Migration

Migration is the movement by people from one place to another, with the intention of settling for at least an extended time period in the new location. Migration is referred to as emigration when emphasizing that the migrants are leaving a particular area and is referred to as immigration when emphasizing that the migrants are entering a particular area.

Migration may be between or within countries. It may involve individuals, small groups, or large groups (mass migration). Nomadic movements are normally not regarded as migrations, as there is no intention to settle in the new place and because the movement is generally seasonal. Only a few nomadic peoples have retained this form of lifestyle in modern times. The temporary movement of people for the purpose of travel, tourism, pilgrimages, or commuting is not regarded as migration, in the absence of an intention to live and settle in the visited places.

Mass immigration is about to tear apart British society. Nobody voted for mass migration; taxpayers have had no say in it; and everybody has been told that they must accept it. It is simply wrong. ~ Nigel Farage, British politician & broadcaster, 31st May 2024.

Stereotypes

Reported rapes in Sweden between 1975 and 2018, as stated by official crime statistics, showing a +1666% increase. There are no publicly available recent official data on immigrants and rape, but Swedish immigration critics argue that various unofficial data and estimates state that a large majority are committed by immigrants and their children. Many other reported crimes, including other reported violent crimes, have also increased. See also Race and crime: Sweden.

Germans demonstrate in Köln against "rapefugees".

Research has found support for that some politically incorrect stereotypes about different immigrant groups are accurate. See the stereotypes article.

Possibly related aspects are discussed in various race articles, such as in Race and crime: Immigration and crime.

Criticisms

Migrations may cause increased ethnic heterogeneity, which is associated with numerous negative effects.

More generally, such migrations into an area may increase, for example, cultural, religious, and linguistic heterogeneity, causing problems such as cultural/religious conflicts, cultural/linguistic misunderstandings, and a need for previously not needed services such as translators and various organizations trying to lessen the new group conflicts and other problems.

Immigration often means that the immigrants are given access to welfare and other tax paid benefits in their new countries. This means that even if the immigrants work in their new countries, their overall economic effect on the original inhabitants may be negative, if they gain more from such tax paid systems than they contribute. Such calculations should (but often do not) include the costs associated with taking care of the immigrants as they stop working with increasing age and the costs of immigrants bringing in non-working relatives. The economic costs from effects such as the problems associated with increased ethnic heterogeneity and increased crime rates are difficult to calculate and often ignored. Immigrants may have infectious or other diseases common in developing countries (such as due to nutritional deficiencies in childhood) and many immigrant groups have generally poor health, which may cause large economic effects, but is also often ignored. An increased population also causes generally increased demand for and wear on, for example, public roads, water resources (even causing water shortages), and the environment, effects which may also be completely or partially ignored.

Such economic calculations may also be cherry picked, such as pointing to apparent economic benefits in some situations from selective immigration of (mostly) highly educated and skilled individuals, but then misleadingly imply that this applies to all forms of immigration (such as of low-skilled immigrants), and also ignoring that this causes negative effects for the country of origin ("brain drain").

Another issue is that the educational system in developing countries is often poor and that formally "highly educated" individuals may have poor actual skills. There is also an "industry" supplying false academic credentials.

Immigrant workers, low and high skilled, will compete with the non-immigrant workers on the job market, which will affect wages and employment.

Mass immigration may also cause effects such as increased housing costs due to housing shortages, more time spent commuting due to increased traffic congestion, and so on.

GDP/person is often considered an important economic measure, in part because a higher value is associated with higher income and more economic resources per person. Immigration will decrease GDP/person, if immigrants produce less than the average non-immigrant, which is likely for low skilled workers. GDP/person has often been criticized for a variety of reasons, such as not measuring income inequality. Thus, high skilled immigrant workers could cause an increase in GDP/person, but with this not benefiting most of the non-immigrants due to the benefits instead going to the immigrants and the rich who benefit from lower paid workers. Also, GDP estimates may often not include some of the factors previously mentioned, such as long-term negative effects on the environment and negative effects due to increasing ethnic heterogeneity.

Mass immigration of low skilled workers may increase income inequality between the poor and rich in a society. This has been argued to be associated with negative effects, such as psychosocial stress and status anxiety that leads to negative effects. A 2009 study attributed one in three deaths in the United States to high levels of inequality. Life satisfaction in the US has been stated to be declining over the last several decades, which has been attributed to soaring inequality, lack of social trust (associated with increasing ethnic heterogeneity), and loss of faith in government. A 2015 study argued that income inequality could be a driving factor in a marked increase of deaths among White males between the ages of 45 to 54 in the 1999 to 2013 period.

Another form of economic effect derives from viewing the citizens of a country as "owning" a share of the wealth of the government (which includes all publicly owned property) and other publicly owned parts of country. Some of this public wealth may as yet be unknown, such as currently undiscovered natural resources on public lands or within the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) controlled by countries bordering on seas and oceans. Immigrants by becoming citizens may be viewed as diluting the value of the share of this wealth "owned" by of each non-immigrant citizen.

Immigration may cause effects such as mass immigration of low skilled immigrants causing businesses to prefer to hire such low paid immigrants, rather than to replace simple jobs with machines, and thus preventing or reducing industrialization.

In the UK, the government’s Migration Advisory Committee concluded in 2012 that for every one hundred migrants brought to Britain from outside the European Union, around 23 native workers are displaced, with later analyses suggesting the effects are particularly acute for Britons in working-class occupations. Moreover, a 2015 study by the Bank of England found that “a 10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants working in semi/unskilled services — that is, in care homes, bars, shops, restaurants, cleaning, for example — leads to a 1.88 per cent reduction in pay” for British workers.

Immigrants are often predominantly males, which may cause a sex imbalance, with more males than females in the population.

Immigrants may send back large sums of money to relatives in their country of origin. They may import products such as culture specific foods from their country of origin. They often support lobby groups that lobby for benefits for their country of origin. Some may participate in espionage (including large scale industrial espionage) for their country of origin. Such actions may be positive for their country of origin but not for their new country

Immigrants may also support or be part of "terrorist"/"freedom fighter" organizations in their country of origin and may thus involve their new county in internal conflicts in their country of origin.

Immigrants and multiculturalism may cause new and problematic cultural phenomena, which earlier did not exist, such Islamic terrorism, "honor killings", new illegal drugs such as khat, and female genital mutilation.

Immigrants may, rather than support some form of politically correct multicultural utopia, demand that their own culture should be the only one allowed by law, such as sharia laws, and have various other less politically correct beliefs and views. See for example Islamization and anti-Islamization: Opinion surveys of Muslims.

Another aspect of mass immigration can be the rapid expansion of no-go areas.

Immigration is sometimes argued to be necessary in order to prevent a claimed shortage of workers, sometime in the future, due to declining White demographics. This dubious considering the current large unemployment in many countries and the constantly increased automation decreasing the demand for in particular low skilled workers, as many immigrants from developing countries are. It also ignores the possibility of encouraging higher White birth rates.

Developed countries try to protect themselves from unrestricted immigration and associated negative effects through various measures. Therefore, a large scale "industry" has developed, which through various methods, and in exchange for often large payments, bring immigrants to developed countries and associated benefits, for the immigrants. One example is by smuggling "asylum seekers" to developed countries, where they then apply for "refugee" statues (see the Refugees article). Another example is individuals who have been granted citizenship using this to bring in claimed relatives and spouses from alleged new marriages from their country of origin. Still another example is by claiming that an individual from a developing country has been employed in a developed country and therefore needs to given the right of residence, which may then be converted to citizenship at a later date.

Somewhat politically correct immigration critics may often criticize the aspects mentioned above. A more taboo criticism, due to the risk of being accused of racism, is mentioning that mass migration may permanently change the average genetics of, for example, countries. This includes, for example, changing the average genetics argued to influence average country IQ. Mass immigration has been argued to be one explanation for falling average genotypic IQ and more recently also falling measured (phenotypic) average IQ in developed countries (see the dysgenics article). See the article on Countries and intelligence on numerous important variables associated with average country IQ.

Another aspect is that a racial group that controlled a territory may lose this control, which may be very problematic for its long term existence and be contrary to the group's genetic interests. See Racial genetic interests: Ethnicity and territory.

Supporters of mass immigration often point to earlier immigration of Europeans to the United States, arguing that this was successful, despite sometimes initial opposition to some immigrant groups, and claiming that the same thing will happen in the future. This ignores the very different nature of many current immigrant groups with, for example, the cultural and genetic differences being much larger. Black-White differences and problems are still extensive, despite Blacks having been freed from slavery for many generations. Another difference is that the earlier European immigration occurred when tax-paid welfare systems were much smaller or absent.

Support of immigration may involve hidden motives, such as immigrants being perceived as being beneficial for special interest groups. Examples include companies supporting immigration due to this decreasing labor costs, particular ethnicities supporting immigration of the own ethnicity due to ethnic nepotism and due to this increasing the political power of this minority, minorities generally supporting immigration in order to decrease the influence of the majority, and White guilt with Whites wrongly seen as a particularly problematic group that deserves to be negatively affected. See also Jews and immigration.

Surveys

A 2016 survey found that "about 45 percent of more than 16,000 people surveyed in 22 nations said immigration has had a negative effect on their country, compared with 20 percent who said it was positive, Ipsos Mori said Thursday in an e-mailed study. In Turkey, Italy, Russia, Hungary, France and Belgium, the proportion with negative views was more than six in 10. Almost half of the people surveyed worldwide said there are too many immigrants in their nation. [...] The people surveyed were also suspicious of refugees, with four in 10 wanting to close borders to them, and six in 10 saying that terrorists are pretending to be refugees; in Turkey, the site of several recent terrorist attacks, it was 83 percent."

A 2017 US survey found that if asked if the United States was “losing its culture and identity,” 55% of respondents said yes, with 68% of White working class Americans feeling that way. Almost half (48%) of White working class Americans also felt that “things have changed so much that I often feel like a stranger in my own country,” while 62% believed that immigrants arriving from other countries threatened American culture.

A 2017 UK survey found that 56% believed that local culture was threatened by ethnic minorities.

A 2018 survey of all 28 European Union countries revealed an overwhelming concern over illegal immigration. "Europeans also expressed anxiety over the prospect of Africans migrants arriving en masse into Europe over the next decade, with 68 percent of those surveyed saying they either “strongly fear” or “moderately fear” such a scenario. The rapid population growth of Muslims in Europe is another area of particular concern among Europeans, the survey found, with 70 percent of the people believing that a growing Muslim presence is a problem and a mere 8 percent saying it is no threat at all." Majority of Europeans feared that immigration will increase crime, terrorism, and change the culture of their country. Majority of Europeans also believed that immigrants were attracted by factors such as economic and social benefits and that handling immigration impose a major economic burden. Most were dissatisfied with the European Union's handling of the immigration crisis. "Despite widely reported criticism of the immigration policies of countries in Central and Eastern Europe, a majority of EU citizens actually believe that these nations have handled the immigration crisis better than Brussels."

Another 2018 survey found that in 11 out 13 surveyed EU countries, immigration was stated to be the most important issue facing the EU. In the other two countries, immigration was the second most important issue.

Yet another 2018 survey in 11 European countries found that 74% thought that immigration from outside the continent was “not good” for Europe.

Also in 2018, 80% of Italians agreed with Interior Minister Matteo Salvini’s decision to block from Italian ports a ship with African claimed refugees.

See also the Political spectrum article, in particular the sections "Ethnic homogeneity/heterogeneity" and "Increasing polarization," on aspects such as increasing political polarization in the United States, argued to be related to the increasing ethnic heterogeneity and mass immigration. Race now outweighs all other demographic divides regarding which party to vote for, with factors such as income not even coming close.

Libertarian immigration

Libertarians support unrestricted immigration, with immigration problems seen as disappearing if adopting libertarian policies, such as completely removing welfare and various other tax-paid systems. Problems with this may include that

• Libertarians have a tendency to support continued mass immigration, despite welfare and other tax-paid systems (public health care, public schools, public roads, and so on) not having been removed.
• If the libertarian system could be implemented, wages in Western countries may then through wage competition from immigrants approach the very low wages in tropical countries. But the high living costs due to the long winters in northern countries would make such wages difficult to survive on.
• Removed welfare and such lowered wages may well increase problems such as crime, cause food riots, and so on.
• Private charity is supposed to partially replace public welfare in libertarian societies. Poor immigrants may immigrate in order to benefit from such private charity and compete with poor non-immigrants for this private charity.
• Many immigrant problems, such as high rape rates for certain immigrant groups, ethnic heterogeneity, cultural/religious/linguistic heterogeneity, and so on, are not caused by tax-paid systems.
• Many of the problems associated with a country having a low average IQ are likely not or only partially related to tax-paid systems.
• Poor immigrants often support leftist politicians/parties, thus decreasing support for libertarian policies.
• A high degree of support for individualism is associated with White societies and has been argued to have partially genetic causes. This means that also mass immigration of not poor non-Whites may decrease average population support for libertarian views.

Selective "elite" immigration

Selective immigration limited to "elites" with high education/skills/IQ have been argued to avoid some immigration problems. Some countries have special immigration quotas for such immigrants, but typically also allow immigration of other groups. However, also such "elite" immigration may have various problems and especially if allowing immigration of different races/cultures:

• Various negative effects due to increasing ethnic heterogeneity.
• Various negative effects due to increasing cultural/linguistic/religious heterogeneity, as described earlier.
• Various negative effects of race mixing
• Regression to the mean effects affecting the children of such immigrants, if they are atypical compared to racial averages.
• Job and wage competition.
• Immigrants acting for their own group interest and/or for the interests of their country of origin, against the interests of other groups and/or their new country. "Elite" immigrants may even be especially risky regarding exploitation of other groups, due to such immigrants gaining disproportionate influence.
• What has caused Western countries to be so successful regarding achievements such as innovation is unclear, but it has been argued to be more than only a high measured average IQ. Whatever factor(s) are causing such achievements may be negatively affected by large scale "elite" non-Western immigration changing Western countries since, as being unknown, these factor(s) cannot be reliably selected or aimed for.

Non-race realist immigration criticisms

Many organizations and individuals criticizing mass immigration do no mention racial aspects or are explicitly race denialist. Possibly reasons for this (which are not mutually exclusive) include:

• Race denialist arguments are accepted as correct.
• A desire to avoid, or at least lessen, accusations of racism, although immigration critics are frequently labelled as racist regardless.
• "Hate speech" laws.

Such organizations and individuals instead often emphasize some combination of

• Civic nationalism (but many reject any nationalism label, possibly due to perceived negative associations with the word).
• Anti-Islamization.
• Support for Israel, Jewish interests, and/or Judeo-Christianity (possibly in the hope of avoiding accusations of "Nazism" and gaining support from Jewish immigration/Islamization critics. See also Jews and immigration).
• In Europe, anti-European Union views and especially migration related aspects.
• Anti-racism and expulsions of claimed racists from the organization.

Such organizations may have support from individuals who have more radical views than the official views, but who support the organizations as this being safer and less controversial than supporting more radical organizations. Another possibility is that such individuals think that such organizations are more radical than they actually are, in part due to biased media descriptions.

Jews

In September 2015, the World Jewish Congress (WJC) and the Central Council of Jews in Germany (CCGD) issued a formal statement welcoming the non-European invasion of Germany, calling it "the right thing" and as an "evolution towards an open society". At the same time, both organizations back Israel, which has a Jews-only immigration policy and which checks potential immigrants to see if they have Jewish DNA. In a formal statement published in Die Welt newspaper in Germany entitled "We Jews understand what being a refugee means", Ronald S. Lauder [originally Lauta, and whose family were not refugees], President of the WJC, and Josef Schuster, President of the CCJD, and a Vice-President of the WJC, attacked all Germans who opposed the flooding of their country by non-Europeans calling them "neo-Nazis".

See also

• Demographic genocide
• Immigration physical barriers
• Magic dirt
• Multiculturalism
• Race and crime: Immigration and crime
• Refugees
• Repatriation
• White demographics
• Migration Period (Germania)

External links

• Corporate Greed and H-1B Visas