The Effect of Welfare on Muslim Immigration

unnamed (30)

By Counter Jihad, April 1, 2016:

When asked to explain why radical Islamic violence occurs at a much higher rate in Europe than in America, activist Ann Corcoran says that there is only one difference.  “They have been seeing the colonization longer and [thus] the percentage of the Muslim population is higher than ours is here in America.”

There is another difference, however, which explains why not all of Europe has been seeing immigration by Muslim refugees at the same rate.  In Spain, the only Western European country that was once ruled by a caliphate, the mass immigration is not occurring.  This is because Spain, which has a high native unemployment rate, is treating its own citizens as the priority for government aid.

An estimated 98% of Syrian refugees move on to other European countries, Francisco Cansino the director of Spanish Refugee Aid Commission in Malaga says.  “They don’t stay. They leave because they think their chances are better in other countries. They ask to leave the same day they arrive. They say they have relatives in Europe,” Cansino added.

Refugees at the CEAR center in Malaga complain about the lack of benefits for refugees in Spain and say that asylum processing times are much longer than in other European countries. Some of them say that staying in Spain would mean being jobless (Spain has over a 25% unemployment rate) and being left without hope for a better future.

In the United States, by contrast, refugees are being assisted in laying claim to generous welfare benefits.  According to a government report, nearly four in ten are enrolled in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program alone.  Among immigrants from Latin America, though many are quite poor when they arrive, the rate is below ten percent.  Among immigrants from Southeast Asia, it is even lower than that.

Nor is it only TANF.  More than three quarters are enrolled in Medicaid.  More than a third are enrolled in Supplemental Security Income.  Nearly ninety percent are on food stamps.

Corcoran is aware of the degree to which we are electing to support immigrant populations in preference to native-born citizens.  The figures have increased substantially since she compiled a report on the subject in 2013.  Federal contractors who manage the refugee program are clearly involved in making sure that refugees from Muslim countries are especially well-insulated from the American economy.

The result of these kind of policies in Europe has been to nurture the jihad, according to the Gatestone institue. These policies slow or stop the process of assimilation, making recruiting easier among a population that remains separated by culture and language from its host.  Welfare transfer payments also give radicals time to recruit and train instead of seeking work.

Even where immigration is acceptable to a host nation’s citizenry, outcomes for immigrants and refugees are ultimately worse because they remain culturally isolated.  They are slower to learn the local language, slower to integrate, and more exposed to radical elements recruiting among them.  The danger only grows worse among their children, as second-generation Muslim immigrants have proven especially susceptible to radicalization.  Where the immigration of refugees is taken to be the answer, it must be done in a context of not settling them in to live off the public dole.  They need to be integrated and assimilated, and that means being exposed to the need to work in the regular economy.

2 thoughts on “The Effect of Welfare on Muslim Immigration

  1. Sorry, they missed one important difference. The 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution. No jihad when you are afraid of being ventilated.

  2. One more:
    “The Effect of Welfare on Muslim Immigration”
    The article SHOULD BE “THE EFFECT ON WELFARE OF MUSLIM IMMIGRATION”
    answer: bankruptcy of the Welfare system that was created to be a TEMPORARY help up, instead of what it IS, a permanent life-style!

Comments are closed.