Introduction
In most countries immigration has been a touchstone for political debate in many years as many of the policymakers have weighed security, humanitarian, and economic concerns (Fryberg, 2012). Many of the congress in such countries has failed to come into an agreement concerning a comprehensive immigration reforms for quite a number of years, effectively taking some of the major policy decisions into their judicial and executive government branches and fuel a debate in the halls of municipal and state governments. Some extraordinary actions have been taken to curb immigration but it has resulted to public protest and legal challenges (Fryberg, 2012).
In some countries like US, it has resulted to shutdown of the government for some days as Democrats and Republicans failed to compromise on immigration issues, thus, resulting to conflicts (Fryberg, 2012). Therefore immigration has been a vital divisive issue in many countries. There are many advantages and disadvantages of immigration which varies widely across the world. Some communities have been facing the downsides of the most poorly managed immigration or have been struggling to cope up with immigrants influx which is too large and happens very fast to both the newcomers of the community or the host community to adapt. In some cases, it has revitalized the communities. Worldwide, immigrants are characterized of provision of high and low skilled jobs (Fryberg, 2012).
Unfortunately, rhetoric around immigration leaves no consideration room for balancing the advantages and disadvantages from both political left and right or the economic realities of demand and supply. A person who generates genuine concerns to immigration sometimes feels that they are accused unfairly of racism by those people in left. In the same case, both the immigrants with their own children face racism sometimes with inclusion of violence (Fryberg, 2012). Thus, such experiences to both parties results to creation of environment which is nonconductive to listening to one another, excepting of immigration complexity as well as finding compromises which may lead to any practical solutions.
How Certain Risk Populations Can Become Radicalized and Violence Justification
Risk populations can become radicalized through some factors among the immigrants. Such are discussed as follows (Dalgaard-Nielsen, 2010). Immigrants who have criminal records can lead to radicalization in the countries of immigration. Such immigrants are vulnerable to violence activities as they have experience on them hence affecting the population economy, social and political activities. When one has such has to be covered from the attacks by the government to justify the violence cause.
Other cause of radicalization to risk populations is by having enabler by the immigrants (Dalgaard-Nielsen, 2010). In the case where some immigrants have enablers in their leadership or in their daily activities are much vulnerable to radicalization as they have cover from their enablers. Such people are associated with corruption of the government property. Therefore to avoid or to justify any violence in the risk populations, such immigrants should not be discriminated among the others but to be brought close to them (Dalgaard-Nielsen, 2010).
Lastly, but not least radicalization can also be brought in by socially isolating the immigrants in the most risk populations. Due to the isolation, the population can experience some violence from these immigrants as they feel neglected a lot and therefore they fight for equality and avoidance of racism. Hence leading to a decrease in economic growth and social problems in the populations (Dalgaard-Nielsen, 2010). Therefore, to justify this isolated immigrants should be shown love and exercise of racism be avoided among them.
Kind of Legislation to Address Radicalization
There is some legislation that can be put in place to address radicalization issues. Some of this legislation is as follows. In populations that are vulnerable to radicalization has to be imposed to proactive policy (Vidino, 2012). Such policy is a long term approach which addresses the main roots of radicalization as means of violence in the populations. This policy mainly focusses on preventing occurrence of attacks (Vidino, 2012). It addresses all types of extremism violent and isolations in the risk population strength to reduce radicalization. Hence, it protects the economy, social and political activities. Therefore, this policy will help in solving the problem of racism and isolation thus creating unity among the immigrants and the natives (Vidino, 2012). As a result of this the economy of the affected country increases and promotion of sociality among the citizens.
Secondly, I will propose imposing of reactive policy to the risk populations by the immigrants (Vidino, 2012). The reactive policy is associated with short term strategies that incorporates mobilization of security polices with immediate effect due to any attack caused by the immigrants associated with criminal records. The reactive policy imposition will speedy up enforcement of capabilities to restore population protection (Vidino, 2012). As it is associated with short term policy, any immigrant with such criminal records can be de-radicalized with immediate effect as the security forces are granted extraordinary surveillance power to act on them. Therefore, it is most appropriate to control the economy, political and social activities in the risk populations attack by these immigrants.
The rehabilitation program is a potential policy that targets radicalized persons in the risk populations (Bhui et al., 2012). These programs are both post criminal aftercare and prison-based de-radicalization which aims at rehabilitation of those with enablers. These rehabilitation programs offer training, education, and employment opportunities to reduce the radicalization of risk populations. Therefore, cases of corruption and misuse of government properties will decrease hence improving the country’s’ economy, political and social activities.
