Go Figure!

I know two people. Well actually I know more than two – a lot more than two but, the two I have in mind intrigue me.

About 40 years ago Person A decided that, to run their business, they needed to isolate themselves from the day-to-day issues that always crop up in an office environment so that they could concentrate on the really big issues.

This decision has proven to have been wise. The solution was to dedicate a separate part of their home as an office and to run their business from there. The home office was well equipped in terms of the available communication needs that, of course, evolved over time as the internet age emerged and progressed. In short, Person A became a kind of pioneer of what is now commonly referred to as working from home (WFH).

Why am I telling you this? Well, the strange thing is that this person now completely rejects the practice of WFH that has become increasingly prevalent particularly following the Covid-19 pandemic.

It’s just the same story with the second person (Person B) whom I have in mind that, many years ago, decided to emigrate from their home country and take up residence in a new country. At that time both the home country and the new country were outside the European Union (EU) but both countries were eventually admitted as members of that body.

To come clean, I should point out at this stage that the home country concerned is the UK that subsequently decided to ‘Brexit’ that is to say, to leave the EU.

The political atmosphere in the UK was divided over the decision to stay or leave the EU and the campaign on each side was hard-fought and often dishonest. One argument put forward by the Leavers was that the EU laws permitted too many migrants to enter and remain in the UK. This argument was put forward to me by Person B who, let us not forget, is resident in the new country that has remained within the EU. Straight-faced statements were made along the lines of “Everyone should stay in their country of birth” and “There are too many foreigners in the UK.”

Like so many then and now, the irony of this stance was ignored by Person B who even opined that “There are a lot of Ibanians here in Ibania (imagined name of new country)”.

I choose to ignore this and similarly vapid arguments but what, exactly, is the point I am trying to make? I suppose that, first and foremost, I am trying to make the point that when I view this world and its too often lack of sanity, I think that  it is not me that is going crazy, although I confess I do sometimes wonder.

Both Persons A and B are people that I regard as being of above average intelligence. Their mental acuity aside, what concerns me is that illogical views of the nature expressed by them are not atypical in today’s society which, in theory at least, is guided by the views of the average Joe. How much economic and social damage is caused by such ill-considered thought processes that are  broadcast to all and sundry at will to everyone with access to social media and biased “news” outlets?

Back to Person A who has clearly and at first hand seen the benefits of WFH. He might be persuaded to agree that, in some form or other, WFH is here to stay although it may well bed down in some hybrid format that combines WFH and office presence at some agreed upon ratio. Others have pointed out many advantages of WFH including the savings in terms of wear and tear on the infrastructure, air pollution, cost of day care, and, not least of all, on employees’ morale.

As for the opinion about immigration, where would the economies of Europe, the UK, and America be without the labour that is commonly thought to be beneath native-born citizens?

In the UK alone, many migrants living in the UK lost their livelihoods after Brexit and were forced to return home to mainland Europe while, at the same time, the UK’s agriculture and other industries suffered from lack of hands to harvest and do other manual labour.

I suppose in my usual grumpy way, I have once again been brought face to face with the divisiveness of today’s society. A society which, all too often, bases arguments and political stands on anything except facts that a cursory amount of research would expose as the shallowness of those stands.

by
A Perplexed Citizen of the World