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.
In a diverse, multi-ethnic country, national identity cannot be based on ancestry or "bloodline." Instead, it can be rooted in a shared abstract value. Canada's unifying identity is positioned as "freedom"—the common reason people have historically immigrated, providing a non-ethnic foundation for unity.
Denmark pioneered a strategy of "negative nation branding" to discourage asylum applications. This involves deliberately publicizing harsh policies, such as confiscating asylum seekers' jewelry, to make the country appear as unattractive as possible to potential migrants, thereby managing immigration through perception control.
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.
Immigration's success or failure is determined by values alignment, not ethnicity. The US historically integrated diverse groups because they shared a foundational ethos. Current conflicts arise when immigrant populations hold fundamentally different core values from the host nation, creating societal friction regardless of race.
Instead of isolating Nigel Farage's populist movement, the UK's Conservative Party adopted many of its core tenets, such as Brexit and anti-immigration stances. This strategy of assimilation blurred ideological lines, making a future coalition with Reform UK more palatable internally.
While promoting tolerance, mass immigration risks erasing unique cultural differences, creating a homogenous world. In this "beige" environment, the most cohesive and aggressive culture with high birth rates and a clear agenda will inevitably become dominant.
The root of rising civil unrest and anti-immigrant sentiment is often economic insecurity, not just a clash of cultures. People convert financial anxiety into anger, which is then easily directed at visible, culturally different groups, creating flashpoints that can escalate into violence.
Britain is modeling its new asylum system on Denmark's, even though Denmark is far less successful at integrating immigrants into its society and workforce. This strategic shift risks importing Denmark's integration failures in an attempt to deter new arrivals and address political pressures from populist parties.