The Moral Problem of Mass Migration

Governments have a duty to help genuine refugees but owe it to their citizens to repel invasions

There is no doubt that the global phenomenon of mass migration, often downplayed or ignored by government officials and the media, is one of the most divisive political issues of our time.

According to the most recent United Nations International Migrant Stock report, as of 2024 there are approximately 304 million international migrants worldwide, representing about 3.7% of the global population.

This figure has nearly DOUBLED from 154 million in 1990, when migrants made up 2.9% of the world’s population.

International law distinguishes between economic migrants (those voluntarily seeking a better life in another country) and refugees (those fleeing from war or national disasters).

Yet the two groups are often deliberately jumbled together in public discussions.

In fact, as of the most recent United Nations (UNHCR) data, by late 2024 there were approximately 42.7 million legally recognized refugees worldwide. This means that legal refugees and asylum seekers make up only 14% of the estimated 304 million international migrants globally.

The overwhelming majority, or 85%, are economic migrants, often young men of military age, seeking better opportunities outside their own countries.

For Christians and all people of good will, the immigration issue is particularly fraught with moral and political complexities.

The authoritative Catechism of the Catholic Church, which lumps refugees and economic migrants under the common term “foreigner,” urges compassion but recognizes that civil society has a right and obligation to regulate immigration for the common good.

“Prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin,” the Catechism proclaims, in a paragraph of only 129 words. “Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions (CCC 2241).”

By that measure, Americans (as do the people of many other western nations) have plenty to do caring for our own citizens.

An estimated 500,000 Americans are now homeless, sleeping on hot air grates in freezing weather.

According to the U.S. Census, 21.2% of all American children (or 15.3 million kids) live below the poverty line — 1 in every 5 American children.

At least 40,000 Americans die every year of an opioid overdose.

Fully half of all Americans have no more than $10,000 saved for retirement – and will be forced to survive on less than $2,000 per month.

Beyond this, many ordinary citizens in North America and Europe are beginning to recognize and question the ideology behind global mass migration – the assumption among politicians and corporate CEOs that human beings are simply interchangeable economic units that large multinational corporations can import and export the way they do silicon wafers and steel.

For these critics, the issues involved in mass migration go beyond merely economic considerations.

They also include fundamental questions about the nature of democratic government, the role of language and culture in public life, and the kinds of societies people wish to live in.

Millions of people in North America and in Europe believe that politicians and corporations simply imposed mass migration on local populations without their knowledge or consent.

As the common slogan puts it, “We were never asked.”

This is the origin of the idea of a Great Replacement — that is, a deliberate attempt by left-wing politicians and CEOs to flood western nations with tens of millions of migrants both for cheap labor and to bolster the political prospects of some political parties.

For example, the 2021 Census confirms that only about 36.8% of London’s population now identifies as “White Native British” (White: English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British”). The vast majority of the population is now made up of migrants or the children of migrants.

The are parts of London that now look more like Islamabad than the England of old, with the majority of the women wearing head to heel burkas.

At the same time, London has seen an explosion in violent and sexual crime.

The Great Replacement as “Far Right” Conspiracy Theory

Despite this, many in the media and government dismiss the idea of a Great Replacement as a “far right” conspiracy theory.

The push for mass immigration is not, they insist, a far-left plot to destroy western nations with waves of impoverished foreigners from the Third World. 

Rather, globalism is the result of specific, usually well-meaning policies adopted in the wake of World War II – free trade agreements and changes in immigration laws. Nevertheless, these policies ended up serving the interests primarily of large multi-national corporations, not those of the citizens of the various countries involved.

Yet whatever you call it — the Great Replacement or “accidental” waves of Third World migrants flooding western nations — over the past decade or two, the people in western countries have finally awoken to this reality… and they don’t like it. 

They now suspect that the policies that led to this massive demographic shift, almost always adopted without their knowledge or consent, have caused more harm than good to local communities. 

The importation of hundreds of thousands of Arab workers into Denmark in the 1970s helped neither the immigrants nor the Danes, creating instead continuing ethnic conflict, skyrocketing crime and urban ghettoes. 

The same is true in Sweden, Germany, France, and Britain.   The immigrants complain of being second-class citizens, the native Europeans of the disappearance of their common culture.   

Overwhelming Backlash Against Unrestricted Migration

Critics argue that mass immigration and the ideology of multiculturalism encourages the formation of parallel societies, undermining shared values and national identity.

The policy is said to exonerate immigrants from integrating, leading to social isolation, economic marginalization, and, in some cases, radicalization and crime.

Cardinal Sarah, a leading African prelate and former Prefect of the Congregation (now Dicastery) for Divine Worship, is one of the most outspoken Catholic critics of mass migration into Europe.

He warns that relentless migration threatens Europe’s Christian patrimony and social cohesion, describing mass migration as a form of “new slavery” that exploits vulnerable people and undermines both migrants and host societies.

Sarah has condemned those who promote mass migration without prudence, arguing that it rarely benefits all parties and often leads to isolation, dependency, and tragic loss of life

Most recent large-scale polls show the majority of Western Europeans do not support current or increased levels of immigration — especially from non-European, developing countries.

A recent Euronews poll found that fully 71% of respondents across Europe believe that strengthening border controls to combat irregular migration should be a priority in coming years, with the strongest support for such measures found in Poland (86%), Bulgaria (83%), and Finland (83%). 

In famously tolerant Denmark, now pursuing a “zero asylum” policy under a left-wing government, only one-third of respondents (34%) support welcoming more immigrants.

The resurgence of nationalism and populism across Europe and North America is not an outbreak of fascism, as far-left political parties predictably claim, but of democracy itself.

Nationalism is a popular citizen revolt against policies that serve the interests primarily of wealthy elites and multinational corporations, not the interests of ordinary citizens.

Robert J. Hutchinson writes about ideas and current affairs at www.DisputedQuestions.com.  He is the author of Searching for Jesus:  New Discoveries in the Quest for Jesus of Nazareth.