Immigration: The Key Political Issue

Immigration has clearly been the key political issue for some time and the evidence is now overwhelming. There's still an opportunity to run on the issue though, because most politicians are running on extreme pro-immigration policies. This is like being anti-war in 1943 and one must assume they truly want whatever mass immigration is bringing their nation if they refuse to win massive landslide victories.

The clearest examples of the popularity of immigration restriction come from the United Kingdom and Germany. More than a year ago, UKIP was running on an anti-EU platform. As I wrote last year in Immigration Issue Set to Explode in America; Prepare for Political Volatility
UKIP's reason for existence was to get the United Kingdom out of the EU. There are many issues that fall under the control of Brussels, such as economic regulations, but the big issue that voters wanted to hear about was immigration. UKIP realized immigration was the big issue and it focused on that issue, turning it into a shock electoral victory.
The media and politicians have such intense ideological blinders that they cannot see this. When UKIP brought up the immigration issue it was like a red flag and they were attacked as bigots, a menace, etc. The truth is immigration was really an accidental issue, the party was pushing a referendum on EU membership, but found that one subset of the issue, control over national borders and immigration, was very popular. It rode the issue to victory in EU elections and did well in the national election.

Now in Germany, we see a repeat. The wikipedia clearly explains Alternative For Germany's reason for existence:
In September 2012, Alexander Gauland, a former federal minister Bernd Lucke, an economist and Konrad Adam, a former editor of Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung from 1979 to 2000 and chief correspondent of Die Welt until 2008, founded the political group Electoral Alternative 2013 (German: Wahlalternative 2013) in Bad Nauheim, to oppose German federal policies concerning the eurozone crisis. Their manifesto was endorsed by 68 economists, journalists, and business leaders, half of whom were professors and three-quarters of whom had academic degrees.[14] The group stated that the eurozone had proven to be "unsuitable" as a currency area and that southern European states were "sinking into poverty under the competitive pressure of the euro".[15]
Purely economics, mainly anti-euro.

Today: Merkel Cites Refugees as Boon as Anti-Immigration Party Advances
Even so, the Alternative for Germany party, which wants to curb immigration, gained for the second consecutive week, polling 10.5 percent.

...Alternative for Germany, known as AfD, polled 3 percent in the INSA survey as recently as August...
This is not surprising. Identity and culture are now the most important issues in politics, not economics. The new left-right axis runs international to national. Old allies now fall on either side of the spectrum: there are libertarians who qualify as far left lunatic open borders extremists as well as far right lunatic deport-them-all extremists. The question is one of identity: the international libertarians do not believe in borders, the nationalist libertarians do.

The surprising thing is that politicians, who should want to win elections, refuse to budge on the issue. As I have written here many times, the immigration policies in the U.S. are still peak social mood policies that belong to the year 2000, not the current year. Europe actually started shifting right on the issue in the 2000s and accelerated after 2008, and yet Merkel is pushing what can only be described as an insane policy in light of social mood. It is strange to watch the political leaders and business elite commit mass political suicide due to ideological zealotry and greed.

Finally, there is the example in the United States. Donald Trump made a throwaway line about rapists in speaking about illegal immigration and the media took the bait. He recently hit 42% in a Reuters national poll. Unless he makes a major mistake, he will not only win the Republican nomination, but the White House as well, very likely in a landslide with a mandate and control of both houses of Congress.

Immigration and nationalism were third rail political issues. The national media and politicians suppressed these issues even though there is majority support for immigration restriction, as an example. The numbers rose and rose as social mood trended lower, creating a situation where anyone could walk in and win total political control by advocating for the issue. On top of that, however, most of the ruling politicians aren't even trying to win on the issue, they're pushing even harder in the other direction.

From the first link above:
Most members of religious denominations do not feel that illegal immigration is caused by limits on legal immigration, as many religious leaders do; instead, members feel it’s due to a lack of enforcement.

Catholics: Just 11 percent said illegal immigration was caused by not letting in enough legal immigrants; 78 percent said it was caused by inadequate enforcement efforts.
Mainline Protestants: 18 percent said not enough legal immigration; 78 percent said inadequate
Born-Again Protestants: 9 percent said not enough legal immigration; 85 percent said inadequate enforcement.
Jews: 21 percent said not enough legal immigration; 60 percent said inadequate enforcement.
Unlike religious leaders who argue that more unskilled immigrant workers are needed, most members think there are plenty of Americans to do such work.

Catholics: 12 percent said legal immigration should be increased to fill such jobs; 69 percent said there are plenty of Americans available to do such jobs, employers just need to pay more.
Mainline Protestants: 10 percent said increase immigration; 73 percent said plenty of Americans available.
Born-Again Protestants: 7 percent said increase immigration; 75 percent said plenty of Americans available.
Jews: 16 percent said increase immigration; 61 percent said plenty of Americans available.
When asked to choose between enforcement that would cause illegal immigrants to go home over time or a conditional pathway to citizenship, most members of religious communities choose enforcement.

Catholics: 64 percent support enforcement to encourage illegals to go home; 23 percent support conditional legalization.
Mainline Protestants: 64 percent support enforcement; 24 percent support conditional legalization.
Born-Again Protestants: 76 percent support enforcement; 12 percent support conditional
Jews: 43 percent support enforcement; 40 percent support conditional legalization.

In contrast to many religious leaders, most members think immigration is too high.

Catholics: 69 percent said immigration is too high; 4 percent said too low; 14 percent just right.
Mainline Protestants: 72 percent said it is too high; 2 percent said too low; 11 percent just right.
Born-Again Protestants: 78 percent said it is too high; 3 percent said too low; 9 percent just right.
Jews: 50 percent said it is too high; 5 percent said is too low; 22 percent just right.
This is what the public believes and most of the information they receive from the media are lies. Crime data on illegal immigration isn't collected by the government or is horribly distorted, and welfare use is suppressed.

The Center for Immigration Studies has conducted an independently verified study of welfare use by immigrants, legal and illegal, and the numbers are eye popping. Not only is welfare use far higher among immigrants, but welfare use rises over time, likely because they are better able to navigate the welfare state. The most shocking number is the 91% welfare use by Hispanic immigrants with one or more child.

Welfare Use by Immigrant and Native Households

The video below runs through the numbers.

The welfare numbers do not include other social costs, such as schooling and policing due to higher crime rates. Nope, crime statistics don't hold up either. After Trump made his explosion on the scene this summer, there were claims that illegal immigrants commit less crime than natives.
Piquero and Bersani's joint study, "Comparing Patterns and Predictors of Immigrant Offending Among a Sample of Adjudicated Youth," used as its base group "adolescents who were found guilty of a serious offense."
Yes, the mainstream media widely blasted a story based on a study that found among the subgroup of youth criminals who commit serious crimes, illegal immigrant youths committed crimes at a lower rate. This was then reported as illegal immigrants commit less crime overall. This is what passes for information from the pro-immigration side. Goebbels would be proud.

The anti-immigration candidate can look forward to 50-60% popular support in most countries as a baseline before he begins an information campaign. Political enemies will respond by running harder in the opposite direction. Social mood is headed in a direction that favors nationalist policies. If the candidate can make a breakthrough with the public, immigration will carry the candidate and the party to landslide victory so complete that the only thing stopping the winners will be themselves. In a conservatively designed government such as the U.S., change is more gradual and less volatile by design. In parliamentary European governments, volatility will be more extreme and it will come both from parties on both the traditional right and left even within a country. The extreme left and right in Greece are bitter enemies, but line up on issues of sovereignty. Understanding this will help make sense of what unfolds in the coming elections.

No comments:

Post a Comment