Manufacturing the Migrant Threat: Race, Politics, and Human Rights

Human Rights Research Center
2 days ago
20 min read

June 10, 2025

"The scale of international migration has substantially increased in recent years and has become a truly global phenomenon with more than 280 million people estimated to live outside their country of origin." (Source: United Nations) — "The scale of international migration has substantially increased in recent years and has become a truly global phenomenon with more than 280 million people estimated to live outside their country of origin." (Source: **United Nations**)

Abstract

In this paper, I will examine how far-right political actors in Europe and the United States strategically manufacture anti-immigrant sentiment to garner electoral support through systematic fearmongering and racialization of migrants. Through comparative case studies of Muslim immigrants in Europe and Hispanic immigrants in the United States, I identify three primary mechanisms used to create perceived threats: cultural/social erosion, economic insecurity, and public safety concerns. Political figures such as Donald Trump, Viktor Orbán, and Marine Le Pen have effectively weaponized these narratives despite their lack of evidence. This paper reveals parallels in rhetorical strategies across both contexts while highlighting how specific historical and cultural circumstances shape local manifestations of anti-immigrant sentiment. This manufactured crisis has profound implications for democratic institutions, social cohesion, and multicultural values-but there are potential counter-strategies for promoting more inclusive societies.

Key themes: Immigration politics, far-right populism, xenophobia, political fearmongering, racialization

Introduction

From the United States’ Donald Trump to Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, the use of migrants to incite fear in a native population has been a major tactic for winning the hearts of the populists. Trump won two campaigns by creating a fear of social erosion and a sense of job insecurity in order to divide and halt our advances towards multiculturalism. In this paper, I will show how Muslim immigrants in Europe and Hispanic immigrants in the United States are racialized and othered by far-right actors to garner votes by fear mongering about social erosion, job insecurity, and portraying immigrants as criminals.

Literature Review

Populism, a policy approach used by leaders, parties, events, and movements, has become increasingly widespread in global politics (Moffitt, 2020). Populism stems from a general distaste against the “elite,” politicians and people in power who have been actively working “against the people.” Politicians, such as Trump, are self-proclaimed populists, acting as if they were ready to deliver people from oppression. Many populist politicians such as Trump, are the said “elites” themselves. Extremely divisive, destructive, populist rhetoric creates a general sense of distrust in pre-established structures and cultural norms. In an increasingly connected world, where borders and trade are open, multilingual communities and nations are upsizing, and international travel is the norm, far-right populism aims to prey on people’s fear of an unknown world.

The racialization of migrants into a single homogenous group allows for an easier ethnic divide for discrimination and distrust. Whiteness, in both European and American culture, is defined only in its relation to a constructed “us vs them” (Khoshneviss, 2019). After migrating to the US, Italians and Irish people faced discrimination fueled by the anti-Catholicism movement. However, it was discrimination against Black and Mexican Americans that became a more pervasive and lasting issue in American society. Irish and Italian Americans started to be considered as culturally “white” due to their economic advancement and difficulty in differentiating them from other white Europeans.

“Othering,” and scapegoating has always been a tactic used in politics when potentially effective in mobilizing a voter base. Assumptions about patriotism and citizenship are made about people based on their race as opposed to nationality. This ever-growing wave of populism has become extremely dangerous due to the racialization of minorities for political gain. The United States are built on multiculturalism and immigration. This anti-immigrant attitude is decimating the social culture and history of the United States.

Conservatism is a reactive force to two threats, real or imagined. Conservatives fear a secular humanity and the advancement of women and minority populations (Gonzales, Delgado, 2016). Far-right populists have learned how to capitalize on these fears and popular discontent. These fears can only hurt these countries on a global stage. In the growing body of literature on the winners and losers of globalization, losers of globalization tend to be older, rural, less educated, and work more physically laborious jobs. This group becomes more dependent on the government, has less contact with minorities, and is more susceptible to populist rhetoric.

Despite migrants' vital contributions to the economies of leading global nations, the narrative of threat to job security remains a powerful tool in anti-immigrant rhetoric. The underlying assumption positions migrants as competitors in the labor market, particularly for positions requiring lower educational qualifications (Ersanilli, Präg, 2023). However, this perception ignores the significant structural barriers immigrants face in achieving comparable labor market participation, including language barriers, credential recognition issues, and discriminatory hiring practices. Furthermore, when immigrants secure employment, they often accept wages significantly below market rates, limiting their economic mobility rather than creating genuine competition for native workers.

This is but a perceived economic threat (Gonzales, Delgado, 2016). This guise of ethnic competition and the rise of conspiracy theories in the mainstream political sphere have allowed theories such as the “Great Replacement” theory to proliferate. The Great Replacement theory is the claim that typically homogenous populations in European nations are being intentionally replaced by people of non-European origin, and it is typically propagated on the right (Ekman, 2022). This claim was not as prevalent in America, as the United States was founded on multiculturalism, but the rhetoric propagated during Trump’s election campaigns has popularized this theory. This coincides with the stereotype that minorities have a large number of children, typically much higher than the native population. This feeds into the irrational fear that white people will eventually become outnumbered or replaced.

Another false stereotype is that immigrants are dangerous criminals. While attacks by an ethnically native citizen are statistically more frequent than those by immigrants or minorities, instances of attacks by immigrants are blown out of proportion and widely spread in populist rhetoric. The notion that immigrants of color are dangerous is what has led to this harmful period of mass incarceration, deportation, and attacks against immigrants. Unfortunately, these lies have continued to be spread by politicians as a method for gaining votes.

Methodology

This study employs a comparative case study approach to examine the use of fear mongering tactics by far-right actors to racialize migrants and garner votes in two contexts: Muslim immigrants in Europe, and Hispanic immigrants in the United States. I will analyze the rhetoric and messaging used by key far-right actors, including politicians, parties, and campaign materials. I reviewed and analyzed speeches, campaign ads, party manifestos, and policy documents. I used thematic analysis and critical discourse analysis to identify common themes and patterns in the data. I conducted a comparative analysis to identify similarities and differences between the two cases. I selected these cases based on their relevance, comparability, and contextual differences. I acknowledge potential limitations, including bias in data selection and the challenges of analyzing complex political discourse. By using a systematic and transparent methodology, I aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of the tactics and themes used by far-right actors to fearmonger and racialize migrants.

Case Study 1: Muslim Immigrants in Europe

The 2015 European migrant crisis was a significant turning point in public sentiment towards immigration, leading to a steady decline in both public approval of immigrants and confidence in leadership's handling of migration policy. The predominantly Muslim background of these European migrants has become a point of tension in historically Christian European nations, fueling far-right rhetoric. This dynamic is exemplified by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's statement given at a political event held by the far-right Brothers of Italy, which echoes a recurring theme in contemporary far-right discourse on Muslim immigration (The Economic Times, 2023):

“I think there is a problem of compatibility between Islamic culture, or a certain interpretation of Islamic culture, and the rights and values of our civilization.”

Such rhetoric operates on multiple levels of othering— it positions Muslims and immigrants from Muslim-majority nations as inherently incompatible with European society, and constructs a binary between a supposedly “civilized” West and an implicitly “uncivilized” other. Meloni's strategic use of the term “civilization” reinforces a Eurocentric worldview that positions Western Christian culture as the benchmark of civilizational progress, while delegitimizing and marginalizing other cultural traditions.

While this sort of rhetoric has been growing quickly in many nations across Europe, there are a few actors that stand out as being the most overt in their anti-immigrant attitudes. The Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), a far-right, growing populist party in Germany, is known as being extremely anti-immigrant, particularly in regards to Muslim immigration. Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán, who has held office for almost 20 years, has brought the country into a historic new era of hostility towards immigrants. This hostility became even more visible during the 2015 migrant crisis and the resulting National Consultation campaign on “Illegal immigration and terrorism”(Bocskor, 2018). Similarly, Marine Le Pen, the leader of the right-wing populist party in France, National Rally, has furthered this idea of an incompatibility between Muslims and a traditionally catholic France (Rizakis, 2023).

These European politicians all utilize similar messaging. Themes include a cultural “invasion,” erosion of national identity, job losses, welfare-state threats, and security dangers. These threats are typically exaggerated or fabricated to create a sense of conflict and make people believe their party’s policies are the only option to keep the social fabric of a country intact.

Marine Le Pen received a lot of criticism after a 2010 speech, in which she related Muslims praying in the streets to the Nazi invasion of France (BBC News, 2015).

“For those who want to talk a lot about World War II, if it's about occupation, then we could also talk about it (Muslim prayers in the streets), because that is occupation of territory ... It is an occupation of sections of the territory, of districts in which religious laws apply ... There are of course no tanks, there are no soldiers, but it is nevertheless an occupation and it weighs heavily on local residents.”

A ban on praying on the streets of Paris angered many of the city's Muslims [Image credit: Getty Images 2011]

She later went to trial for these remarks, being accused of discrimination and violence towards a group of people because of their religious affiliation (BBC News, 2015). Much like Italian PM Giorgia Meloni, Le Pen has frequently cited Islam as not being compatible with the culture and people of a Christian Europe. By comparing Muslim prayer to a historically disastrous event, Le Pen heightens her followers’ sense of fear about the unknown. Even though the practicing Muslims may be French citizens, they are ostracized from their nation due to a fear of cultural change. Similarly, at a conference organized to evaluate the state of Hungary and its EU Presidency in January of this year, Orbán sums up this perceived threat of a cultural invasion by saying that “a centre of power can only be successful if the life of the state is based on a common identity: history, language, religion (Orbán, 2025).” Furthermore, in his speech at the Peace March in Budapest in 2024, he prides himself on his extremely anti-migration stance and his country’s consequential policies (Orbán, 2024):

“In good time we disconnected the Hungarian railway carriage from the pro-migration train, as it hurtled towards the abandonment of nations. Stop migration!”

Far-right actors employ multiple strategies of fear mongering, with economic and physical security threats being particularly potent. By portraying minorities as economic burdens who strain welfare systems and threaten job security, these politicians rally support through promises of asset protection. This is evident in AfD campaign materials with slogans like "turn off the welfare state magnet" and threats of deportation. However, the manufactured threat to physical safety, often specifically invoking the protection of children heightens emotional response the most. The AfD exemplifies this approach with inflammatory campaign posters that sensationalize criminal incidents, such as "Syrian with numerous criminal records kills 29-year-old German: thanks to CDU policy, the perpetrator was still here." Such messaging demonizes minority groups and undermines faith in existing political institutions, driving voters away from mainstream parties toward far-right alternatives that position themselves as society's sole protectors.

Many of these once peripheral far-right groups are starting to take the lead in mainstream governments and politics. The National Rally party of France, of which Marine le Pen was the head of from 2011-2021, was founded and known for its extreme anti-immigrant values, especially against immigrants from the Middle East and Africa (Bisserbe, 2025). While originally hailed as an extremely hateful and xenophobic group since its foundation by Marine Le Pen’s father, the Party rebranded and softened their stance while holding onto their anti-immigrant values. In the 2024 EU parliamentary elections, the National Rally won a total of 30 seats and 31.4% of the vote (Baxter, 2024). This is similar to recent victories of the AfD and the continued victories of Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán.

The far-right rhetoric employed by European leaders has had significant policy outcomes and electoral impacts. The perceived threat posed by Muslim immigration has led to border control and stricter asylum laws. As these policies have been implemented, there have been notable shifts in voting and public attitudes, with far-right parties gaining traction at the expense of mainstream counterparts. Ultimately, the rising tide of far-right sentiment has reshaped the European political landscape, with significant implications for the future of immigration policy and social cohesion.

Case Study 2: Hispanic Immigrants in the United States

The context surrounding Hispanic immigration in the United States is characterized by complex dynamics in immigration flows, labor markets, and public sentiment. Migration from Mexico to the United States has increased since the 1960s, but it declined substantially after 2008. In recent years, the narrative of a "Mexican immigration problem" in the United States has persisted despite objective evidence to the contrary (Escobar, 2022). Most undocumented immigrants arrive by air with temporary visas and fail to leave the country. The labor market has also undergone significant changes; Mexican workers were previously drawn to the booming construction sector in the early 2000s, which was severely impacted by the Great Recession (Escobar, 2022). The subsequent decline in Mexican migration was due to a lack of job opportunities, changing labor market conditions, and the rise of migrants from Central America. Public sentiment, meanwhile, has been shaped by the rhetoric of far-right populists, such as Donald Trump.

Donald Trump's 2016, 2020, and 2024 presidential campaigns were marked by potent anti-immigration rhetoric that helped galvanize support amongst his base. Trump's repeated emphasis on building a border wall and his warnings about the perceived threats posed by migrants resonated with many voters, particularly in key battleground states. As he boasted at the 2020 CPAC conference, "I could get elected twice over the wall," (The Marshall Project, 2024) highlighting his confidence in the electoral power of this issue.

Similar to the tactics of the European populists, three primary narratives have been used to whip up fear and anxiety among American citizens: economic insecurity, cultural dilution, crime, and national security. The claim that immigrants are "stealing our jobs" has been a longstanding trope, despite evidence suggesting that immigration has a net positive effect on the economy. This narrative is often accompanied by emotive language, such as Trump's assertion that "Under Border Czar Harris, our communities are being ravaged by migrant crime (The Marshall Project, 2024).” However, fact-checks have consistently shown that immigrants, both documented and undocumented, commit less crime than American Citizens (The Marshall Project, 2024). Research dating back to the 1870s has found that immigrants have lower crime rates than American citizens, debunking the myth that immigration is linked to higher crime rates.

Trump has also perpetuated the narrative that the border is "lawless" and that immigrants are responsible for a surge in crime, citing emotionally charged anecdotes such as the cases of Kate Steinle and Jamiel Shaw (The Marshall Project, 2024).

"Cases like Kate Steinle, murdered in San Francisco by a five-time deported illegal immigrant, or cases like Sarah Root… or my friend Jamiel Shaw who lost his incredible son..."

Trump claimed these cases prove that all undocumented immigrants are dangerous. However, these are mere anecdotes representing a small minority of immigrants used to create a false narrative about the relationship between immigration and crime (The Marshall Project, 2024).

Furthermore, Trump's characterization of Democrats as the "party of open borders, socialism, and crime, whether you like it or not" (Cillizza, 2018) is false, as the democratic party also enforces border laws in an attempt to reduce illegal crossings (The Marshall Project, 2024). This kind of rhetoric is designed to create a sense of fear and urgency among voters, and to portray immigrants as a threat to American values and way of life. This fearmongering aims to normalize anti-immigrant rhetoric and make policies such as family separation and mass deportation more palatable. By repeatedly using emotionally charged language and cherry-picked examples, Trump and other far-right activists have helped shift the window of acceptable discourse, contributing to a toxic climate that perpetuates fear and hostility towards immigrants.

The anti-immigrant rhetoric and policies implemented during the Trump administration have had significant outcomes such as the construction of a border wall, travel bans targeting predominantly Muslim countries, and increased Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Moreover, the administration's actions have been marked by controversy, including the recent instances of random deportations of migrants. An example of a controversial case is that of Cristian, a 20-year-old Venezuelan man who was deported to El Salvador despite having a pending asylum application. A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration had violated a 2019 settlement agreement in deporting Cristian, highlighting the administration's willingness to disregard established protocols and court orders in its pursuit of strict immigration enforcement (Kunzelman, 2025).

The electoral impact of Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric has been notable, particularly among key demographics. White working-class voters and other rural voters have been mobilized by the emphasis on border security and immigration control, contributing to electoral shifts in key battleground states. The success of this narrative in mobilizing support among these groups has helped to shape the broader electoral landscape, making immigration a central issue for voters. By tapping into anxieties about cultural identity, economic security, and national security, Trump and other far-right actors have been able to mobilize a significant segment of the electorate, with lasting consequences for the country's electoral dynamics.

Comparative Analysis

The cases of Muslim immigrants in Europe and Hispanic immigrants in the United States reveal similar rhetoric. The "us vs. them" framing is particularly prominent, with both European leaders and Trump consistently positioning immigrants as fundamental outsiders who cannot assimilate. This is evident in Meloni's assertion about the "incompatibility" of Islamic culture with European civilization, and Trump's characterization of immigrants as criminals and threats to American society. The rhetoric consistently creates polarization between a perceived pure, native population and a threatening "other."

Appeals to tradition and national greatness manifest in both contexts through references to cultural preservation and historical identity. European leaders emphasize Christian heritage and traditional values. Similarly, Trump's "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) campaign taps into nostalgia for an idealized past, suggesting that immigration threatens to erode traditional American values and society.

The historical and national contexts significantly shape how anti-immigrant rhetoric is adapted locally. Europe's response to Muslim immigration is heavily influenced by its historical Christian identity and the 2015 refugee crisis. In contrast, the U.S. context is shaped by its history as a nation of immigrants, leading Trump's rhetoric to focus more on economic and crime-related threats rather than outright cultural incompatibility. The irony of anti-immigrant sentiment in a nation built by immigrants creates a different dynamic than in European nations with longer histories of ethnic homogeneity.

Media ecosystems and social media play a role in both cases. The AfD uses Facebook posts and social media campaigns to spread anti-immigrant messages in Europe. Trump dominates traditional and social media platforms through provocative statements. Twitter (now X) has been particularly effective in spreading Trump’s rhetoric. The media landscape in each region has shaped how these messages are disseminated and received by the public.

The impact on multiculturalism and social cohesion has been notable in both contexts. The rise of far-right rhetoric has deepened societal divisions and challenged the very concept of a multicultural society. In Europe, this has manifested in increasingly restrictive immigration policies and growing support for far-right parties. In the United States, Trump's presidency has led to more polarized attitudes toward immigration and heightened tensions around racial and ethnic identity. Both cases demonstrate how anti-immigrant rhetoric can effectively undermine social cohesion and create lasting damage to multicultural ideals, leading to the erasure of genuine cultural diversity in favor of a culture rooted in anti-immigrant sentiment and fear.

Consequences and Implications

The success of far-right ideals in mobilizing anti-immigrant sentiment has yielded significant electoral victories for right-wing leaders around the globe. However, these short-term political gains come at substantial social costs. The normalization of xenophobic rhetoric has created deep societal fractures that may take generations to heal. This manufactured crisis has eroded trust in democratic institutions and damaged the social fabric in both European nations and the United States. The polarization created by this rhetoric extends beyond immigration issues, affecting everything from local community relations to international diplomatic ties.

As shown in both case studies, the legitimization of anti-immigrant sentiment has led to concrete policy changes that directly impact immigrants' lives, from Trump's family separation policies to Hungary's restrictive border controls. The constant portrayal of immigrants as threats has also contributed to increased discrimination, reduced access to social services, and heightened fear within immigrant communities. The racialization of migrants has created barriers to integration and social mobility, even for long-established immigrant communities and citizens with an immigrant heritage. The success of fear-based messaging has encouraged more extreme positions and further polarization in democratic systems.

Several counter-strategies emerge from this analysis. Fact-checking and myth-busting efforts, while important, have shown limited effectiveness against emotionally charged rhetoric. More promising approaches have emerged through the building of broad-based coalitions that unite diverse stakeholders around shared economic and social interests. There is potential in the development of inclusive narratives that emphasize the positive contributions of immigrants to host societies. Creating opportunities for direct interaction between native-born citizens and immigrant communities has shown efficacy in countering stereotypes and building understanding. The strengthening of democratic institutions and civil society organizations is crucial to resisting authoritarian tendencies. Furthermore, addressing legitimate concerns about integration and social change while rejecting xenophobic framing can be effective. Successful counter-strategies must go beyond mere fact-based rebuttals to address the underlying anxieties and social changes that make anti-immigrant rhetoric appealing in the first place. This requires a comprehensive approach that combines policy solutions with narrative strategies that can compete effectively with fear-based messaging.

Discussion

The systematic racialization of migrants and the strategic deployment of fearmongering tactics have become fundamental to far-right electoral success in both Europe and the United States. The false representation of migrants as a homogeneous threat, the exploitation of economic and cultural anxieties, and the strategic use of isolated incidents to promote broader anti-immigrant narratives emerged as themes in these cases. In both contexts, the movements of the far-right have successfully manufactured a migrant "crisis" through three primary mechanisms: the threat of social erosion, economic insecurity, and public safety concerns. The evidence from both Muslim immigrants in Europe and Hispanic immigrants in the United States shows how these manufactured threats, though often disconnected from empirical reality, have proven remarkably effective in mobilizing voters and shifting public discourse toward increasingly restrictive immigration policies.

Looking forward, this research suggests several critical areas for future investigation. There is a pressing need to better understand the long-term impacts of sustained anti-immigrant rhetoric on democratic institutions and social cohesion, particularly in historically multicultural societies. Future research should examine the effectiveness of various counter-narratives and strategies for rebuilding trust in multicultural democracy. Additionally, comparative studies across different regional contexts could help identify successful approaches to combating manufactured migrant threats while addressing legitimate concerns about integration and social change. The role of social media and evolving communication technologies in amplifying or countering anti-immigrant narratives also warrants further investigation. Understanding these dynamics will be crucial for developing effective strategies to protect democratic values and promote inclusive societies in an era of increasing global mobility and cultural exchange.

Glossary

Asylum: The protection granted by a nation to someone who has left their native country as a political refugee or is unable to return because of persecution.
Assimilate: To absorb or integrate into a dominant culture or society, often at the cost of one's original cultural identity.
Capitalize: To take the chance to gain advantage from; also, in finance, to provide a company with capital.
Comparative analysis: A research methodology that involves comparing and contrasting different phenomena, systems, or data sets to identify similarities, differences, or patterns.
Conspiracy theories: Explanations for an event or situation that invoke a conspiracy by powerful and sinister groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable.
Cultural identity: The sense of belonging or affiliation that individuals or groups have with a particular culture, often shaped by factors like history, language, or tradition.
Cultural norms: The shared expectations, values, or behaviors that are considered typical or acceptable within a particular culture or society.
Decimating: To kill, destroy, or remove a large proportion of.
Delegitimizing: To withdraw legitimate status or authority from (someone or something); to make (something) seem not valid or not deserving of respect.
Diplomatic: Of or concerning the profession, activity, or skill of managing international relations; often implies tact and sensitivity in dealing with others.
Documented (migrant): A migrant who has the necessary official documents, such as a visa, residence permit, or work permit, to legally enter, stay, or work in a country.
Empirical: Relating to or based on observation, experience, or evidence, rather than theory or ideology.
Eurocentric: Focusing on European culture or history to the exclusion of a wider view of the world; implicitly regarding European culture as preeminent.
Fabricated: Invented or concocted, typically with deceitful intent; made up.
Fearmongering: The act of deliberately spreading fear or alarm, often through exaggerated or false information, to influence public opinion or political decisions.
Globalization: The process of increasing global interconnectedness, driven by trade, technology, and cultural exchange, which can lead to the emergence of a global culture or economy.
Great Replacement Theory: A conspiracy theory that posits that certain populations (often white, native, or Western) are being deliberately replaced or undermined by other groups, often through immigration or demographic changes. This theory is widely regarded as unfounded and racist.
The Great Recession (United States): The severe economic downturn that occurred in the United States and globally between 2007 and 2009, triggered by a housing market bubble burst and financial crisis.
Homogenous (group, social group): A group that is uniform in composition or character, with little or no diversity in terms of factors like culture, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status.
Hostility: Unfriendliness or opposition; hostile behavior.
Legitimization: The process of making something (like a policy, ideology, or action) appear legitimate, valid, or justified, often through rhetorical or ideological means.
Manifestos: Written declarations or statements of intent, often issued by political parties, movements, or ideologies, outlining their goals, principles, or policies.
Market rates: The usual price charged for a good or service in a free market.
Methodology: A system of methods used in a particular area of study or activity.
Mobilized: (Of a country or its resources) To prepare and organize for active service or action. More broadly, to organize and encourage (a group of people) to take collective action in pursuit of a particular objective.
Multicultural: Relating to or characterized by the presence of many different cultures within a single society or community, often celebrating diversity and promoting inclusivity.
Native population: The original inhabitants of a particular region or country, as opposed to immigrant or settler populations.
Ostracized: Excluded from a society or group.
Polarization: The process by which individuals or groups become more extreme or entrenched in their views, often leading to increased conflict or division within a society.
Populism: A political ideology that emphasizes the needs and desires of the general population, often in opposition to the perceived elite or establishment. Populism can manifest on both the left and right of the political spectrum.
Potent: Having great power, influence, or effect.
Proliferation: The rapid increase or spread of something, such as ideas, technologies, or populations.
Racialization: The process by which certain characteristics, behaviors, or issues are attributed to race, often leading to the stereotyping or stigmatization of particular racial or ethnic groups.
Rebuttal: A refutation or contradiction; a response intended to disprove or counter an argument.
Rhetoric: The art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, often used to refer to language that is intended to influence or manipulate public opinion.
Secular: Denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis.
Secular humanity: A perspective or ideology that emphasizes human values, ethics, and dignity, separate from religious or supernatural considerations.
Sensationalize: (Of a newspaper, news report, etc.) To present information about (something) in a way that is intended to provoke public interest and excitement, often at the expense of accuracy.
Sentiment: A view or opinion that is held or expressed; in data analysis, often the emotional tone (positive, negative, neutral) in text.
Social cohesion: The extent of connectedness and solidarity among groups in a society, involving shared values, reduced disparities, and a sense of belonging.
Social erosion: The gradual decline or weakening of social structures, institutions, or norms, often due4 to factors like economic pressure, cultural changes, or political instability.
Systematic: Done or acting according to a fixed plan or system; methodical.
Thematic analysis: A qualitative research method that involves identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns (themes) within data, often textual.
Undocumented (migrant): A migrant who lacks the necessary official documents, such as a visa, residence permit, or work permit, to legally enter, stay, or work in a country, often leading to precarious or vulnerable living conditions.
Xenophobia: An intense or irrational fear or dislike of people from other countries or cultures, often manifesting in hostility towards immigrants or foreign influences.

References

Baxter, T. (2024, September 19). The National Rally's electoral success. American University. https://www.american.edu/sis/centers/transatlantic-policy/articles/20240919-the-national-rallys-electoral-success.cfm
BBC News. (2015, October 20). France: Marine Le Pen goes on trial over Muslim remarks. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34580169
Bisserbe, N. (2025). Jean-Marie Le Pen, far-right French firebrand politician, dies at 96: He co-founded what became France's biggest opposition party, National Rally, rooted in deep anti-immigrant sentiment. Dow Jones & Company Inc.
Bocskor, Á. (2018). Anti-immigration discourses in Hungary during the 'crisis' year: The Orbán government's 'national consultation' campaign of 2015. Sociology, 52(3), 551-568.
Cillizza, Chris. “The 46 Most Outrageous Lines from Donald Trump’s Campaign Rally in Missouri | CNN Politics.” CNN, Cable News Network, 2 Nov. 2018, www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/politics/trump-missouri-speech.
Ekman, M. (2022). The great replacement: Strategic mainstreaming of far-right conspiracy claims. Convergence, 28(4), 1127-1143.
Ersanilli, E., & Präg, P. (2023). Fixed-term work contracts and anti-immigration attitudes: A novel test of ethnic competition theory. Socio-Economic Review, 21(1), 293-318.
Escobar Latapí, A., & Masferrer, C. (2022). Migration between Mexico and the United States IMISCOE regional reader. Springer International Publishing.
Gonzales, M. G., & Delgado, R. (2016). The politics of fear: How Republicans use money, race, and the media to win. Routledge.
Khoshneviss, H. (2019). The inferior white: Politics and practices of racialization of people from the Middle East in the US. Ethnicities, 19(1), 117-135.
Kunzelman, M. (2025, April 24). Trump administration violated a 2019 settlement in deporting a Venezuelan man to El Salvador, judge rules. PBS. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-administration-violated-a-2019-settlement-in-deporting-a-venezuelan-man-to-el-salvador-judge-rules
Moffitt, B. (2020). Populism. Polity Press.
Orbán, Viktor. “Speech by Prime Minister Victor Orbán at the ‘Peace March’ .” Viktor Orbán, 2 June 2024, miniszterelnok.hu/en/speech-by-prime-minister-victor-orban-at-the-peace-march/.
Orbán, Viktor. “Speech by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán at a Conference Organised to Evaluate Hungary’s EU Presidency.” Viktor Orbán, 22 Jan. 2025, miniszterelnok.hu/en/speech-by-prime-minister-viktor-orban-at-a-conference-organised-to-evaluate-hungarys-eu-presidency/
Rizakis, M. (2023). Battling to dominate the discursive terrain: How Marine Le Pen and Emmanuel Macron have framed terrorist incidents on Twitter. French Politics, 21(1), 47-80.
The Marshall Project. (2024, October 21). Fact-checking thousands of Trump's quotes about immigrants. https://www.themarshallproject.org/2024/10/21/fact-check-12000-trump-statements-immigrants
“No Place for Islamic Culture in Europe, Says Italy’s Giorgia Meloni at Far Right Event.” (2023, December 18) The Economic Times, economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/italy-pm-giorgia-meloni-makes-loaded-comment-on-islam-at-far-right-event/articleshow/106079509.cms?from=mdr.