Is immigration bad for the economy and culture? Only for Vox and Alianza

BarcelonaThe delegation of immigration powers to the Generalitat has brought the issue of immigration back to the table – if it has ever left the public debate. Beyond the questions of jurisdiction and law, from who is responsible for deciding the type of immigration policies to how they are going to be applied, the issue stands out once again for its political logic. In almost all European countries, to a greater or lesser extent, the radical populist right-wing parties (those that in popular language are often known as "the extreme right") have changed the game board. Their entry into parliaments, initially seen as a temporary phenomenon, has ended up consolidating, with a good part of the countries cursing and debating whether it is convenient to contain them (applying, if necessary, cordons sanitaires) or whether other collaborative or confrontational strategies are more effective to recover or win a certain number of voters.

If we look at the evolution of political families in recent decades, the European radical populist right has achieved a new milestone: for the first time in recent history it is the most voted political family, slightly above the conservative and social democratic families, which until recently had dominated a good part of the electoral contests. Where has its support come from? Although with state particularities, the flows show us a clear pattern: the radical populist right has fished mainly from traditional right-wing parties (4 out of 10 voters), left-wing parties (2 out of 10) and abstentionists (25%).

As political scientists Catherine de Vries and Sara Hobolt have studied, immigration is a "divisive issue", a political question that cuts across a large part of political parties and has the potential to create divisions between and within parties. By putting it on the table, radical populist right-wing parties have "won" the issue, made it their own, and created a certain reputation among many voters who are the ones who best manage the issue. It is worth clarifying that this is a perception, which does not mean that it is associated with reality, but it leads to a logic of message: after all, who do voters think of when immigration is discussed? Beyond the reputational issue, in our country these parties (and discourses) have the potential to grow because they exploit the dilemma of a large part of the citizenry about the impact that immigration can have in economic or cultural terms.

According to the available surveys, on average Catalan society considers that the immigrant population has positive effects on the cultural and economic life of the country, especially in the latter aspect. These two dimensions, culture and economy, are key to understanding the rejection or acceptance of newcomers. If you want to make immigration policies, it is not the same if the reaction against newcomers is due to a cultural or economic issue (or both at the same time). In a series of experiments carried out by the Center for Opinion Studies at the end of 2024, it is observed that, on average, the Catalan population gives a similar weight to both dimensions. However, and this is where much of the crux of the matter lies, there are important differences depending on political affiliation. Thus, for example, voters of Vox and Aliança Catalana give greater importance to immigration adapting to the host culture. On the other hand, voters of ERC, Junts and CUP have a more civicThat is, they generally believe that the host culture is important, even though the origin is not so important.

The importance given to the cultural aspect and the importance given to the economic aspect are highly correlated, but there are important nuances. First, there is a more positive assessment of the economic impact of immigration, especially among the most undecided electorate (with a significant relative weight in Junts and the PSC). Second, despite the high average values, there is nearly a third of the electorate that gives greater importance to culture or the economy. For example, 35% of the voters of the Comuns believe that immigration does not necessarily enrich the country economically, but, on the other hand, their view of the cultural impact is more positive. The opposite occurs among the voters of Junts and, to a lesser extent, among those of the PSC: while its cultural contribution is perceived as more doubtful, its economic contribution is seen as valuable.

This preference structure leaves room for parties like Vox or Aliança Catalana, which can put the emphasis on cultural or economic issues depending on the moment and create a dilemma for voters of other parties. In addition, they can also direct criticism at the parties that govern and have governed on an important front: although there are certain differences between left and right, the opinion that there is too much immigration, and that the government has lost control of who enters our country, is the majority opinion in broad layers of the population and, in fact, this has been the message with which Juntos.

The curious graph of the week

Friends of friends

Have you ever wondered whether you have the same number of male and female friends (or vice versa)? Segregation in social networks has often been a topic of interest among social scientists, since they can be a good reflection of existing gender discrimination. However, measuring it has always been difficult. A new paper, written by researchers from Meta and NYU, has attempted to put numbers on it: the ratio of male and female friends that a person has on Facebook and Instagram, weighted by the quantity and frequency of interactions. The data from Catalonia reveal that, among the five closest ties, a man has, on average, 57% of his female friends. When we look at the 25 closest friendships, the segregation increases. The paper also shows that in Catalonia, gender segregation in friendships is greater than in the European environment.