Americans misinterpret European politics by projecting their definition of race. In Europe, 'race' is tied to nationality and culture. This leads to a centrist, deep-seated bias against all outsiders, making Europe one of the most anti-immigration places in the world, even among its political left.
Related Insights
Effective assimilation requires a clear, confident host culture for newcomers to integrate into. The UK's struggle with assimilation stems from a reluctance to define 'Britishness' and assert its value. This cultural vacuum makes meaningful integration impossible.
The rise of populism is better understood as a resurgence of humanity's innate "groupish" and tribal instincts. This regression is amplified by a modern cocktail of social media, rapid migration, and weakening political institutions, making it a deeper cultural and psychological phenomenon than just an economic one.
The global rise of right-wing populism cannot be solely attributed to economic factors like inequality or job loss. Its prevalence in wealthy, low-inequality nations like Sweden and strong manufacturing countries like Germany proves the root cause is a deeper, more widespread cultural anxiety.
The UK government's policy makes a critical category error by conflating concern over cultural erosion from non-assimilating migration (cultural nationalism) with ideologies of racial superiority (white supremacism). One is a defense of shared societal values, while the other is based on bigotry, and treating them as the same is a dangerous oversimplification.
Resistance to mass immigration is often mislabeled as racism when it's a defense of cultural uniqueness. The core fear is that blending all cultures creates a bland 'beige' monolith, ultimately allowing the most aggressive and cohesive incoming culture to dominate.
The British affinity for queuing is not a mere stereotype but a manifestation of a core national value: fairness and orderliness. Illegal immigration is perceived as 'jumping the queue' on a national scale, which fundamentally offends this deep-seated cultural principle and explains the visceral public reaction.
Left-leaning parties are losing worldwide because they offer economic solutions (e.g., more government programs) to what is fundamentally a cultural problem. Voters feeling existential anxiety from globalization and social change are drawn to the right's message of nostalgia and tradition, not the left's policy proposals.
In a counter-intuitive argument, the UK's Home Secretary, herself the daughter of immigrants, posits that restricting immigration is necessary to protect social harmony. The theory is that a perceived lack of control fuels public panic and racism, so tightening controls will calm tensions and ultimately shore up multiculturalism.
The notion that identitarianism is exclusive to the left ("woke") is outdated. A powerful, mirrored version has solidified on the right ("Groypers"), indicating that identity-based politics has become a central, and polarizing, framework across the entire political spectrum.
The psychological engine of populism is the zero-sum fallacy. It frames every issue—trade deficits, immigration, university admissions—as a win-lose scenario. This narrative, where one group's success must come at another's expense, fosters the protectionist and resentful attitudes that populist leaders exploit.
