The politics of immigration has returned in recent months — and returned with a depth of feeling that suggests it never truly went away. It’s always there, lingering just beneath the surface of Western societies, waiting to be tapped into by politicians skilful (or brazen) enough to harness its power.So Donald Trump went to the 2024 presidential election excoriating his predecessor’s record on immigration and for “losing control” of the southern border control; by contrast, <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/12/29/mass-deportation-immigration-history-00195729">he promised</a> the “largest deportation operation in American history”. In mid-September, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2025/sep/13/aerial-footage-shows-scale-of-unite-the-kingdom-rally-video">as many as 150,000 people</a> took to the streets in central London as part of the “Unite the Kingdom” rally organised by far-right activist Tommy Robinson. Demonstrators wrapped themselves in the Union Jack, waved St George’s flag and held aloft wooden crosses amid calls for “remigration” and other forms of mass deportation.Closer to home, also in August and September, a series of “March for Australia” demonstrations took place across Australia’s major cities against <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/religion/re-emergence-of-race-and-white-nationalism-in-australia/105750476">“mass migration”</a> as the root of any number of social and economic problems: from housing shortages, food prices and traffic congestion to increased levels of social division and a declining sense of national “identity”.And as is invariably the case, there are politicians prepared to make the most of the social ferment. Leaving aside the surge in support for Nigel Farage’s anti-immigration Reform UK party, we can point to Senator Jacinta Nampijimpa Price’s <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-08/hawke-nampijinpa-price-apologise-indian-australians/105747484">recent comments about Indian migrants</a> and Liberal MP Andrew Hastie’s blunt identification of <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DO-SA2ZkWeH/?hl=en">post-pandemic immigration levels as</a> “the real reason you can’t afford a home”.Conservative political parties across Western democracies have “won” the debate over “border control”. It has been the clear intention of centre-left parties to neutralise the politics of “irregular arrivals”. What’s left, then, is the debate over multiculturalism and levels of immigration.And yet this is dangerous political terrain. For however much researchers point to the economic benefits of immigration, or the lack of clear connection between international student numbers and rising house prices, or the historic success of Australia’s bipartisan commitment to multiculturalism, “fact-checking” cannot touch the underlying emotions to which anti-immigration rhetoric appeals. Moreover, one of the reasons anti-immigration rhetoric is so successful is the fact it is at once parasitic and opportunistic. As social researcher <a href="https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/economy/2025/10/04/everything-thats-wrong-with-this-immigration-debate">Rebecca Huntley recently put it</a>, “Whatever the top anxiety people have at any one time, they will graft an anxiety about immigration on it.”Given the affective dimension of both social cohesion and anti-immigration rhetoric, is there a way of appealing to political emotions as a way of addressing these anxieties without giving way to their more insidious expressions?

Podurama

Home

Trending

Personal

Your Podcasts

New Episodes

My Files

Favourite Episodes

Tags (Folders)

Recently Played

Bookmarks

Followed Playlists

What role should emotion play in the fraught politics of immigration?

The Minefield

AI Chapters

AI Insights

Reviews