.jpg)
In today's interconnected world, ideational influences are increasingly crossing national borders, shaping political and social movements in complex ways. This blog post focuses on anti-immigration sentiments, summarising key insights from the Norwegian case study component of the project ‘Mobilization against Migration in Europe’ (MAM). By investigating 1) the shared curriculum of left- and right-wing anti-immigration actors, 2) the convergence of anti-globalism among radical actors across the political spectrum, and 3) the weak yet impactful transnational ties among far-right groups, we shed light on the ways in which global influences permeate the formation and articulation of anti-immigration ideologies in Norway (also touching on the case of Germany). The research explores the intertwined dynamics of localised political agendas and transnational influences and reveals the intellectual ecosystems that drive contemporary anti-immigration rhetoric. Here, I unpack these themes to better grasp how ideas propagate and transform within and across societies, challenging conventional notions of inward-looking nationalism.
Ideational influences across national borders
Based on interviews with 27 Norwegian anti-immigration actors from various political spectrums, my research posit that anti-immigrant sentiments, although focused on preserving the nation-state, often draw on global influences. I identify two main types of influences, namely ‘enlightening sources of information’ such as books and media platforms, both mainstream and alternative, and ‘exemplary entities’ like foreign policies, politicians and critical events.
Many anti-immigration actors share a view of themselves as ‘victims of political censorship,’ and make references to academic literature that is sometimes described as representing a contrast to more ‘politically correct’ research. These ‘enlightening sources of information’ include well-respected and mainstream scholars – such as Francis Fukuyama and Jonathan Haidt – whereas a couple of far-right actors are also inspired by clearly more controversial and far right authors – such as Renaud Camus. Common for both right-and left-wing actors is their susceptibility to writings by academic or political authors who criticise multiculturalism or the influence of Islam in society. These authors might be akin to what Finlayson describes as 'ideological entrepreneurs'—academic writers or intellectuals leveraging their position and media platforms to critique multiculturalism.
Ideological entrepreneurs disseminate their views both in books and online magazines. Examples include the conservative magazine The Spectator and its editor Douglas Murray (who have also authored many bestselling books), along with more left-leaning writers like Yascha Mounk, who in addition to writing books edits the online magazine Persuasion. Mounk and Murray are both in opposition to the ‘New Class’ of academics and bureaucrats who they define as ‘Cultural Marxists’. They unite a broad range of readers across different ideological leanings, and like many other ideological entrepreneurs, they are particularly widely read.
In contrast, I find less commonality across the political spectrum when it comes to the foreign news- or alternative media they follow. More specifically, there are similarities in terms of the ideological content they are drawn to, but divergence in their preferred media outlets' extent of 'alternativeness' (i.e. the rhetoric used and the frequency of non-mainstream and counterculture content). In addition to reading books, journalists writing for anti-immigration alternative media are inspired by similar ‘alternative’ news outlets in other countries, and specifically those that focus on the ‘problem of mass immigration’ which has been identified as a common driver for right-wing alternative media. Nevertheless, even moderate individuals peruse platforms that could be categorised as 'anti-woke' or similar. Consequently, my examination of online platforms frequented by anti-immigration actors provides evidence supporting Finlayson's concept of ‘the recirculation of political ideas and arguments, traversing various contexts,’ and underscores the erosion of ‘boundaries between and within ideologies´.
Politicians abroad, especially from the Republican US, are ‘exemplary entities’ that also inspire anti-immigration actors. Here, Donald Trump is recurrently mentioned by far-right interviewees, while moderate right-wing actors admire Republican politics more generally (albeit not necessarily Trump). Left-wing immigration critics state their preference for Denmark’s strict immigration policies, and especially those by Prime Minister Mette Fredriksen, who is occasionally also mentioned by some far-right actors. Sweden’s long-time liberal policies and current multicultural crises serve as negative inspirations for both left- and right-wing (or moderate) anti-immigration actors. Events like the fatwa against Salman Rushdie and the Charlie Hebdo attack are seen as manifestations of the danger of multiculturalism.
Anti-globalism among radical anti-immigration actors
Building on the interviews mentioned above, Kristin Brastad Dammen and I found a surprising similarity in anti-globalism frames among both far-right and far-left anti-immigration actors, though this overlap has nuances tied to their ideological distinctions. Instead of attributing this convergence solely to the horseshoe theory of politics, which oversimplifies these dynamics, we juxtapose radical and moderate actors' frames to identify nuanced differences.
While it's generally believed that the right is more prone to anti-immigration views due to perceptions of immigrants as 'other,' our study shows that anti-immigration sentiments exist on the left as well. Left-wing actors may reject immigration due to concerns about inequality and cultural differences, despite their emphasis on egalitarianism.
Interviews with moderate (mainstream) actors show that they are not anti-globalist, but nationalist in the sense that they support policies that advocate for cohesion, stability, and that minimise the impact of migration. This seems to reflect their own political convictions rather than result from a 'mainstreaming' of far-right influences. Contrary to traditional right-left frameworks, the primary conflict around immigration management is found between radical and mainstream actors. Both far-right and far-left radicals are anti-globalist, challenging mainstream views on global cooperation in migration management. They share populist features, contrasting ordinary people with corrupt global elites who facilitate high immigration rates and cultural mixing, while protecting themselves from its impacts.
However, we also find differences between the radicals: far-right actors see the 2015 immigration flow as a democratic turning point, while far-left actors identify the 2008 financial crisis as particularly pivotal. Their frames differ culturally and economically: the far-right focuses on cultural concerns like the growing Muslim population, while the far-left emphasises economic downgrading of native workers and 'brain drain' (or high skill migration) from third world countries. While both sides are anti-globalist and nationalist, collaboration on these issues is unlikely. Their frames complement rather than oppose each other, reflecting their distinct yet sometimes overlapping critiques of globalisation.
Our findings support contemporary theories about a new transnational cleavage around values – along the GAL-TAN axis (green-alternative-libertarian as opposed to traditional-authoritarian-nationalist). Immigration, integration, and trade challenging national states may mark a crucial juncture in Europe's political development focusing on safeguarding national ways of life from external actors like migrants. We find that this cleavage and cultural backlash are not solely defined by the radical right, but also find resonance among certain factions of the radical left. This new cleavage has weakened the importance of the left-right divide, since today the most ‘heated political issues’ in contemporary societies are cultural, including immigration, border control and Islamic-related terrorism.
Far-right transnationalism
Research underscores the significance of far-right transnationalism in ideology and practice, but there's a lack of comprehensive analysis on how far-right actors perceive their transnational activities like party exchanges, protests, or online communication. Exploring transnationalism in Norway and Germany, Manès Weisskircher and I found that the so-called 'transnationalisation of nationalism' is limited in practice. Interviews in Germany and Norway reveal that while far-right 'nationalists' often support transnational activities, only a few of them actively engage. They find these practices useful for strategic learning, networking, and as a means to showcase collective strength, but they also express concerns about being associated with extremist organisations and conflicts due to incompatible differences. Most transnational ties are 'weak,' with sporadic interactions rather than sustained contact. According to Granovetter’s theory, weak ties, characterised by less frequent and less intense interactions, can still facilitate the rapid spread of ideas and increased frequency and number of contacts.
Despite limited transnational engagement, the potential for strategic learning, demonstrating strength, and networking enabled by transnational practices reinforces far-right collective identities beyond nationalism. These weak ties are important because they interlink practices and ideas, contributing to a stronger far-right European identity without necessarily implying close and sustained face-to-face contact.
Conclusion
Contemporary Norwegian anti-immigration actors are outward-looking nationalists who intertwine local and global ideational influences as they formulate their rhetoric. We see a clear pattern where Norwegian anti-immigration actors draw inspiration from a diverse array of international sources, something which underscores the need to move beyond simplistic frameworks and acknowledge the complex, transnational nature of anti-immigration ideologies. The convergence of anti-globalism among both far-right and far-left actors further illustrates how traditional political divides are being reconfigured in the face of shared global threat scenarios among fringe actors. Finally, although remaining weak and infrequent in contacts, transnational ties among far-right groups still play a crucial role in spreading ideas and strengthening collective identities across the Atlantic. As we continue to explore these dynamics, it becomes evident that understanding the flow of ideas across borders is essential for comprehending modern political landscapes.
