through even though she tries to cover it up with her ‘glam’ image. She hides behind a mask and the audience only realise when she dies.

Military Brat

Of course the military has a lot of traveling, family orientated, many free services, and good food. Being a military brat was not all its hyped up to be. As a little girl growing up I never had a place to truly call home. Ling the lifestyle as a military brat my mother frequently transferred or was given new assignments. Our locations verified from state to state and we always ended up on a military base. Never staying in a place for more than one to two years it was like being passed around like a damn basketball. At times I got used to my mother's absence when she received her assignments.It was a breath of fresh air when she wasn't around. It felt like a taste of bliss when I TLD have to hear her constant nagging or screaming. All of us children were able to feel free for the time she was gone. As the time came near for her return It felt as If we walked on egg shells due to her unpredictable mood swings. It's a shame that I didn't have a choice to be a part of the military cultu re. Being born into a family that was already actively enrolled was no fair chance for me to have a civilian life experience. On base they preach over and over to us about values and patriotism.What bucking values, Is all I say to myself. The military law required commanding officers and those in authority to demonstrate were 7 Army Values†. The acronym was â€Å"LADYSHIP' which stands for Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, and Personal Courage. I was never taught values, morals, or anything of that nature. That woman who called herself a mother wasn't there to teach me values. I see more of my mother's back walking straight out the door than I saw her miserable looking face. The most difficult challenge I dealt with was constantly making new friends to replace the ones I just left behind.I've never felt such a bitter taste of hate in my mouth for when she uprooted us and took my best friend Sarah away. No one could replace my Seraglio or even come close to fill ing in her shoes. From that point on I kept my distance away from most people so I wouldn't get attached and set my-self up Tort another narrates. It really success when we relocated ruling ten welter holidays. I would plan and save up my funds to buy my friends presents. Making ewe friends in a new environment was extremely hard to break into their social groups. To them I was an outsider from a different base.Being on base there is a zero tolerance policy for misbehaver or being rebellious. As brat I remember the discipline being cruel and unusual punishment putting me in the corner to kneel on my knees and hold both my arms up and away from my body. My arms would go numb and the knees feeling like someone Just removed the knee caps. The amount of time in the corner was based on how well we held our composure. She would have us drop our pants to the floor grabbing our ankles as she took my father's biggest leather belt slashing it against our ass as hard as she could.If we moved s he would distribute more lashings. My mother was mean and called her discipline â€Å"tough love†. Yeah right, my ass it wasn't tough love. She could dissemble my door frame in five minutes taking away my privacy when I would slam my door from anger. She would turn off the electricity to my room so that there was no TV, curling irons, games, or any luxury. The more my mother was a pitch the more I rebelled with braking my curfew, sneaking out, hiding her badge, taking her lies and hiding them.The consequences of misbehaver for a military brat are generally greater than for a civilian children. Being labeled a brat was not a choice by any means. However, due to the challenges I endured it has shaped and molded me into the woman I am today. A woman with values, strength, great friendships, and unconditional love for all. No longer that innocent girl thanks to the military who robbed me of that innocence. And It makes want to spit when someone refers to me as a military brat. It 's not a word that means â€Å"endearment† or â€Å"respect† as we were taught. It signifies Hell for

The Rights Of Minorities By Jean Baptiste - 3342 Words

Rights of Minorities Eddy Jean Baptiste Mr. Wilson Period 2 Senior Project Minorities are people that can be assembled as national, ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious. In addition migrants, refugees and indigenous. Minorities are discriminated, they develop and increase group loyalty as results of discriminatory. A minority group refers to a certain group of people differentiated from the social majority. Those who hold the majority of positions of social power in a society may be defined by law. Rather than a relational social group. as the term would indicate, minority group refers to the above-described. â€Å"Minority group often occurs alongside a speech of civil rights and collective rights which gained eminence in†¦show more content†¦Most important issues would definitely lie in racial relations, economic policy, government-individual communication, and controversial social topics, just like for everyone else unlike issues certainly stand out for different groups. Asian Americans feel helpless to revolution the coor dination, and because the community is so various, it is hard to organize politically. The racism that Asian Americans face in society and their actions in overwhelming racism are often modest or ignored altogether. In addition, Asian Americans are far less personified in state and federal government than in equivalent to their population. Many Asian Americans are not citizens, and never apply for citizenship. Asians minorities could help more in this generation with the federal government, doing more to the Asians where there could help the countries don’t let the Asian do as much to protect what the Asian need to issue to the diversity and large device of the important of ethic minority. Asian have to change the society. They have less represented of them self to the state and government. Where they need to change to show the American they are helpful and conclude to them what the bad thing America are not really doing to help them. Respectively Minority right now are facin g conceptual discourse, also ancient outline. By this the minority conflicts core of conditionShow MoreRelatedAid For Illegal Immigrants : Special Interests Or The Best Interests Of Society?2680 Words   |  11 Pagesbecause of their parent’s status. Undocumented children who are able to receive public assistance to continue their education may be those best capable of finding a viable, positive solution to the issue of illegal immigration in general. Given the rights and services already afforded this group (as children they are protected even if their parents are not) extending those services to college also seems the only logical step in the immigration quagmire. Penalizing legal citizens regardless of theirRead MoreFrancois Boucher4287 Words   |  18 Pageslightness and charm of rococo. Jean-Antoine Watteau marks the change of mood, also evident in his followers Jean-Baptiste Pater (1695–1736) and Nicolas Lancret. In Watteaus informal fà ªtes galantes, grac eful figures engage in musical and amatory pursuits in theatrical landscape settings which are tinged with melancholy and a sense of the transitory nature of pleasure. A graceful and highly decorative development of this style is found in the work of Franà §ois Boucher and Jean-Honorà © Fragonard, both ofRead MoreUnveiling The Hijab : Oppression Versus Self Determination1719 Words   |  7 Pageswhile stating systematic censorship is the real agent of oppression. Ultimately despite the vocal objections of certain political and feminist groups, the hijab represents far more than the religious implication. It is the embodiment of Muslim women’s right to self-determination and should only serve the interests of the individual wearer. The religious origins of the hijab are rooted in Qur anic verses 24:30-24:31, which states that women â€Å"draw their veils over their bosom and not display their beauty†Read MoreColonialism2524 Words   |  11 Pagessixteenth to the twentieth centuries that ended with the national liberation movements of the 1960s.† Jà ¼rgen Osterhammel, Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview Colonialism is a relationship between an indigenous (or forcibly imported) majority and a minority of foreign invaders. The fundamental decisions affecting the lives of the colonised people are made and implemented by the colonial rulers in pursuit of interests that are often defined in a distant metropolis. Rejecting cultural compromisesRead MoreRoosevelt and Isolationism5742 Words   |  23 Pagesalignment with the Democratic party towards the isolationist element was consistent with nationalist sentiment. FDRs change in policy also illustrates the need to make concessions in order to gain political backing. Under pressure from influential right-wing Democrat and publishing mogul William Randolph Hearst, in exchange for his support of FDRs nomination required a denunciation of his Wilsonian internationalism. FDR adroitly obliged to Hearsts request and, on 2 February 1932, FDR announcedRead MoreRacial Discrimination During The 20th Century3606 Words   |  15 Pagesracial mixing. The name eugenia was first introduced in the title of a medical paper at the Rio Medical Faculty by a scientist named Tepedino in 1914, although eugenics was inspired by the work of eighteenth century scientist and intellectual Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, who published theories on the improvement of race throug h changes in hygiene, health, and education. Eugenics gained popularity in the 1930s, and the 1934 constitution even mandated that â€Å"eugenic education† be taught in every school. EugenicsRead MoreThe Theory of Absolutism Essay3273 Words   |  14 Pagesultimate authority in the state rested in the hands of a king who claimed to rule by divine right. But what did sovereignty mean? Late sixteenth century political theorists believed that sovereign power consisted of the authority to make laws, tax, administer justice, control the states administrative system, and determine foreign policy. These powers made a ruler sovereign. One of the chief theorists of divine-right monarchy in the seventeenth century was the French theologian and court preacher BishopRead MoreAmerican Holidays11778 Words   |  48 PagesHow have you been? (How you been?) Agreeing Yes Yeah (informal) Yep (informal) Yup (informal) Right! You’re right! Right you are! Right on! Right o! Uh-huh! Sure You got it! You bet! That is true. (That’s true) Ain’t thatRead MoreThe Entrepreneurial Mind-18021 Words   |  73 Pagesentrepreneurship and economics has long been the accepted norm. In fact, until the 1950s, the majority of definitions and references to entrepreneurship had come from economists. For example, the aforementioned Cantillon (1725), the French economist Jean Baptiste Say (1803), and twentieth-century economist Joseph Schumpeter (1934) all wrote about entrepreneurship and its impact on economic development.6 Since that time, researchers have continued to try to describe or define what entrepreneurship is