I'm not a defender of mass immigration- in fact I find all arguments in favour of it (or just fatalistic about it) to be naive or well-intentioned non sequiturs.
Yet, I don't see how it is contributing to the decline of Europe, which is entirely endogenous- a product of Europe's fragmented history and culture. The only real macro impact of mass immigration is, for the time being, the discontent and slide towards populism that it fosters. But I'd be curious to hear what makes it one of the great problems of Europe now according to the author- the article doesn't even try to explain it.
I do not think it is fragmented culture either. There is no clear patter of bigger being better. I think it is complacency, bad government, and a decline in efficiency. I do agree it is endogenous.
It's cultural- European culture puts much more emphasis on safety and security and collective good vs individual freedom and reward. Plus it has sclerotic bureaucracies, and old nation-states that refuse to relinquish their power in favour of a collective entity- which results in a lot of uncoordinated or even adversarial actions. The collective entity finally might be even impossible given the linguistics and cultural differences between the various countries and the reciprocal, well entrenched distrust. All not necessarily in this order.
One per theory of mine is that immigrants actually might help breaking up this course of things: as people with no built up wealth and much less to lose, they might be willing to work harder and risk more; and they might be more indifferent towards the national stereotypes that are still a source of mistrust between europeans.
That culture varies a lot between countries, but they share a direction of travel.
a collective entity
IMO is likely to create more bureaucracy rather than less. I am convinced it is impossible without a common identity and culture.
immigrants actually might help breaking up this course of things: as people with no built up wealth and much less to lose, they might be willing to work harder and risk more
Possibly, but only the first generation. Not even them in countries (the UK does this, I am sure other countries do too) that strongly favour immigrants with money or who are highly skilled.
On the other hand, I think one of the advantages the US has over Europe is its ability to attract high skilled immigrants.
Comments
I'm not a defender of mass immigration- in fact I find all arguments in favour of it (or just fatalistic about it) to be naive or well-intentioned non sequiturs.
Yet, I don't see how it is contributing to the decline of Europe, which is entirely endogenous- a product of Europe's fragmented history and culture. The only real macro impact of mass immigration is, for the time being, the discontent and slide towards populism that it fosters. But I'd be curious to hear what makes it one of the great problems of Europe now according to the author- the article doesn't even try to explain it.
The author wants to blame immigrants.
I do not think it is fragmented culture either. There is no clear patter of bigger being better. I think it is complacency, bad government, and a decline in efficiency. I do agree it is endogenous.
It's cultural- European culture puts much more emphasis on safety and security and collective good vs individual freedom and reward. Plus it has sclerotic bureaucracies, and old nation-states that refuse to relinquish their power in favour of a collective entity- which results in a lot of uncoordinated or even adversarial actions. The collective entity finally might be even impossible given the linguistics and cultural differences between the various countries and the reciprocal, well entrenched distrust. All not necessarily in this order.
One per theory of mine is that immigrants actually might help breaking up this course of things: as people with no built up wealth and much less to lose, they might be willing to work harder and risk more; and they might be more indifferent towards the national stereotypes that are still a source of mistrust between europeans.
That culture varies a lot between countries, but they share a direction of travel.
IMO is likely to create more bureaucracy rather than less. I am convinced it is impossible without a common identity and culture.
Possibly, but only the first generation. Not even them in countries (the UK does this, I am sure other countries do too) that strongly favour immigrants with money or who are highly skilled.
On the other hand, I think one of the advantages the US has over Europe is its ability to attract high skilled immigrants.