J.K. Rowling is a well-known fictional author from the United Kingdom, who is famous for her “Harry Potter” series of novels. Her work on this fictional universe of wizardry and magic has resulted in her literary success, as well as there being a slew of movies based on each of the books set in this universe. Rowling has also become a modern-day inspiration for writers, who wrote what would become the Harry Potter novels on napkins and relying on state welfare until she was launched into fame and fortune. No one can deny that this is a rags-to-riches story, in and of itself, and definitely proof of how capitalism works when one applies themselves and works hard to make their dreams come true.
However, Mrs. Rowling, like most in the western world that acquire fame and fortune through their pursuits in the arts, has been a vocal advocate for leftist ideologies and agendas. Most recently taking to discussing how refugees must be taken in and sheltered, something that the vocal Left in politics have been in favor of supporting. Some people have taken up a petition, in response to her advocacy, saying that she should shelter 18 refugees in 18 spare bedrooms of one of her homes. She has since demolished the house, in order to expand her garden, and rebuilt “Howarts-Style tree houses” in its place.
I don’t think whether she should or shouldn’t house these refugees should be a question, since I honestly doubt that she’d respond to something so childish and ridiculous (which it IS). What should be brought into question is why Rowling thinks that bringing refugees into the U.K. will solve the issue. Instead of advocating for the state to bring in more people, when there are already massive economic issues and socio-political issues to tackle with those who are native to her country? Just like everywhere else in the world, higher education is being valued less, the money that jobs pay don’t make up for the unceasing inflation of market prices on goods and services, and there is a massive cultural rift that’s created a schism in the country.
Instead of fueling the flames by wanting more refugees brought into the U.K., which encourages the state to continue bombing the Middle-East, why not make a campaign to urge MP’s to discontinue their military involvement in bombing countries like Syria and put money towards rebuilding their economy? I understand that it’s out of sympathy for the plight of refugees, but bringing them into countries that they despise for taking part of their homeland’s destruction will only worsen things. I get how we should give the benefit of the doubt to these people and believe that they just want to live normal lives. The best way to let them do that is to stop enabling the systematic genocide of their people and encourage them to rebuild.
The extremist perspective of Islam never was a thing until the West decided to intervene and control their politics by placing puppets in power that sparked the cultural shift from secular to an extremist regime that I could only describe as an autocratic theocracy. So why further the wrong that has been done to these people for decades? Why not do the right thing and let them rebuild what’s left of their society back home?