Multiculturalism is unpopular with the majority – even though it makes for happier societies

How do people feel about multicultural policies? Ethnic majorities tend to resent them, and feel less safe in societies with a number of affirmative and rights-based policies, write Pamela Irving Jackson and Peter Doerschler. As a result, governments have come under pressure to ensure policies that tackle inequality benefit everyone. Yet both ethnic majorities and minorities declare themselves happier with their lives and governments when they live in states with multicultural policies

Radical Right-Wing Parties in Western Europe and their Populist Appeal: An Empirical Explanation

In a majority of Western European countries, the vote share cast for radical right-wing populist parties in national elections was over 10% by 2015, reaching 46% in Austria’s 2016 presidential election. Policy agendas of national governments have also moved to the right, demonstrating greater restrictiveness on immigration and skepticism toward the EU. With data from the Chapel Hill Expert Survey, European Social Survey, Multiculturalism Policy Index, and Parliaments and Governments Database, we extend current models of electoral support for far-right parties by assessing whether the ethnic majority’s sense of discrimination and safety help explain the allure of the right-wing message. Does right-wing populist voting by majority group members reflect their sense of being personally disadvantaged in a multicultural state beyond their more general opposition to immigration as bad for the country? Building on the multivariate model of voter preference developed by Inglehart and Norris (2016), we look specifically at majority group members in thirteen Western European states and add two measures of personal grievance: sense of being in a group that is discriminated against and fear of walking alone at night. Our results suggest that along with their stance against immigration and multiculturalism, their socioeconomic appeals and ideological signals, radical right-wing populist parties draw majority group members’ votes by stoking their sense of personal grievance as members of a group that is discriminated against

Screening migrants in the early Cold War: the geopolitics of U.S. immigration policy

The main elements of U.S. immigration policy date back to the early Cold War. One such element is a screening process initially designed to prevent infiltration by Communist agents posing as migrants from East-Central Europe. The development of these measures was driven by geopolitical concerns, resulting in vetting criteria that favored the admission of hardline nationalists and anti-Communists. The argument proceeds in two steps. First, the article demonstrates that geopolitics influenced immigration policy, resulting in the admission of extremist individuals. Second, it documents how geopolitical concerns and the openness of U.S. institutions provided exiles with the opportunity to mobilize politically. Although there is little evidence that the vetting system succeeded in preventing the entry of Communist subversives into the United States, it did help to create a highly mobilized anti-Communist ethnic lobby that supported extremist policies vis-à-vis the Soviet Union during the early Cold War

Push-Pull Factors and Immigrant Political Integration in Germany

Drawing specifically on the German case, I argue that individuals' motivations for immigration, or so-called push-pull factors, have a lasting impact beyond the decision to immigrate and, in fact, profoundly influence immigrants' political integration in the host country. Specifically, economic push-pull factors are likely to impede immigrants' political integration, whereas political push-pull factors lead immigrants to remain more interested and engaged in politics while abroad. Copyright (c) 2006 Southwestern Social Science Association.

Radical Right-Wing Parties in Western Europe and their Populist Appeal: An Empirical Explanation

In a majority of Western European countries, the vote share cast for radical right-wing populist parties in national elections was over 10% by 2015, reaching 46% in Austria’s 2016 presidential election. Policy agendas of national governments have also moved to the right, demonstrating greater restrictiveness on immigration and skepticism toward the EU. With data from the Chapel Hill Expert Survey, European Social Survey, Multiculturalism Policy Index, and Parliaments and Governments Database, we extend current models of electoral support for far-right parties by assessing whether the ethnic majority’s sense of discrimination and safety help explain the allure of the right-wing message. Does right-wing populist voting by majority group members reflect their sense of being personally disadvantaged in a multicultural state beyond their more general opposition to immigration as bad for the country? Building on the multivariate model of voter preference developed by Inglehart and Norris (2016), we look specifically at majority group members in thirteen Western European states and add two measures of personal grievance: sense of being in a group that is discriminated against and fear of walking alone at night. Our results suggest that along with their stance against immigration and multiculturalism, their socioeconomic appeals and ideological signals, radical right-wing populist parties draw majority group members’ votes by stoking their sense of personal grievance as members of a group that is discriminated against