Floods, Invaders, and Parasites: Immigration Threat Narratives and Right-Wing Populism in the USA, UK and Australia

Abstract

In the last 20 years, industrialised Western nations have witnessed a marked increase in right-wing social movements and political parties. While the origins and agendas of these groups differ in important ways, all arose in a climate of intensifying globalisation. All arose in the context of a widespread embrace of multiculturalism and cultural diversity. And all are keenly focused on the perceived threats posed by immigration. This paper examines immigration threat narratives constructed by four of these groups: the British National Party, the One Nation Party, the Tea Party Patriots, and the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. Striking similarities in the narratives employed by these groups suggest the emergence of a transnational right-wing populist ‘playbook’. The paper further argues that even when the direct electoral impact of such groups is relatively small, they have the potential to substantially reshape broader political discourse and public policy.

Keywords:

• Culture
• Migration
• Racism
• Right-Wing Populism
• Multiculturalism
• Nationalism
• Threat Narratives
• Anti-Immigration
• Transnationalism

Notes

[1] Some commentators have called the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) ‘Britain's Tea Party’ (see Montgomerie 2014), and useful parallels can be drawn between UKIP and the TPP. For instance, both are critical of government overreach, although in quite different ways. While a central concern of the TPP is limiting the power of the federal government and increasing states’ rights, the central concern of UKIP is limiting the influence of the European Union over British affairs. In another significant difference, while the TPP strives to limit ‘big government’ social welfare programmes, UKIP claims its policies would help preserve and strengthen social welfare programmes such as healthcare, childcare, and public housing for citizens, and rejects the ‘back door privatization’ of such services (UKIP 2015). Due, in part, to UKIP's quite singular focus on Britain's withdrawal from the EU, we have not included it in our analysis here. Nonetheless, analysis of the group's discourses on immigration is a fruitful avenue of inquiry.

[2] In the May, 2015 national election, the BNP fielded eight parliamentary candidates, none of whom garnered more than one per cent of the vote. Despite its lack of electoral success, the party proclaimed victory for quashing a predicted Labour Party win in the election. ‘Even Labour insiders have confirmed that when stepped up in the last few days, the BNP's Punish Labour campaign had a devastating effect … MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!’ (BNP 2015).

[3] Amidst speculation about a come-back for One Nation, Pauline Hanson narrowly lost a Queensland state legislature election bid in 2015 (Brisbane Times 2015).

[4] While the household wealth of whites has dropped by about 16 per cent since the foreclosure crisis, it has dropped by 53 per cent among blacks and 66 per cent among Latinos (Parker and Schwartztol 2012). Moreover, white wealth levels have rebounded more quickly. The Pew Research Center finds that white household wealth has increased 20 times more than that of blacks and 18 times that of Latinos (Taylor et al. 2011).

[5] There are notable differences between American right-wing populist groups, which are typically highly critical of social welfare programmes and view many recipients of such programmes as ‘freeloaders’, and right-wing populist groups in nations such as the UK, Australia, Italy, and Finland where right-wing populists typically seek to preserve (or even expand) social welfare programmes for citizens. In nations with stronger welfare states, right-wing populists often frame immigration as a threat to necessary and beneficial social support programmes.

[6] Even when media coverage is critical of such groups, the coverage itself helps define the groups as newsworthy. Furthermore, critical and mocking coverage reinforces the right-wing populist claim that they are victimized by arrogant liberal elites.

[7] The number of Britons who believed there were ‘too many’ immigrants in Britain rose from less than 60 per cent in 1999 to 70 per cent in 2007; and in 2013, 77 per cent believed that immigration should be decreased. More dramatically, the number of Britons who saw immigration as one of the nation's most important issues increased from well under 10 per cent during most of the 1990s to a peak of 46 per cent in 2007, and has continued to remain around 40 per cent.

[8] Donald Trump's embrace of far-right populist and anti-immigrant rhetoric, and his early domination of other Republican candidates in the 2016 Presidential race, further demonstrate the influence the Tea Party has exerted over the GOP.