Miriam Ticktin’s “What’s Wrong with Innocence” puts in one place a set of complete and coherent thoughts relating to the idea of innocence and what it means for refugees and migrants. Although a shorter article, it brings to light these concepts regarding asylum and our views about refugees that are not talked about usually, yet these thoughts have crossed my mind since the start of our class. In particular, Ticktin’s point about innocence making a clear distinction between refugees and migrants, specifically those migrating for economic reasons is eye opening.

The representation of someone who is facing problems deemed as “real” and outside of the scope of merely finding better opportunities makes for a better illustration as deserving, with innocence stemming from reasons for fleeing that are caused by factors other than the individual. At least that is what is portrayed. “Real” refugees flee for reasons that are outside of their responsibility like war or race while migrants flee for jobs and money, which are portrayed in a way where the individual is more to “blame”. Doing so has a sort of blanket effect that encompasses anyone who does not fall into the category of a refugee and marks them as not deserving enough. This is the factor that is the most frustrating because migrants that moves for better opportunities often do not have the social or economic mobility that some of us have witnessed or experienced here in the United States. In more examples than not, people are trapped in their fixed roles and have difficulty moving up because of tradition, social norms, and government policies, just to name a few causes. With this trail of thoughts, it is hard for me to understand a clear cut between deserving and undeserving, which is probably why the effort to incorporate innocence into the picture makes sense as a way to make the process “easier.”