This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (March 2008)

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2008)

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (January 2008)

Opposition to immigration is present in most nation-states with immigration, and has become a significant political issue in many countries.^[1]Immigration in the modern sense refers to movement of people from one nation-state to another, where they are not citizens.

The three main anti-immigration themes are: economic costs (especially job competition and the expenses of schools and social services), negative environmental impact such as accelerated population growth, and the distortion of the national identity. Opposition to immigration can be directed at the immigrants themselves, their culture, language and religion — or on politicians/political parties that favor or promote immigration; opponents also often focus on employers of the immigrants.

In countries where the majority of the population is of immigrant descent, such as the United States, opposition to immigration often takes the form of nativism^[2] (targeted only at 'first-generation' immigrants).

Contents 1 Major anti-immigration arguments 2 Counter-arguments 3 Australia 4 Europe 4.1 Spain and Portugal 4.2 United Kingdom 5 Japan 6 Mexico 7 United States 8 See also 9 References 10 External links

[edit] Major anti-immigration arguments

The national identity of a nation-state is reflected in claims regarding ethnicity: the immigrants fail to assimilate into the original population, and replace its culture with their own. This argument is based on maintaining the rule of the original ethnic group.

National unity arguments emphasise language use and isolation: the immigrants "isolate themselves in their own communities and refuse to learn the local language".

Economic arguments usually concentrate on employment: the immigrants "take our jobs". That is often combined with the claim that immigrants make heavy use of social welfare systems, and overload public education, while not returning anything to the economy through taxes. A related argument is that immigration deprives the countries of origin of badly needed skills, also known as the "brain drain".

Environmental arguments include the increased consumption of scarce resources and overpopulation.

Maintaining an original ethnic structure, government, and overall citizenship, is the base argument of all opposition to immigration.

This ethnic-based type of thinking is an accepted practice, in many countries, that are comprised of one ethnic group.

[edit] Counter-arguments

Responses to typical anti-immigration arguments include:^[3]

• the argument that immigrants "steal jobs" always overlooks the fact that the jobs being taken are typically menial and/or low paying positions which natives generally do not wish to perform, creating a demand for labour which raises overall costs of the industry forcing it overseas
• the argument that immigrants are an economic burden is unproven and the reverse appears to be the case: immigration is correlated with an improvement in economic conditions, because immigrants spend money on products and services just like everybody else. Many immigrants also send a large percentage of their pay back to their home countries via Remittances which further hurts the host country
• with regard to the "heavy use" of benefits and services such as publicly-funded health care, welfare and other forms of social security, immigrants are often ineligible to receive such assistance, or their eligibility is otherwise restricted in some way (eg. they may only become eligible after a lengthy period of time); furthermore, the effect of such restrictions is to reduce the economic contribution immigrants can make. In most U.S. states, public agencies are forbidden by law from inquiring about someone's immigration status. Illegal immigrants are also users of emergency care. Their children also use the public education system.
• in countries with a declining, aging population, immigrants tend to provide additional young residents who will, effectively, later help to support the aging native population. Indeed, population projections show that some countries who consider themselves to have a problem with excessive immigration will in fact face severe difficulties in future decades without immigration. Opponents of large-scale immigration often view the argument that immigration, and an ever-growing population, are needed to save social security (or other retirement plans) as a form of Ponzi scheme.^[4]
• the problems which are purportedly caused by immigrants equally exist amongst native-born populations as well, and that politicians often use immigration as a convenient scapegoat to distract the public from real social, political and economic problems.

[edit] Australia

A sparsely-populated continental nation with a predominantly European population, Australia has long feared being overwhelmed by the heavily-populated Asian countries to its north. After narrowly preventing a Japanese invasion during World War II, and suffering attacks on Australian soil for the first time, it was seen that the country must "populate or perish". Immigration brought people from traditional sources such as the British Isles along with, for the first time, large numbers of Southern and Central Europeans. However, the abolition of the so-called 'White Australia policy' during the early 1970s led to a significant increase in immigration from Asian and other non-European countries, inevitably causing some concern and opposition in Australia.

In the 1996 election Pauline Hanson was elected to the federal seat of Oxley. In her maiden speech to the House of Representatives, which instantly made headlines and television news bulletins across Australia, she expressed her concern that Australia "was in danger of being swamped by Asians". This message exposed a population deeply divided on the issue of immigration, especially from non-Western countries.

Hanson went on to form the One Nation Party, which subsequently won nearly one quarter of the vote in Queensland state elections. The name "One Nation" was meant to signify national unity, in contrast to what Hanson claimed to see as an increasing division in Australian society caused by government policies favouring migrants (multiculturalism) and indigenous Australians. Political ineptitude and infighting led to One Nation's demise, but the issue of immigration remains highly sensitive in Australia.

Arguments against immigration to Australia can be summarised in the following way (order is alphabetical):

1. Cultural: (National Identity and Unity): Multicultural societies are, a rule, unstable, and conflicts between different cultures (that takes frequently form of ethnic and religious conflicts) are not only potential, but a present and very serious threat to the very existence of Australia, as a modern, democratic state. See also political, defence and safety arguments.

2. Defence: in today’s world not a number of soldiers, but their quality and equipment decide on the military strength, so Australia does not need more people (and thus needs no immigrants) in order to defend itself. Also multicultural society usually lacks cohesion, identity and unity, so can be unable to defend itself. See also cultural argument.

3. Demographic: As Australia already has relatively high unemployment (its real unemployment rate is well above 10%) and enjoys relatively high natural growth of population, it does not need immigration.

4. Ecological: Australian environment will not cope with additional millions of immigrants, as it can hardly cope with the present-day natural increase of population.

5. Economic: as technological progress is driven by shortage of labour (or its high costs), increasing population removes incentives for the progress (actually fast development of technology in the US in the late 19th and early 20th century was caused mostly by shortage of labour and its relatively high cost).

6. Educational: instead of importing people, lack of skills should be defeated by educating Australians, so Australia will become not only “lucky country”, but also a “smart country”. Immigration puts also additional stress on already underfinanced Australian public (state) school system.

7. Housing: Immigration puts too much stress on existing and inadequate housing resources, and unnecessary diverts finance from potential high-tech projects (capital deepening) to building new houses (capital widening). See also infrastructure argument.

8. Infrastructure: Immigration puts too much stress on existing infrastructure, which is relatively poorly developed in Australia, and unnecessary diverts finance from potential high-tech projects (capital deepening) to infrastructure (capital widening). See also housing argument.

9. International: Immigration to Australia causes brain drain, mostly in poor countries of Asia and Africa. It can be argued that it is unethical for Australia to seek qualified workers in such poor countries, thus denying them opportunities to develop.

10. Political: Immigration drives racism and xenophobia, especially if it is from countries with significantly different cultures. See also cultural argument.

11. Safety: Immigrants from different cultures usually have serious problems with adjusting to life in a new country, so they consist a disproportionately large proportion of offenders and prison population. See also cultural argument.

12. Standard of living: Immigration, by increasing the size of labour force in condition of relatively high unemployment, drives real wages down, that in turn decreases standards of living.

13. Welfare State: immigration puts too much stress on Australian welfare system. As it put Prof. Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize-winning advocate of a free market “It's just obvious that you can't have free immigration and a welfare state.” Opponents of large-scale immigration often view the argument that immigration, and an ever-growing population, are needed to save social security (or other retirement plans) as a form of Ponzi scheme.

[edit] Europe

Immigration is one of the central political issues in many European countries, and increasingly also at European Union level. The anti-immigration perspective is predominantly nationalist and cultural, rather than economic or environmentalist. The issue is complicated by the fact that many immigrants in western Europe are Muslims from Turkey and Northern Africa. Prominent European opponents of immigration include Jörg Haider, Jean-Marie Le Pen, and the assassinated Pim Fortuyn. In France, the National Front opposes immigration. Major media, political parties, and a large share of the public see the possibility of anti-immigrant sentiment due to the 2005 civil unrest in France. A major anti-immigrant political organization in Germany is the National Democratic Party.

Anti-immigration views are held by many right-wing groups in Europe. Expression of these views is sometimes considered a criminal offense under anti-discrimination statutes, and there are frequent calls for stiffer sentences for xenophobia in many European countries and by the European Union.

[edit] Spain and Portugal

A survey showed that the majority of Spaniards see immigration into their country as excessive. ^[5] Neo-fascist parties, such as Movimiento Social Español, openly campaign using nationalist or anti-immigrant rhetoric. Everyday racial harassment of Africans is sometimes a problem, a notorious incident being the November 2004 Spain-England football friendly.^[6] The mainstream media sometimes portrays African-American culture and black music negatively for humor, though there exists also an active following of hip hop in Spain.

Portugal was long a dictatorship, and had little immigration until a sudden influx in the 1970s, as ex-colonists returned. Today there are Lisbon-born, African and Middle Eastern neighborhoods. Rural areas have just recently begun to see many new arrivals. The country has right-wing parties that support curbs in immigration quotas. Any resident of a Portuguese-speaking country is free to live and work in Portugal, and vice-versa. In recent years, the growth of the Portuguese nationalist "National Renewal Party", known as PNR, has exposed the growing concern of the Portuguese population on the immigration issue.

[edit] United Kingdom

Anti-immigrant perspectives in the United Kingdom mainly have to do with the many South Asians, particularly Pakistanis and Indians, who have moved there. Current concerns also involve Africans, Eastern Europeans, East Asians, Middle Easterners, and numerous others who have become part of the estimated 4.3 million of the UK's population that is foreign-born.^[7] Like other countries, public attention is on their perceived refusal to assimilate, sheer numbers, illegal immigration, and Islamist terrorism.

[edit] Japan

The movement for Japanese cultural isolation, sakoku (鎖国), arose in Edo Period Japan, in response to the strong influence of Chinese culture. The study of (ancient) Japanese literature and culture was called kokugaku (国学 "country study").

Japan was an anomaly among states, as it went through post-war industrialization without any major use of immigrant labor (unlike countries such as France and Germany) instead depending more on labor from women and rural sections of the country. However, as Japan headed into the 1980s and the Bubble Economy, there was a shortage of unskilled labor in the nation, and illegal immigrants from East Asia and the subcontinent began to trickle in.^{[citation needed]}

These immigrants were a very visible part of Japanese society, performing the so-called 3K jobs": kitanai (汚い dirty), kiken (危険 dangerous) and kitsui (きつい hard, tough); jobs that natives with higher skill sets wouldn't participate in. Despite their illegal status, they were generally tolerated by law enforcement and government, as they fulfilled a significant function in the Japanese economy. Toward the end of the 1980s, however, illegal immigration became a hot button issue, with many Japanese sharply divided about how to address the problem.^{[citation needed]}

Those in favor of cutting off all immigration fell into the sakoku (鎖国) camp, and those in favor of a less restrictive policy were on the side of kaikoku (開国 "open country"). Those in favor of sakoku argued that immigration (illegal or otherwise) would be detrimental to Japanese racial homogeneity and also dilute culture as well as promote crime. Kaikoku, on the other hand, wasn't necessarily in favor of immigration, but rather proponents acknowledged that illegal immigrants had arrived and were a viable part of the economy that must be addressed at the risk of eroding human rights further (conditions in factories were poor, and as illegal immigrants were on the periphery of society, they had no protection from the law).^{[citation needed]}

Ultimately, Japan passed the Immigration Control Act in 1990 which opened a side-door to ethnic Japanese (up to the third generation) living in other countries, allowing them to immigrate to Japan for the unspecified purpose of performing unskilled labor; Japan still does not issue visas to anyone but skilled workers. By adding this provision--they must be ethnic Japanese--the government had addressed the sakoku arguments by preserving racial homogeneity (despite the glaring cultural and linguistic differences), but also compromised with those in favor of kaikoku by allowing a legal loophole providing for immigrant unskilled labor. This caused a large influx of Japanese Brazilians, termed Dekasegi.^{[citation needed]}

Today attitudes in Japan often remain decidedly negative towards immigrants, legal or otherwise, and new tighter controls are currently being drafted, according to the Japan Times

This section requires expansion.

[edit] Mexico

In Mexico, the first eight months of 2005, more than 120,000 people from Central America have been deported to their countries of origin. This is a higher number than the people deported in the same period in 2002, when 1 people were deported in the entire year.^[8] Many women from Eastern Europe, Asia, United States and Central and South America are offered jobs at table dance establishments in large cities throughout the country, causing the National Institute of Migration (INM) in Mexico to raid strip clubs and deport foreigners who work without the proper documentation.^[9]

Mexico has very strict laws pertaining to both illegal and legal immigrants.^[10] The Mexican constitution restricts non-citizens or foreign-born persons from participating in politics, holding office, acting as a member of the clergy, or serving on the crews of Mexican-flagged ships or airplanes. Certain legal rights are waived, such as the right to a deportation hearing or other legal motions. In cases of flagrante delicto, any person may make a citizen's arrest on the offender and his accomplices, turning them over without delay to the nearest authorities.

Many immigration restrictionists in the United States have accused the Mexican government of hypocrisy in its immigration policy, noting that the Mexicans are demanding looser immigration laws in the United States while at the same time keeping tight restrictions on immigration into Mexico. The country's 1910 constitution guarantees citizens "freedom of movement".

[edit] United States

In the United States, opposition to immigration has a long history, starting in the late 1790s, in reaction to an influx of political refugees from France and Ireland. After passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798, opposition receded. Nativism first gained a name and affected politics in mid-19th century United States because of the large inflows of immigrants from cultures that were markedly different from the existing White Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture. Nativists objected primarily to Roman Catholics, especially Irish American. Nativist movements included the American Party of the mid-19th Century (formed by members of the Know-Nothing movement), the Immigration Restriction League of the early 20th Century, and the anti-Asian movements in the west, resulting in the Chinese Exclusion Act and the so-called "Gentlemen's Agreement" aimed at the Japanese. Immigration became a major issue again from the 1990s, with a renewed immigration reduction movement.

[edit] See also

• Benefit tourism
• Brain drain
• Economic impact of immigration to Canada
• Emigration
• Illegal immigration
• Immigration
• Immigration policy
• Immigration reduction
• Immigration reform
• International Organization for Migration
• Multiculturalism
• Nationalism
• Nativism
• Overpopulation
• People smuggling
• Political asylum
• Right of foreigners to vote
• Refugee
• Rivers of Blood speech
• Xenophobia

[edit] References

[edit] External links

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Opposition to immigration

• No one is an illegal immigrant