Subscriber OnlyOpinion

Anti-migrant sentiment makes people want to migrate. Here’s how to fix it

Fear of authoritarianism and loss of freedom is pushing people to move away

There has been a normalisation of politics committed to limiting freedom in the name of restoring national glory corresponding with hostility towards asylum seekers, as seen in Coolock. Photograph: © RollingNews.ie
There has been a normalisation of politics committed to limiting freedom in the name of restoring national glory corresponding with hostility towards asylum seekers, as seen in Coolock. Photograph: © RollingNews.ie
Shana Cohen
Sun Jul 21 2024 - 07:00

In his acceptance speech at the Republican convention, former US president Donald Trump began and ended with a note of unity and hope, calling for “a new era of safety, prosperity and freedom for citizens of every race, religion, colour and creed” and for “the discord and division in our society” to be healed. Towards the conclusion of the very long speech, he said “any disagreements have to be put aside, and go forward united as one people, one nation, pledging allegiance to one great, beautiful − I think it’s so beautiful − American flag.”

But, in between, he returned to form, accusing the Democrats of cheating to win the last election, of allowing cities to “become flooded” with illegal aliens, and the nation to spiral into decline because of environmentalism, trans rights, inflation and involvement in international wars.

[ Trump speech focuses on immigration, tax cuts and trade wars ]

Despite Trump’s praise of unity, it’s his version of unity that he wants. This is a time of sustained divisions not just within the US, but also globally. Political disaffection has influenced the rise of self-interested, often openly discriminatory and sexist, politicians who have contributed to the consolidation of two opposing trends: normalisation of a politics committed to limiting freedom in the name of restoring national glory; and the lure of migration in search of economic, religious and political freedom.

If access to healthcare, housing and even food are constant concerns, then the appeal of anti-status-quo politics should not be surprising

This corresponds with growing frequency and visibility of hostility toward refugees and asylum seekers, as we have just seen in Coolock, and aggression toward minorities in general. Leaders eager to reduce rights have benefited from the alienation of citizens who believe greater respect for their own rights will come from diminishing those of others.

READ MORE

Migration for freedom is not new – my great grandparents migrated to the US from Eastern Europe for exactly this reason. But survey data indicates that an increasing number of people over the past decade, regardless of where they are in the world, are anxious enough about political developments in their country to consider moving. A number of my friends are wondering where they will move to in order to protect the freedom to be themselves. A German friend and his American wife are moving to Berlin, regardless of who wins the election in November, because they have grown so uncomfortable living in the US. A friend of mine in France received a call after the first round of elections on June 30th from a Moroccan Jew, who told him he was leaving the country, either for Canada or the UK, if the Rassemblement National, tainted by racism, anti-Semitism and disregard for liberal values, came to power.

[ Coolock unrest: Fire at Crown Paints building earmarked to house asylum seekers ]

A recent survey in the UK by the research consultancy firm Word on the Curb found that 15 per cent of 18-34-year-old Black and Asian men and women are investigating possibilities to emigrate and another 51 per cent are considering leaving the UK. They cite the cost of living and racial inequality as factors in their decision. A Gallup Poll conducted when Trump was president found that 30 per cent of Americans aged 15-29, 20 per cent of women (versus 13 per cent of men), and 30 per cent of the poorest 20 per cent wanted to move to another country. These figures were double or more than those found in the same survey conducted during Barack Obama’s presidency.

And it isn’t just democracies suffering from a growing desire to split. A 2024 poll conducted by Sigma Conseil in Tunisia found that 75per cent of Tunisians aged 18-30 wanted to migrate.

The appeal of migration, of movement, contrasts with a nationalistic politics of place and leaders fixated not only on retaining power but also reshaping societies in line with a static ideological agenda that often neglects economic, environmental and social realities.

[ ‘At the heart of this is poverty’: How Coolock’s pressure-cooker finally exploded ]

Is a third trend possible and what would it look like? Is it Keir Starmer’s pledge to restore the notion of “public service” in order to generate greater trust in politics and government? In his first speech as prime minister, he stated, “When the gap between the sacrifices made by people and the service they receive from politicians grows this big, it leads to a weariness in the heart of a nation. A draining away of the hope, the spirit, the belief in a better future that we need to move forward, together.” He argues that “the simple acknowledgment that public service is a privilege. And that your government should treat every single person in this country with respect” represent the first steps towards narrowing the gap.

A number of my friends are wondering where they will move to in order to protect the freedom to be themselves

Greater trust in political leaders is critical, and it does depend on politicians recognising that public service is a privilege. But I would suggest a bolder approach to win back the would-be migrants and counter the exploitation of political disaffection and growing hardship. If access to healthcare, housing and even food are constant concerns, then the appeal of anti-status-quo politics should not be surprising. We need an alternative politics of place that links greater equality and life aspirations to individual and collective freedoms.

[ Europe cannot ‘build a wall’ in Mediterranean to stop migration, says EU commissioner ]

Specific policies could include reducing the cost of essential goods and services; expanding public transportation; protecting public space and investing in community-based health, education, environmental and youth programmes, especially in areas of high deprivation; and granting more authority to local government and local groups to listen to and represent their residents’ interests.

Ideological agendas fixated on cultural change and the threat posed by migrants inevitably generate migrants themselves. The appropriate response would be to humanise migrants, to make their lives more real and to to demonstrate that narrowing freedoms leads to a decline in life possibilities for all.

Shana Cohen is director of Tasc, the economic and social think tank