How Immigration Has Reshaped European Politics

As my esteemed reader knows, Europe has been undergoing rapid change since at least 2015. It is therefore interesting to see how this change is reflected in opinion polls.

For this reason, I decided to share a few images this Sunday showing the development of party support in different countries. The source of the images is Politico.eu’s Poll of Polls.

* * *

Let us begin with Germany.

The chart clearly shows how, as recently as 20 years ago, Germany’s political landscape was dominated by two major parties, CDU/CSU and SPD. In 2013, a new, small, immigration-critical party, AfD, appeared on the scene. Over the course of the past roughly 13 years, its support has risen in waves to its current level of around 28 percent, making it the largest party in Europe’s largest economic area.

Another significant change is the division of the SPD’s traditional support base between the party and the Greens. At the moment, the Greens are even more popular than the old dominant party of the left.

* * *

Next, France.

The chart beginning in 2017 shows the rise of the immigration-critical National Rally from a medium-sized party to France’s most popular political movement. Two other significant developments have been the consolidation of the previously fragmented left, which has made it the country’s second-largest political movement, and the gradual decline in support for Emmanuel Macron’s centrist party.

* * *

Third, the old world power, the United Kingdom.

The chart shows that the country’s two traditional major parties held their ground for a long time, but that the political landscape has since evolved into a three-party contest involving three medium-sized parties. At the moment, the Labour Party is in the lead, but the Reform UK party, led by Nigel Farage and having risen on the back of concerns about immigration, as well as the Conservatives, are breathing right down its neck. In recent months, however, support for the old major parties has been rising, while Reform UK’s upward trajectory appears to have peaked sometime last year.

* * *

Overall, these party polls tell us a great deal about the enormous impact of immigration on the political landscape of Western Europe’s largest countries. The same has happened in Finland and Sweden — and Italy is governed by the immigration-critical Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. When we add to this the fact that modern mass immigration is not wanted in the countries of Eastern Europe either, it becomes clear that this is a pan-European view among the peoples of Europe.

This view, however, is reflected rather poorly in European politics. The European Union has failed to close its borders, and there is still an open route for harmful immigration in the form of the so-called right to apply for asylum. In addition, there are spontaneous waves of illegal immigration, most recently in Spain’s Ceuta.

It remains to be seen whether the changing views of EU citizens will affect European immigration policy. And if they do, how.

Will the right to asylum, which emerged in the aftermath of Nazi Germany’s atrocities, be abandoned because of excessive abuse? Will European states begin effectively returning the people who have flowed across their borders over the past ten years and who are unwilling to integrate into their societies? And even their descendants born within the EU?

* * *

From the perspective of us ordinary citizens, the important thing is to lay the foundations for a better future for Europe by voting in elections for parties and candidates through whom the population and culture of our continent can preserve their vitality. The development I have described above shows that many Europeans have understood this, but also that not everyone has.

The future is, of course, unpredictable, so let this entry remain as one snapshot of the current situation. And at the same time, let it serve as a reminder to all of you — my esteemed readers — that ultimately, every democratic society becomes what the people living in it want it to become. At least when the people living in these countries understand what is in their own best interests and exercise their right to vote.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish Families Flee Immigrant-Dominated Areas Over School Safety Concerns
Lessons for EU Citizens from the Ceuta Episode
Lessons from the Abdul Ballout Case

Finnish Families Flee Immigrant-Dominated Areas Over School Safety Concerns

The Finnish newspaper Iltalehti published an article about a Helsinki family’s experiences with immigration. According to the article, the parents decided to move away from Helsinki because their son refused to start lower secondary school at a comprehensive school in eastern Helsinki. The reason for this was the sense of insecurity caused by immigrant children, predominantly Muslims and children of African background.

The school in question has a large immigrant population and has also been in the news recently for other reasons, as Helsinki decision-makers have changed school admission catchment areas in order to bring not only immigrant children but also native Finnish children into the school. This has sparked opposition among families affected by the decision.

* * *

In the newspaper article, the mother gave her own account of the students at the school who bullied her son. According to her, some children of foreign background would gang up on others, pick fights, and behave violently. She also described an incident in which a group of bullies had been waiting outside the family’s home with sticks so that they could beat up the boy.

The group of bullies had also mocked the boy’s name while his mother was investigating an altercation that had taken place in the residential courtyard. In other words, they showed no respect even towards adults – or at least not towards ethnic Finns.

* * *

Finland’s Minister of Social Affairs and Health, Wille Rydman (Finns Party), commented on the matter on social media. He asked what “open-borders immigration policy,” “tolerance,” and “anti-racism” mean in practice.

He answered that they mean children becoming victims of systematic violence and learning nothing at school, while ethnic Finns are forced to become refugees in their own country. He further stated that “in many cases, immigration also means that your daughter, or in some cases your grandmother, or even you yourself, will be raped.”

* * *

It is clear that this statement by the minister will either be silenced completely or, alternatively, prominently highlighted alongside accusations of racism. For ethnic Finnish families living in eastern Helsinki, however, this is not a matter of political debate but of their children’s future. And that is why those who have the means and understanding to do so are leaving eastern Helsinki altogether.

It therefore remains to be seen how the school involved in the above-mentioned case and its surrounding areas will change in the coming years. It also remains to be seen whether Wille Rydman is right or wrong when he claims that “mass immigration builds nothing. It is a sweeping destructive force that civilizations always succumb to – history demonstrates this unequivocally. For our enemies, migration is a key instrument for weakening us. For the defenders of our civilization, opposing mass immigration and promoting return migration is therefore a fundamental moral duty. European society and civilization will either survive or fall with it.”

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Two Recent Life-Threatening Crimes in Finland
Attitudes Toward Immigrants Are a Problem in Schools
Swedish School Shooting with Automatic Weapon Highlights Nation in Crisis

Swedish Left Politicians Sent Letters to Palestinian Terrorists

The Finnish Broadcasting Company reported that Swedish left-wing politicians had sent letters of encouragement to Palestinian terrorists imprisoned by Israel. One of the recipients was Ahmad al-Moghrabi, who had ordered an attack on a family gathering in which eleven people, including two small children, were killed.

The Swedes had asked Palestinians living in Sweden for a list of people to whom they could send letters, and the Palestinians had provided them with such a list, which included terrorists.

The Swedish politicians are now expressing regret over what happened and blaming the Palestinians for their mistake. The fact remains, however, that even in Israel, people are presumably not imprisoned — at least not for long periods — without good reason. Not even Palestinians.

It remains to be seen whether what happened will have any effect on support for the Swedish left-wing party. And if it does, whether the effect will be positive or negative from their perspective — in other words, whether there is a pro-terrorism sentiment among Swedes of immigrant background who typically vote for green and left-wing parties, or whether they have already adopted the Western view that terrorism is unacceptable under any circumstances.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle Using Taxpayer Money to Mislead?
Burning a Man Alive Led to Life Imprisonment
Who Is Responsible: The Donor or the Recipient of Aid?

Lessons for EU Citizens from the Ceuta Episode

The events in Ceuta have led Europeans to wake up. Or at least almost all of them, since 22 EU countries – Germany, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden – have signed a letter calling for effective protection of the external borders, action to prevent illegal entry, and support for Spain. Finland’s signatory was Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party).

It is regrettable, of course, that five countries have expressed their desire to see the continuation of the modern-day mass migration by refusing to sign the demand. They are Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and Portugal, whose motives are – at least to me – rather difficult to understand, because this is not about immigration in general but specifically about illegal immigration.

* * *

The Finnish Government evidently takes illegal immigration seriously, since Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns Party) immediately instructed her ministry’s officials to prepare the measures required for closing Finland’s EU internal borders. According to her, the purpose is to ensure that the “decisions required to close the internal borders can, on the basis of this preparatory work, be made very quickly if the need arises.”

In other words, neither Rantanen nor Finland is unilaterally closing the EU’s internal borders, but rather creating the capability to do so quickly if necessary. This is important because, in the absence of both the necessary legislation – and the political will – the Finnish Government was forced in 2015 to stand by helplessly as large numbers of illegal immigrants poured into our country from the western border.

As a result of the preparations now under way, the steps required to close our country’s EU borders will in future already be prepared in advance, meaning that shutting them can be accomplished with a single order from the Government. And as a result, the internal movement of illegal immigrants into our northern land will come to an end.

* * *

It remains to be seen whether Finland will ever need the legislation currently being prepared. In any case, the events in Ceuta turned out to be a brief episode, possibly caused by organized – perhaps even state-sponsored – crime.

This is because there is no way to get from Ceuta to mainland Europe without border checks. Thus, it was not a route that could have led to a repetition of the events of 2015. Consequently, the Moroccans who had rushed there soon returned to their home country.

In the end, the whole Ceuta episode concluded happily, just like a fairy tale. Instead of the modern-day mass migration taking another step forward, it reminded EU politicians that it is better to prepare in advance than to find themselves searching for illegal immigrants all over the Union.

That is why it is difficult to understand the stupidity demonstrated by the power-holders in Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and Portugal by refusing to sign the demand mentioned at the beginning. Perhaps, in their next parliamentary elections, the citizens of those countries will understand that they would be well advised to consider giving their votes to politicians more responsible than their current rulers!

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
From Burden to Benefit: Reforming Immigration in Finland
Sensible Immigration or Moral Posturing?
Why is Somalia unwilling to meet Finland’s conditions for continuing development cooperation?