Something I've been noticing is a narrative emerging in the UK where people are criticising British expats in Dubai and the Middle East, arguing that because they no longer pay taxes into the British system, they shouldn't be entitled to government assistance or repatriation during the current conflict. And I find this deeply problematic, for a couple of reasons.
First, I think it establishes a really dangerous principle, that your worth as a citizen is tied to your financial contribution to the state. Because if you follow that logic through, it applies equally to working class people and low earners in the UK who don't pay much tax either. It essentially creates a two-tier citizenship based on wealth, and I don't think most people have thought through what they're actually arguing for when they say that.
Second, and more broadly, I see this as a classic example of how divisive political narratives get constructed, pitting ordinary people against each other, while the people making these arguments are often the ones most insulated from the bigger political picture. I think they're unable to see how these attitudes reflect and reinforce the very systems that are causing the problems they're angry about in the first place.
The way I see it, citizenship shouldn't be transactional. And directing anger at fellow citizens, expat or otherwise, just distracts from the more meaningful questions about how power and politics actually operate.
I get it, there is absolutely reason to be angry. But I'd just ask one question: where should that anger actually be pointed? Because I don't think it's at each other.