The character of Karomat Lone argues that citizenship is a privilege, not a right. It can be revoked if the government thinks appropriate. Do you agree with him?

Comparing it with two articles Washington Post and The Daily Mail

The articles both had an extremely contrasting text tone, the Washington Post was rather calmer and had an almost sad tone to it, so people may feel sympathy for Shamima Begum, the language was very formal making it sound reliable to the readers. Meanwhile, The Daily Mail post had a much more volatile tone, the language was much more explicit to how the author felt and gave no regards to the audience; however, which while reading is extremely persuasive, as it gives a more passionate argument. The Daily Mail’s post also relates to the extract from Home fire as in both texts there was an angry tone towards the issue. 

But when it comes to the overall content of the articles I feel that the situations in Home Fire and the two articles about Shamima Begum who left the UK in February 2015, aged 15, to join the ISIS are extremely different when you look into it closely. One of the main differences I feel was that unlike in Home Fire Shamima Begum wasn’t as brainwashed as Eamonn was. Eamonn didn’t know what he was going into as all he wanted was to be closer to his father; however, Shamima Begum who was well educated and very well knew what she was getting into bed with, still left to join ISIS. This offers the challenge that can you even judge both of the cases together as they are actually extremely different. But at the same time, it gives me clarity about if I agree with their citizenship being provoked. 

So overall I do agree with Karomat Lone statement that ‘citizenship is a privilege, not a right.’ Mainly because, if you want to keep your citizenship, you must be loyal to that country and joining a terrorist group isn’t doing so. But in the case of Eamonn, he was brainwashed which is why I would give him his citizenship back. However, for  Shamima Begum who left the UK, who knew completely what she was getting into, I would not give her, her citizenship back. There has to be a limit and revoking her citizenship should be used as an example for others who do the same and try to come back into the country.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *