Nobody in Europe ever voted for mass immigration. It was foisted on them by their rulers. The Euro elites ignored the dissent because they were so much more enlightened than the knuckle draggers who lacked the right credentials. Also, their daughters weren’t being raped and let’s be honest, some Europeans are more equal than others.
European leadership has been removing the pressure relief valves in the system for years now, that it is going to blow was obvious at least a decade ago. Democracy doesn’t work if the winners are committed to defying their voters.
Another interesting ‘fun fact’ - the head of Germany’s AfD party is a lesbian (and her partner is black) and more gays support the AfD than any other party in Germany. No doubt, it’s out of sheer fear of Islam, Islamacists and its attackers on the public in public spaces.
Great info. There is much discussion of failed immigration policy in Europe and little discussion of what is very quietly working. In Northern Norway, on a few hours long horse ride we were surprised as our guide, a German college student, recounted what was required for her summer job. To shepherd adults and children on Icelandic Pony trail rides, she had to speak either fluent Norwegian or English and prove her experience with the horses, before she could enter the country.
Virtually, any Norwegian non tourist visa also requires an employment contract, that demonstrates economically self sufficiency, before arrival. Alternatively, she could have deposited enough money in a Norwegian account to prove she would not be a financial drain on Norway, before she arrived. As she was a temporary employee, she also had to show proof of medical insurance.
According to her, her visa was specifically tied to her job contract. It allowed her a little time to sight see before and after, but if she did not exit Norway on time, she would be fined, her employer would be fined, and she would never be allowed to work in Norway again. She was not sure she would ever be allowed to return, even as a tourist.
The experience was lovely, but it was a glorified pony ride most 12 year old Texas ranch kids could have easily led. Yet Norway still required fluent language skills, specialized experience, and an employment contract with a departure date, set in stone.
Norway also now requires any asylum seekers that have set foot elsewhere in Europe, to return to their entry point, to await Norway's adjudication of their asylum claim. The vast majority of both Norwegian immigrants and asylum seekers must now possess fluent Norwegian or English language skills and economically self sufficient employment, before they enter Norway.
Norwegians are convinced their $2 trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund will only survive to provide a safety net and medical care for Norwegians, if everyone works at a job that pays enough to be economically self sufficient, which nearly always requires fluent language skills.
As immigration is very restricted, Norwegians have begun to embrace automation, like few other nations. We encountered an unmanned convenience store. Literally, no one was minding the store. Customers utilized self checkouts and paid via card or cash. Another shopper noted the owners opened the store in the morning, stocked it with fresh self serve coffee, pastry, and prepared lunch items, along with groceries and camping necessities, because a campground was nearby. They returned at night to dispose of the unsold prepared food and to lock up.
When I asked about theft, the local customer that helped us at check out, laughed. It wan't an issue and he did not believe there was a security system. The store simply functioned on the honor system. What a concept. Progressives obsessed with Scandinavian healthcare, might consider how sane Immigration policy, is part and parcel of delivering healthcare. Of course, a couple of trillion dollars in North Sea oil revenue, doesn't hurt either.
This is a very good analysis of the state of the EU, but it's far too opitmistic.
Where, outside of Sweden and Norway, is this "rightward turn on immigration" in the EU actually visible in policy? Peter Magyar talked a good game about Orban being "too lax on immigration" but he's governing firmly within Brussels open-borders agenda. Muslim assaults on women (crotch grabbing, pussy-pointing, etc...) were reported just this week; that didn't happen under Orban.
The press makes a big deal about weakening of the EU's cordone sanitaire, but they're just a few scratches on the wall, not even chinks yet.
How can RN in France and Meloni in Italy be "far-right" when their only real political threat is further to the right? Le Pen will (once again) make the 2nd round but will not win. The French press will ensure that, and absent that, there's always the Romania solution. (As Queen Ursala says: "we have tools.")
"The test will come in upcoming national elections in Germany and Austria" Yes, it will. Nationalist parties will win and will still be locked out of government by a grand coalition that agrees on nothing except "everyone to our right is a Nazi!"
I don't mean to be negative, but I've been hearing for 10 years, "this year is the one". I'll believe it when I see it. There's lots of words still but no evidence of a rightward immigration shift in actual policy.
It may be too little & too late. Liberal secular democracies assumed everybody was as liberal and tolerant as they are. They are NOT. The plague they allowed to enter is taking its inevitable toll on Western culture. Is a New Dark Age on the horizon?
Liberals have no theory of mind for illiberals. Because of our vast Western wealth, security and magical technology, it's hard for Western liberals to not believe they're the inevitable apex and terminus of human history; that everyone wants what we want and will outgrow tribe and faith with some combo of therapy and Amazon gift card; and also that our white person's burden demands we import endless members of the Wretched of the Earth, in the name of charity, compassion and GDP (and rubbing conservative noses in diversity).
Now xenophilia has become a class marker and status symbol, the moat that separates backwards bigoted conservatives from enlightened cosmopolitan liberals.
There is no chance of Western liberals abandoning their sacred beliefs about sentimental universal egalitarianism, it is essentially our post-Christian managerial faith. They will have to be swept aside, and they will be.
Good but limited coverage the whole story. Here's more from CoPilot:
## 🧭 1. **Economic drivers the article barely touches**
The article frames immigration as the *central* catalyst for nationalist ascendancy, but omits several economic factors that political scientists consistently identify as co-equal or stronger drivers:
- **Energy costs and industrial competitiveness**
Europe’s post‑Ukraine‑war energy shock reshaped politics across Germany, Italy, France, and the Nordics. The article never mentions the collapse of cheap Russian gas, the spike in electricity prices, or the deindustrialization pressures on Germany’s manufacturing base — all major contributors to voter discontent.
- **Stagnant wages and productivity divergence**
Southern Europe’s long-term stagnation (Italy, Spain, Greece) and France’s productivity plateau have fueled anti-establishment sentiment independent of migration.
- **Fiscal constraints and austerity**
EU fiscal rules, austerity cycles, and the political backlash to them (especially in Italy and France) are absent from the article’s narrative.
These omissions matter because nationalist parties often gain support in regions with *low immigration but high economic stress* — a pattern the article does not acknowledge.
---
## 🧭 2. **Demographic collapse and labor shortages**
Europe’s demographic crisis — aging populations, shrinking workforces, and collapsing birth rates — is central to the migration debate. Yet the article never mentions:
- Why Europe *needs* immigration to sustain pension systems
- How labor shortages in healthcare, construction, logistics, and agriculture shape policy
- How nationalist parties differ on “replacement migration” vs. automation vs. pronatalist policy
Without this, the article treats immigration as purely a political liability rather than a structural necessity.
---
## 🧭 3. **Internal EU dynamics beyond the Parliament**
The article focuses heavily on the European Parliament (EP), citing sections like [sec26](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection26) and [sec27](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection27), but omits the institutions that actually drive migration policy:
- **European Council** (heads of government) — the real power center
- **Dublin Regulation** — responsibility for asylum claims
The EP’s rightward drift matters, but it is not the decisive institution for migration policy. The article’s institutional focus is therefore incomplete.
---
## 🧭 4. **The role of external shocks**
The article does not integrate several major shocks that reshaped migration politics:
- **The Syrian civil war (2015–2016)**
- **The Belarus–Poland border crisis (2021)**
- **Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (2022)** and millions of Ukrainian refugees
- **Climate-driven migration from Africa and the Middle East**
- **Post-pandemic labor market restructuring**
These events explain why migration surged and why public opinion shifted — but the article treats migration as a static, endogenous political choice rather than a response to global crises.
---
## 🧭 5. **The rise of digital media ecosystems**
Nationalist parties’ growth is inseparable from:
- Alternative media ecosystems
- TikTok and YouTube political influencers
- Declining trust in legacy media
- Algorithmic amplification of anti-establishment narratives
The article does not mention how Bardella, AfD, or Meloni leveraged digital platforms to reach younger voters — a major omission given their demographic breakthroughs.
---
## 🧭 6. **Security and geopolitical factors**
The article briefly mentions China ([sec57](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection57)) but omits:
- **The EU’s fear of U.S. strategic retrenchment**
- **NATO burden-sharing debates**
- **Terrorism cycles (2015–2017)**
- **Border externalization deals with Turkey, Tunisia, Libya**
These shape migration policy as much as domestic politics.
---
## 🧭 7. **The cultural dimension beyond immigration**
Nationalist movements also draw strength from:
- Identity politics and secularism
- Gender debates
- Rural–urban divides
- Distrust of technocratic governance
- Perceived erosion of national sovereignty
The article reduces these to immigration alone, missing the multi-dimensional nature of nationalist appeal.
It never addresses **why centrist parties lost legitimacy** beyond immigration.
Scholars point to:
- Technocratic drift
- Coalition instability
- Perceived democratic deficits in EU governance
- Loss of ideological coherence
- Failure to deliver economic growth
Without these, the article’s explanation is too narrow: immigration is a catalyst, but the underlying substrate is institutional exhaustion.
---
## 🧭 9. **What the article *does* capture well**
To be fair, the article accurately highlights:
- The EP’s rightward shift ([sec28](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection28), [sec29](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection29))
- The normalization of cooperation between center-right and nationalist parties ([sec31](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection31), [sec34](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection34))
- The political instability in France, UK, Germany ([sec47](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection47), [sec48](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection48))
8. **EU institutional complexity beyond the Parliament**
The article focuses almost exclusively on immigration and electoral outcomes, leaving out the structural forces that make nationalist politics durable rather than cyclical.
Sigh... analysis of this caliber was de-riguer at the NYT.
Sigh sigh...
This is NOT the first time I've laid laurels at the feet of this author. Great job, man. Really good job. I have a better understanding of the political dynamics across the pond now.
Your description of what's happening in the EU Parliament could not have been easy to write: there's sooo many moving parts! But ya did.
The age of mass migration is over. People cannot overpopulate their home country and just expect to move to greener pastures. There are no more green pastures. They need to voluntarily reduce their country's population to an environmentally sustainable level, stay there and work to improve their living conditions. Enough.
Nobody in Europe ever voted for mass immigration. It was foisted on them by their rulers. The Euro elites ignored the dissent because they were so much more enlightened than the knuckle draggers who lacked the right credentials. Also, their daughters weren’t being raped and let’s be honest, some Europeans are more equal than others.
European leadership has been removing the pressure relief valves in the system for years now, that it is going to blow was obvious at least a decade ago. Democracy doesn’t work if the winners are committed to defying their voters.
Another interesting ‘fun fact’ - the head of Germany’s AfD party is a lesbian (and her partner is black) and more gays support the AfD than any other party in Germany. No doubt, it’s out of sheer fear of Islam, Islamacists and its attackers on the public in public spaces.
Great info. There is much discussion of failed immigration policy in Europe and little discussion of what is very quietly working. In Northern Norway, on a few hours long horse ride we were surprised as our guide, a German college student, recounted what was required for her summer job. To shepherd adults and children on Icelandic Pony trail rides, she had to speak either fluent Norwegian or English and prove her experience with the horses, before she could enter the country.
Virtually, any Norwegian non tourist visa also requires an employment contract, that demonstrates economically self sufficiency, before arrival. Alternatively, she could have deposited enough money in a Norwegian account to prove she would not be a financial drain on Norway, before she arrived. As she was a temporary employee, she also had to show proof of medical insurance.
According to her, her visa was specifically tied to her job contract. It allowed her a little time to sight see before and after, but if she did not exit Norway on time, she would be fined, her employer would be fined, and she would never be allowed to work in Norway again. She was not sure she would ever be allowed to return, even as a tourist.
The experience was lovely, but it was a glorified pony ride most 12 year old Texas ranch kids could have easily led. Yet Norway still required fluent language skills, specialized experience, and an employment contract with a departure date, set in stone.
Norway also now requires any asylum seekers that have set foot elsewhere in Europe, to return to their entry point, to await Norway's adjudication of their asylum claim. The vast majority of both Norwegian immigrants and asylum seekers must now possess fluent Norwegian or English language skills and economically self sufficient employment, before they enter Norway.
Norwegians are convinced their $2 trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund will only survive to provide a safety net and medical care for Norwegians, if everyone works at a job that pays enough to be economically self sufficient, which nearly always requires fluent language skills.
As immigration is very restricted, Norwegians have begun to embrace automation, like few other nations. We encountered an unmanned convenience store. Literally, no one was minding the store. Customers utilized self checkouts and paid via card or cash. Another shopper noted the owners opened the store in the morning, stocked it with fresh self serve coffee, pastry, and prepared lunch items, along with groceries and camping necessities, because a campground was nearby. They returned at night to dispose of the unsold prepared food and to lock up.
When I asked about theft, the local customer that helped us at check out, laughed. It wan't an issue and he did not believe there was a security system. The store simply functioned on the honor system. What a concept. Progressives obsessed with Scandinavian healthcare, might consider how sane Immigration policy, is part and parcel of delivering healthcare. Of course, a couple of trillion dollars in North Sea oil revenue, doesn't hurt either.
This is a very good analysis of the state of the EU, but it's far too opitmistic.
Where, outside of Sweden and Norway, is this "rightward turn on immigration" in the EU actually visible in policy? Peter Magyar talked a good game about Orban being "too lax on immigration" but he's governing firmly within Brussels open-borders agenda. Muslim assaults on women (crotch grabbing, pussy-pointing, etc...) were reported just this week; that didn't happen under Orban.
The press makes a big deal about weakening of the EU's cordone sanitaire, but they're just a few scratches on the wall, not even chinks yet.
How can RN in France and Meloni in Italy be "far-right" when their only real political threat is further to the right? Le Pen will (once again) make the 2nd round but will not win. The French press will ensure that, and absent that, there's always the Romania solution. (As Queen Ursala says: "we have tools.")
"The test will come in upcoming national elections in Germany and Austria" Yes, it will. Nationalist parties will win and will still be locked out of government by a grand coalition that agrees on nothing except "everyone to our right is a Nazi!"
I don't mean to be negative, but I've been hearing for 10 years, "this year is the one". I'll believe it when I see it. There's lots of words still but no evidence of a rightward immigration shift in actual policy.
It may be too little & too late. Liberal secular democracies assumed everybody was as liberal and tolerant as they are. They are NOT. The plague they allowed to enter is taking its inevitable toll on Western culture. Is a New Dark Age on the horizon?
Liberals have no theory of mind for illiberals. Because of our vast Western wealth, security and magical technology, it's hard for Western liberals to not believe they're the inevitable apex and terminus of human history; that everyone wants what we want and will outgrow tribe and faith with some combo of therapy and Amazon gift card; and also that our white person's burden demands we import endless members of the Wretched of the Earth, in the name of charity, compassion and GDP (and rubbing conservative noses in diversity).
Now xenophilia has become a class marker and status symbol, the moat that separates backwards bigoted conservatives from enlightened cosmopolitan liberals.
There is no chance of Western liberals abandoning their sacred beliefs about sentimental universal egalitarianism, it is essentially our post-Christian managerial faith. They will have to be swept aside, and they will be.
Good but limited coverage the whole story. Here's more from CoPilot:
## 🧭 1. **Economic drivers the article barely touches**
The article frames immigration as the *central* catalyst for nationalist ascendancy, but omits several economic factors that political scientists consistently identify as co-equal or stronger drivers:
- **Energy costs and industrial competitiveness**
Europe’s post‑Ukraine‑war energy shock reshaped politics across Germany, Italy, France, and the Nordics. The article never mentions the collapse of cheap Russian gas, the spike in electricity prices, or the deindustrialization pressures on Germany’s manufacturing base — all major contributors to voter discontent.
- **Stagnant wages and productivity divergence**
Southern Europe’s long-term stagnation (Italy, Spain, Greece) and France’s productivity plateau have fueled anti-establishment sentiment independent of migration.
- **Fiscal constraints and austerity**
EU fiscal rules, austerity cycles, and the political backlash to them (especially in Italy and France) are absent from the article’s narrative.
These omissions matter because nationalist parties often gain support in regions with *low immigration but high economic stress* — a pattern the article does not acknowledge.
---
## 🧭 2. **Demographic collapse and labor shortages**
Europe’s demographic crisis — aging populations, shrinking workforces, and collapsing birth rates — is central to the migration debate. Yet the article never mentions:
- Why Europe *needs* immigration to sustain pension systems
- How labor shortages in healthcare, construction, logistics, and agriculture shape policy
- How nationalist parties differ on “replacement migration” vs. automation vs. pronatalist policy
Without this, the article treats immigration as purely a political liability rather than a structural necessity.
---
## 🧭 3. **Internal EU dynamics beyond the Parliament**
The article focuses heavily on the European Parliament (EP), citing sections like [sec26](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection26) and [sec27](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection27), but omits the institutions that actually drive migration policy:
- **European Council** (heads of government) — the real power center
- **European Commission** — drafts migration legislation
- **European Court of Justice** — adjudicates returns, asylum rules
- **Schengen governance** — border controls, suspension mechanisms
- **Dublin Regulation** — responsibility for asylum claims
The EP’s rightward drift matters, but it is not the decisive institution for migration policy. The article’s institutional focus is therefore incomplete.
---
## 🧭 4. **The role of external shocks**
The article does not integrate several major shocks that reshaped migration politics:
- **The Syrian civil war (2015–2016)**
- **The Belarus–Poland border crisis (2021)**
- **Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (2022)** and millions of Ukrainian refugees
- **Climate-driven migration from Africa and the Middle East**
- **Post-pandemic labor market restructuring**
These events explain why migration surged and why public opinion shifted — but the article treats migration as a static, endogenous political choice rather than a response to global crises.
---
## 🧭 5. **The rise of digital media ecosystems**
Nationalist parties’ growth is inseparable from:
- Alternative media ecosystems
- TikTok and YouTube political influencers
- Declining trust in legacy media
- Algorithmic amplification of anti-establishment narratives
The article does not mention how Bardella, AfD, or Meloni leveraged digital platforms to reach younger voters — a major omission given their demographic breakthroughs.
---
## 🧭 6. **Security and geopolitical factors**
The article briefly mentions China ([sec57](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection57)) but omits:
- **The EU’s fear of U.S. strategic retrenchment**
- **NATO burden-sharing debates**
- **Terrorism cycles (2015–2017)**
- **Border externalization deals with Turkey, Tunisia, Libya**
These shape migration policy as much as domestic politics.
---
## 🧭 7. **The cultural dimension beyond immigration**
Nationalist movements also draw strength from:
- Identity politics and secularism
- Gender debates
- Rural–urban divides
- Distrust of technocratic governance
- Perceived erosion of national sovereignty
The article reduces these to immigration alone, missing the multi-dimensional nature of nationalist appeal.
---
## 🧭 8. **The article’s biggest structural omission**
It never addresses **why centrist parties lost legitimacy** beyond immigration.
Scholars point to:
- Technocratic drift
- Coalition instability
- Perceived democratic deficits in EU governance
- Loss of ideological coherence
- Failure to deliver economic growth
Without these, the article’s explanation is too narrow: immigration is a catalyst, but the underlying substrate is institutional exhaustion.
---
## 🧭 9. **What the article *does* capture well**
To be fair, the article accurately highlights:
- The EP’s rightward shift ([sec28](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection28), [sec29](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection29))
- The normalization of cooperation between center-right and nationalist parties ([sec31](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection31), [sec34](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection34))
- The political instability in France, UK, Germany ([sec47](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection47), [sec48](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection48))
- Meloni’s strategic positioning ([sec19](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection19), [sec20](#sentenceindex-turn0edgesection20))
But these are only part of the larger picture.
---
## 🧭 10. **Synthesis: What’s missing for a full understanding**
To fully grasp the rise of European nationalism, one must integrate:
1. **Economic shocks** (energy, inflation, deindustrialization)
2. **Demographic collapse**
3. **Geopolitical instability**
4. **Digital media ecosystems**
5. **Institutional legitimacy crises**
6. **Cultural identity debates**
7. **External migration pressures**
8. **EU institutional complexity beyond the Parliament**
The article focuses almost exclusively on immigration and electoral outcomes, leaving out the structural forces that make nationalist politics durable rather than cyclical.
beat case is europe as an amusement park. worst case is full blown cccp
Sigh... analysis of this caliber was de-riguer at the NYT.
Sigh sigh...
This is NOT the first time I've laid laurels at the feet of this author. Great job, man. Really good job. I have a better understanding of the political dynamics across the pond now.
Your description of what's happening in the EU Parliament could not have been easy to write: there's sooo many moving parts! But ya did.
Thanks.
Thank you for your comprehensive analysis!
They are lying. They're not center parties in Europe. Just the nationalists and leftists.
The Europeans could always do what we here in the USA should do. Create and enforce merit-based immigration guidelines.
Great article. Hopefully nationalist movements can win the Euro leadership and right the ship.
The age of mass migration is over. People cannot overpopulate their home country and just expect to move to greener pastures. There are no more green pastures. They need to voluntarily reduce their country's population to an environmentally sustainable level, stay there and work to improve their living conditions. Enough.
Wow. Well said.