Against Xenophobia: An Argument For Immigration

Against Xenophobia

An Argument For Immigration

  

Introduction

I doubt it has escaped anyone's attention that recent years have seen a surge in anti-immigrant sentiment across the world. In this article I seek to go against what appears to be a dominant narrative where often both sides of the political spectrum operate on the assumption that immigration should be considered a net negative and viewed with suspicion.

 Often when anti-immigration politicians or political commentators use the words 'immigrant' or 'immigration' they often tend to conflate what are really different, distinct groups. Mainly, refugees, expatriates, international students and actual immigrants. For the purposes of this article, I am willing to engage them with their own definitions of the terminology. Consequently, my argument will refer to all of the different kinds of foreign individuals enumerated above. Furthermore, due to me being the most familiar with the situation in the United Kingdom, this article would be primarily relevant to that country, however I posit that most of my arguments are applicable to any developed country due to the overall dynamics being largely similar.

 This article will be divided into two sections that delves into the economic side of the argument and then the ideological.

 

Economic

·        Firstly, this article would like to emphasize the role of international students in subsidizing the education of home students. This is true to a degree in most developed countries, but of particular significance in Britain where the funds provided by the internationals have allowed for fairly low tuition fees for home students relative to the rest of the anglosphere. Indeed, it would be quite impracticable to provide the current standard of education to the current percentage of the population at current fees without international subsidy (Financial Times). At best, the system would suffer a sharp decline in quality, scale and affordability. Less optimistically, it would be on the precipice of collapse with many universities being left with no recourse but to close down. In any case, British universities would go from being the envy of the world to a pitiful shadow of their former grandeur.

·        International students bring a significant influx of wealth into areas near their campus through spending thereby boosting the local economy. It is estimated that on average internationals spend ~1300 GBP per month on living expenses, adding a total of around 9 billion GBP to the economy. Taking into consideration the tuition fees and it adds up to 40 billion GBP (Immigration Advice Service). The situation is likely to be similar in the anglosphere and Europe. 

·        Internationals contribute large lump sums to the NHS as a part of their visa process. A system which many don't even use given that it is obtuse and difficult for an outsider to grasp. This is essentially free money into the system which would be sorely missed should this funding be cut or diminished. Naturally, they also pay taxes in addition to this surcharge (Immigration Healthcare).

·        Contrary to popular belief, immigrants do not drag down wages. If anything the opposite would hold true as they tend to be wealthier on average than the 'White British' group which would not be possible if they were also undercutting them. (Gov.uk)

·        In contradiction to the commonly heard xenophobic refrain that 'we are full, fuck off', the UK can easily accommodate far, far more people. It is nowhere close to being close to its potential limit. Comparing to countries such as South Korea and Japan, the latter of which notably does not have a housing crisis, the UK can hold atleast 90-100 million individuals if not more (South Korea). The fact of the matter is that even London is less densely populated than smaller European cities such as Barcelona (Guardian). The rest of the country with its small towns and a handful of medium sized cities has a fairly low population density.  And this is just with regards to Britain, it applies tenfold to countries such as the US, Canada, and Australia. The crux of the matter is that the issues faced by these countries in places such as housing or healthcare are a result of poor government planning and asinine regulations, not immigration.

·        Immigrants make up a significant percentage of key workforce demographics. Nurses, carers, lawyers, doctors, engineers, researchers, lecturers et alia. Remove them from the system or constrict the flow of talent and the systems dependent on them would be severely debilitated, if they are left functioning in the first place.

·        Many countries in the commonwealth, Africa, and Asia view freedom of movement as an important consideration (India UK trade deal). Outlawing or curtailing immigration too much could well spark outrage from these countries (which includes key trading partners such as the other anglosphere countries, EU, India, Singapore, Nigeria etc). Should they elect to cut or reduce trading ties as a consequence, the economy would suffer. The country's international reputation would be viewed in context of suspicions of xenophobia which could discourage other countries from engaging in trade too.

·        Internationals in the fields of STEM, economics, and finance choosing for instance, the UK (or any developed country) over their countries of origin and contributing their intellectual capabilities to the former instead gives Britain a competitive advantage. Without this phenomenon, research output would fall, entrepreneurial ventures would decline, the innovativeness of the country would suffer and make it more reliant on and weaker in comparison to other countries which either have a much larger resource and population base or are more open to immigration such as the US, China, and the EU. 

·        This is the most important point and one that deserves the most emphasis. One might consider this argument to be my ace or trump card. The UK and all other developed countries have an ageing population, a significant percent of which is retired and consequently does not work (IMF). This demographic of retirees is projected to only grow over the coming decades. They cannot contribute to the economy to any significant degree and require vast quantities of government resources in form of pensions and healthcare (Investopedia). As the population ages and there are more and more of such citizens and progressively fewer working age productive citizens in the local population pool, the entire system would inevitably and inexorably move towards a complete collapse without an influx of young tax payers. Remove immigrants from the equation and one is left with increasing government spending while the revenue from taxes declines sharply. Followed by widespread labour shortages and soon afterwards precipitate in a complete disintegration of the welfare state that the citizens of developed countries are so (rightly) fond and proud of. Ultimately, regardless of what perspective you analyse the situation from, without immigration the standards of living would fall by a truly immense degree.

 

 

Ideological

·        To be blunt, this entire issue is a distraction (Morning Star). Drummed up by the far right to capitalize on the economic stagnation over the past decades. The peoples of Europe see their economic growth slow due to a plethora of deeply complex factors that they cannot understand and instead some among them seek simple answers. A scapegoat; which the far right is all too happy to provide. While in the UK, the conservatives are quite happy to blame just about anyone and anything save for themselves for the stagnation despite being the ruling party for fourteen years. There are far more pressing issues responsible for the current plight of the Britons and Europeans. Unchecked privatization of the economy, utter failure in the housing construction market, rampant inflation, soaring debt, catastrophic mismanagement of the administration, jingoism, blatant lying by politicians et alia. Immigrants are not only scapegoats but furthermore as net contributors by a truly massive margin, they are preventing the situation from being worse. Fortunately, it appears that even despite such efforts by the fringe, it has not had the desired effect with the majority actually being more favourable to immigration than at the time of the Brexit vote (Financial Times II).

·        The deeply xenophobic rhetoric deployed against internationals is extremely insulting and dehumanizing. Treating them as a monolithic bloc and 'otherising' them in a tribal us vs them mentality is harmful and regressive. Furthermore, most immigrants tend to have primarily local born friends and networks as well as potentially a native partner. Talks of deportation and treating them as though they are some vile aliens is extremely unethical and immoral.

·        What precisely is wrong with immigration in principle? Ultimately, there is no such thing as race or ethnicity (Scientific American) (Harvard). We are one species. The country we happened to be born is a fluke, a matter of a rolling of the dice, luck. Consequently, what issue is there in individuals looking to move to a different region to which they may feel a greater affinity or have better life prospects? Especially as mentioned many times in this article, they are only benefiting the economy of the region in doing so.

·        It is worth noting that those same individuals have a choice. Continue to tell them that they are unwelcome and they will not come, taking their talents, funds, cultural and intellectual contributions instead to a country which treats them with dignity.

·        In the anglosphere, a plurality of internationals are from commonwealth countries (National Statistics) with whom there exist long standing cultural and historical ties, with no shortage of bilateral cultural exchange having taken place between them, in particular with regards to the UK and its former empire. Most prominently, Canada, India, Australia, Ireland (not commonwealth but once a part of the empire),Singapore, New Zealand, Hong Kong (same as Ireland), etc. Countries whose citizens are extremely easy to integrate so long as they are not alienated through ceaseless hostility and xenophobia.

·        On the matter of integration, countless immigrants and their descendants are fully integrated into the society of the country they chose and are every bit as part of the culture as those whose families have been there for longer (though sooner or later everyone is descendent from immigrants except for the people of East Africa). One only has to take a look at the Conservative Party to see that immigrants or their descendants can be just as vile as their local born counterparts.

·        With regards to those who have failed to integrate, in many cases it is a combination of native hostility in concert with the inaction of the government in the developing of segregated ghettos. Follow the lead of Singapore in setting quotas in buying housing in order to ensure people live mixed together rather than segregated, this can be implemented in a house building spree that would be necessary to address the developing housing crisis anyway. In addition to that, encourage the locals to be welcoming and this issue can be easily solved. In most regions, immigrants can simply be absorbed into the local population through intermarriage. That was after all the policy of the Roman Empire and it worked for over a thousand years (Anthony Kaldellis).

·        In the regions where the locals may not hold a majority thereby making absorption through intermarraige difficult, take steps to bring about cultural integration. This can be done through a variety of methods such as education environment and curriculum, housing policy, anti-segregationist action, and in extreme cases such as with regards to religious extremism, education centres which focus on instilling secular values. Especially with regards to immigrants from Europe, the MENA region, and South Asia, one would be hard-pressed to actually tell the difference at a glance between a native and them given the significant similarities in appearance. And when this is not the case, we are ultimately one species. There is only one race on this planet, the Human Race (Scientific American)(Harvard). I certainly hope the reader would agree that their culture is about more than just skin colour and that an immigrant can be just as integrated into the social fabric of a country as a local born individual.

 

 

Bibliography

·        Financial Times. “UK Universities Risk Falling into Deficit as Foreign Student Numbers Fall.” www.ft.com, www.ft.com/content/71b4c6e0-aad9-4e07-9859-152ca7f2dae2.

·        Immigration Advice Service. “How Much Do International Students Contribute to the UK Economy | IAS.” Immigration Advice Service, 2 Aug. 2023, iasservices.org.uk/how-much-do-international-students-contribute-to-the-uk-economy/#:~:text=A%20recent%20study%20showed%20that.

·        Immigration Healthcare. Government Digital Service. “Pay for UK Healthcare as Part of Your Immigration Application.” GOV.UK, 6 Apr. 2015, www.gov.uk/healthcare-immigration-application.

·        GOV.UK. “Household Income.” Www.ethnicity-Facts-Figures.service.gov.uk, 5 Sept. 2022, www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/work-pay-and-benefits/pay-and-income/household-income/latest/.

·        Guardian. Beckett, Andy. “Is Britain Full? Home Truths about the Population Panic.” The Guardian, The Guardian, 9 Feb. 2016, www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/09/is-britain-full-home-truths-about-population-panic.‌

·        South Korea. “South Korea Population (2022) - Worldometer.” Www.worldometers.info, www.worldometers.info/world-population/south-korea-population/#:~:text=South%20Korea%20population%20is%20equivalent.‌

·        India UK Trade Negotiations. “UK and India Sign Ground-Breaking Partnership Migration Deal.” GOV.UK, www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-india-sign-ground-breaking-partnership-migration-deal.

·        Morning Star. Monday, Matt Trinder, et al. “Government Using Migration to “Distract from Its Attacks on Ordinary People,” Campaigners Warn.” Morning Star, 15 May 2023, morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/government-using-migration-to-distract-from-its-attacks-on-ordinary-people-campaigners-warn. Accessed 27 Jan. 2024.

·        Scientific American. Prontzos, Peter G. “The Concept of “Race” Is a Lie.” Scientific American Blog Network, 14 May 2019, blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/the-concept-of-race-is-a-lie/.

·        Harvard. Chou, Vivian. “How Science and Genetics Are Reshaping the Race Debate of the 21st Century.” Science in the News, Harvard University, 18 Apr. 2017, sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-reshaping-race-debate-21st-century/.

·        Anthony Kaldellis. The New Roman Empire. 2023.

·        National Statistics. “Ethnic Group, England and Wales - Office for National Statistics.” Www.ons.gov.uk, 29 Nov. 2022, www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/bulletins/ethnicgroupenglandandwales/census2021.

·        IMF. “Aging Is the Real Population Bomb.” IMF, www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/Series/Analytical-Series/aging-is-the-real-population-bomb-bloom-zucker#:~:text=Between%202000%20and%202050%20alone.

·        Investopedia. Borji, H.S. “4 Global Economic Issues of an Aging Population.” Investopedia, 9 Aug. 2021, www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/011216/4-global-economic-issues-aging-population.asp.

·  Financial Times II. “Britain Is Now a High-Immigration Country and Most Are Fine with That.” Www.ft.com, www.ft.com/content/f2d72f42-af5f-4922-8fcb-f50a32f37afc#comments-anchor. Accessed 29 Jan. 2024.

‌