As liberal and left-liberal parties across the west become ever more hysterical in the wake of frequent electoral loses against a new brand of populism, something that could have become easily predictable decades ago seems to have caught liberals off guard. Whilst most people agree that hard working legal migrants to western countries would eventually become more confident and comfortable in their new homes with the passage of time, it was also assumed that such people would automatically gravitate towards liberal/left-liberal political parties should they ever seek to engage in politics.
And yet, such liberals negated to realise that whilst the second half of the 20th century saw ultra-social liberalism becoming increasingly normalised in the west, such a trend was almost totally confined to the west and the west alone. Throughout Asia and Africa, societies evolved in terms of economic development, post colonial political development and infrastructural development, but they tended to retain their traditional social values in the way that the west had generally done prior to the socially turbulent second half of the 20th century.
As such, it was always foolhardy to think that immigrants and the children of immigrants who had come from east-to-west would automatically gravitate towards liberal political parties of their new homes rather than to the more instinctively familiar socially conservative political parties of their new homes.
The issue is that like their conservative counterparts, liberals tended to view most Asian or African legal migrants as inherently disadvantaged. In a way this was true to a point because few people migrate from one hemisphere to another unless there is a dire economic need.
And yet, many of these immigrant families worked tirelessly to improve their material condition and as such many succeeded – some immensely. Once such immigrant families became more materially comfortable they sometimes become more interested in the politics of their new homes. It is at this point that the liberal or left-liberal politician arrives on the doorstep of the immigrant family expecting a cheery confirmation that he or she shall be receiving the vote of the immigrant family during the next election. The fact is that this assumption was false from the beginning and is becoming ever more false as time goes on.
Whilst it is true that parties on the traditional left (aka the old left) that appealed to the economic concerns of new(ish) immigrant families often won the votes of newly settled immigrants, as such immigrants became more economically successful over time, many followed the exact same political patterns of their indigenous neighbours: vote for the pro-poor party when one is poor and vote for the low tax party when one has become either economically comfortable or rich.
But whilst votes based on one’s clear economic interests are not surprising among any ethnic demographic, the social views of immigrants and the children of immigrants tell a different story. Whilst liberals and left-liberals have attempted to link their ever more extreme social agenda with policies that are allegedly supportive of newly settled families for decades, the fact is that there is no real linkage between the issues.
What is more crucial is that as the descendants of immigrants become more economically confident they tend to become more politically confident. When such political confidence grows many such descendants of immigrants tend to associate with political forces that are socially conservative or at minimum political forces that oppose the utter extremes of contemporary social liberalism.
This trend has in fact been going on for some time but it is only in recent years that celebrity figures and prominent politicians have arisen whose public presence has helped to illuminate this trend. Kathy Zhu for example is a young model whose parents came to the United States from China. She has gained notoriety as an active campaigner for Donald Trump. Another young American Andy Ngo was born to Vietnamese immigrants and he is also on the conservative end of US politics.
In Britain, Boris Johnson’s new Cabinet has been called the most right wing in decades but it is also incredibly ethnically diverse. Johnson’s Home Secretary Priti Patel of Ugandan-Indian heritage is for example in favour of bringing back hanging – a position generally seen as one on the traditional right wing of her Tory party.
These are just a handful of examples of the children of immigrants whose families went from east to west adopting either moderately or heavily socially conservative viewpoints in the context of western politics. This wider social trend is now reaching the top levels of politics and media and as a result, increasingly sectarian liberal parties are in panic mode.
This is not to say that no immigrants or children of immigrants are liberals – some are. But the fact of the matter is that as liberal social politics in the west becomes ever more sectarian, ever more in favour of a state which meddles constantly in the social lives of families and ever more in favour of adult sexuality transforming from a private to a public affair even when in the presence of children, something had to give. The liberals have only themselves to blame for alienating a class of people they traditionally courted.
Whilst a desire for economic opportunity and a desire to live without fear of the criminal element are colour blind phenomena, the ultra-social liberalism of today’s western liberal parties is clearly a white man and white woman’s game. Thus, it becomes clear that when it comes to maintaining moderate and conservative social values, immigrants from eastern societies have far more in common with western moderates and conservatives than such western moderates and conservatives have with the white liberals who are intent on destroying every form of traditional culture known to mankind.