It's time to face this difficult fact, understand why it's happening, and deal with it.
"... has touched off Europe’s traditional fear of the Middle Eastern “other”."
OK, maybe it's because I'm European but that sentence annoyed the hell out of me! Oh, Americans turning against immigration is all common sensical and reality based but Europeans doing the same is just them reenacting their Dark Ages traumas...
We have many of the same problems America faces re. asylum seeking, with a lot more landmass a lot closer to the flashpoints and we're starting from a significantly higher base of uneducated third world immigrants. And we don't have the dynamic US economy that helps digest the extra labor force. And, yes, last point is likely cultural - we are less favorable to change and immigration hasn't the same foundational imagery it has in the USA. But that's a relatively minor point compared to everything else.
And so, yes, sure, those Pro Palestinian protests in Europe reminded us we have literally millions upon millions of badly integrated Muslims from North Africa and Turkey and Syria, quite willing to bring their problems and their identity issues to our streets. And we're not enamoured with that. Would you be?
Finally a short, sharp explanation on a thorny but important subject.
Noah, you know full well that results-oriented pragmatism is not allowed in politics.
Now pick an enemy and start yelling.
And the are right about being upset. Immigration is supposed to be about attracting the people who will make the biggest contribution (and certainly not a negative contribution) to society. We need a way to massively speed up the processing of what are mostly bogus claims of asylum. ARA was the opportunity to spend a few billions paying for temporary asylum case hearers. It should not take too long for word to get out that bogus claims don't work; you get "heard" and deported pronto, losing the investment in the trip. Without reform of asylum processing, we can't turn our attention to the important issue of allowing entry and active recruiting high value immigrants.
Another issue (very well explained) where Biden risks progressive backlash for doing what most Americans want. I hope he ignores early and meaningless polling and tries to do the right thing.
Illegal immigation keeps wages down and prices low for all the basic services rich Americans need.
So-called "immigration advocates" have been telling Americans for years that immigration is synonymous with border chaos created by drug trafficking cartels. What else are they supposed to think?
Americans are not anti-immigration (meaning controlled inflows of workers and future citizens, as decided by government policy). But if people insist on confusing the issue, by lumping in the disasters of illegal crossings, general border security, and asylum policy under the heading "immigration", then of course they will become anti-immigrant.
Without the number of people intentionally surrendering to Border Patrol this article lacks the most important data. As my high-school Biology teacher would have said, it is a worthless article.
But in fact, the US government decided in March 2020, to make the Border encounter data meaningless. Before then, encounters and expulsions were tabulated separately. Now the data is combined. Thus the data after March 2020 can't be compared to that prior, but the WSJ has done that and Noah accepted this therefore worthless graph.
However, it is interesting to look at the earlier peaks in the WSJ graph, 1987, 2000, on a per-capita basis. 1987 encounters were 0.67% of US population, 2000 0.61%, the recent peak in 2022 0.59%. The idea that there is some explosion in numbers is obviously incorrect to anyone who cares about numbers and data. Without the separate data on encounters and expulsions the WSJ graph is meaningless.
A missing part is that the conditions in many other regions have deteriorated, in many cases with the historic cause of US foreign policies.
Few people would just move for the sake of moving, most would just stay put with their families if the living conditions would not suck that much.
I don’t see a comment about housing in this. That’s one of the big issues Europeans and Americans are struggling with that’s related to immigration.
The homelessness we see in Los Angeles is driven by old, NIMBY policies that make even replacing blight and building on empty lots too expensive and slow.
Old people are terrified that increased residents means increased cars and increasing traffic jams are going to prevent them from getting to the hospital on time (I’ve literally heard this brought up at community meetings on development). And everyone is generally get pissed when they’re stuck in traffic.
But homelessness caused by higher rents and fewer units also drives people off the streets into their cars. And lack of local construction makes people drive to other neighborhoods, rather than walk around their own.
In LA we need to ignore the NIMBYs and speed up rezoning -- except NIMBYs traditionally vote more than YIMBYs for City Council seats, so council members may have to do this knowing they will not get re-elected, against the will of their constituents.
In the Netherlands there is a shortage of 400,000 homes and the pace of building can’t keep up with the net immigration. Europe has to keep a lot of its classic architecture. I’m not sure what rezoning could do -- or where to do it.
Rising interest rates and inflation are making construction expensive, too. This is where we need an economist like Noah to help us figure out how to proceed...
Nothing is more depressing and un-American to me than anti-immigrant sentiment. Democrats are complete cowards on this issue. They look weak and incompetent because they adopt defensive talking points in line with what the GOP says. It's similar to how Democrats refused to say the word "abortion" for decades.
The talking points should be "Immigration is the United States superpower. We dominate the world because we provide people opportunity. The smartest, hardest working people in the world line up to get into this country, so they can achieve their dreams. We welcome them, because we know they will make all of our lives better and our nation stronger."
I don't think Republicans would vote for any "solution" to the border crisis. They like the current chaos because they're getting tremendous political gains from it. They controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency in 2017 and 2018 and had campaigned on the border issue, but they didn't do much to solve it then, and they wouldn't now.
Sustainable immigration...I like it. In addition to the areas Noah covered, I'm also concerned that terrorists have been sneaking into the country through our porous border.
The largest groups of asylum seekers come from Central America and Venezuela, and the Ukraine war added Ukrainian and Russian asylum seekers. It's not just immigrants from Mexico, as it may have mainly been before.
Here in Texas, you see many nationalities now. Our strong job market is causing migrants from other states (such as Florida) to move here. I wonder if that is adding to the anti-immigration stance here.
You assert that it's *American's* asylum system that's broken, but isn't America simply following the Geneva convention? According to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees#:~:text=The%20Convention%20Relating%20to%20the,of%20nations%20that%20grant%20asylum. article 32 forbids the expulsion of asylum seekers.
I agree with you that the system is broken, but based on the above it appears that it's the *Geneva convention* that is broken which would suggest that the only way to fix it would be to renegotiate the geneva convention. I don't see how that happens?
You also argue that it's the *process* that's upsetting Americans, but how do you know it isn't the *numbers* that are upsetting Americans? Suppose Biden managed to force the passage of new funding/government positions that could ensure the rapid processing of asylum claims and the expulsion of those who were judged ineligible for asylum. This would perhaps decrease the number entering some. But would American's really be satisfied if a smaller but still substantial number of people were successfully imigrating as *rule following* asylum seekers? I speculate not, as this wouldn't eliminate the demand on state services and support for the immigrants.
The sentiment of US immigrants themselves being upset about illegal immigration is difficult for a liberal like me to hear, but important nonetheless. The 538 podcast recently interviewed some Hispanic and Turkish immigrants in California who said they were leaning trump bc they were upset about the border and said he would manage immigration better. It seemed insane and self-contradictory but this article sheds some light on it, makes a little more sense now