#Spain Immigration Policy

[wavevisa001]

Spain to Grant Residency and Work Permits to 900,000 Migrants by 2027: A Life-Changing Opportunity.

Highlights of Spain’s Residency and Work Permit Scheme

900,000 permits by 2027: The Spanish government plans to issue approximately 300,000 permits annually, starting from May 2025.

Flexible options: Migrants can register as salaried workers or self-employed, catering to a wide range of professional backgrounds.

Simplified application process: Streamlined procedures will make it easier to secure residency and work permits.

Job Seeker Visa extended: The validity of Spain’s Job Seeker Visa has been extended to one year, offering more flexibility for applicants.

Why Spain is Welcoming More Migrants

Spain faces a significant labor shortage, requiring approximately 250,000 workers to sustain its economy. Industries across the country are struggling to fill critical positions, creating immense opportunities for skilled and unskilled workers alike.

Between January and November 2024, Spain welcomed over 54,000 migrants, yet the demand for workers remains high. This new policy is designed to fill the gap while supporting migrants with a clear pathway to residency and employment.

Benefits for Undocumented Migrants

The policy will particularly benefit undocumented migrants from countries like:

Algeria

Morocco

Mali

Syria

Afghanistan

Italy

By legalizing their status, these individuals can contribute to the economy and integrate into Spanish society more effectively.

How to Take Advantage of This Opportunity

Under the new scheme, migrants can choose to work as salaried employees or start their own businesses. This flexibility is ideal for professionals, entrepreneurs, and individuals with diverse skill sets.

The streamlined application process ensures faster approvals, making it easier than ever to live and work legally in Spain.

How Wave Visas Immigration Can Help

Navigating immigration policies can be overwhelming, but Wave Visas Immigration simplifies the process for you. Our team of experts is dedicated to helping you secure your residency and work permit in Spain.

Our services include:

Eligibility assessment: Determine if you qualify under Spain’s new policy.

Application assistance: Ensure your documents and application meet all requirements.

Job Seeker Visa support: Get step-by-step guidance on applying for and maximizing your Job Seeker Visa.

Post-arrival assistance: Navigate your new life in Spain with confidence.

Why Choose Wave Visas Immigration?

Proven expertise in immigration services.

Personalized support tailored to your needs.

A track record of helping migrants achieve their dreams of living and working abroad.

Start Your Journey to Spain Today

Don’t miss out on this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to live and work in Spain. With Wave Visas Immigration, you’ll have the support and guidance you need every step of the way.

Contact us now to learn more about Spain’s new residency and work permit scheme and begin your journey toward a brighter future!

Corporate Office : 2nd Floor, Right Side, Building №5, Kehar Singh Estate Westend Marg, Lane №2, Saidulajab, Saket New Delhi 110030

[trendynewsnow]

Spain Legalizes Residency for 900,000 Undocumented Migrants to Address Labor Shortage

Spain’s Bold Move to Legalize Undocumented Migrants In a significant policy shift, Spain has announced plans to provide residency and work permits to approximately 900,000 undocumented migrants within the next three years. This initiative aims to address a growing labor shortage in the country, even as many other European nations adopt stricter immigration policies. The new regulations are set to…

[head-post]

Spain’s PM praises migration benefits as European neighbours tighten borders

Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez announced measures to facilitate the settlement of immigrants in Spain, arguing in favour of migration and its economic benefits, Reuters reported.

[Immigration is] not just a question of humanitarianism…, it’s also necessary for the prosperity of our economy and the sustainability of the welfare state. The key is in managing it well.

To stop illegal migrants, Germany, Slovakia and Hungary reintroduced temporary border controls. Meanwhile, France says it is considering similar steps, whereas Italy is seeking to set up detention camps in non-EU Albania for migrants picked up at sea.

Facilitation initiatives included recognising academic qualifications for temporary workers, simplifying contracts under a new labour migration programme and cutting red tape when applying for residence permits, Sánchez stated.

Skilled migrants from Latin America are boosting Spain’s economy. They fill labour shortages in technology and hospitality sectors.

However, Sánchez went further, saying that low-skilled migrants also contributed to the economy by working in “invisible jobs.” Without them, construction, agriculture and the hotel industry would collapse, the prime minister emphasised.

Meanwhile, elsewhere in the EU, sentiment is becoming increasingly hostile to migration. Ahead of next week’s summit, 17 EU member states called on the European Commission last week to tighten EU rules on returning irregular migrants to their home countries.

However, even in Spain, anti-immigrant sentiment is growing. A recent poll published by the newspaper El País showed that 57 per cent believed that there were too many immigrants in the country.

Member of the Congress of Deputies of Spain, Santiago Abascal, said that migration led to an increase in violent crime and overburdened social services.

They tell us that there is a need for immigrant labour, but they hide from us that young Spanish workers often have to leave Spain to make ends meet.

Sánchez said only 6 per cent of migrants entered Spain illegally, with most arriving by sea from West Africa via the Canary Islands. According to the Interior Ministry, some 30,808 migrants arrived in the Canary Islands by sea on unreliable fishing boats in the first nine months of 2024.

The right wants the navy to stop helping shipwrecks and dedicate itself to sinking them. Sending frigates against boats is just that.

Read more HERE

[probablyasocialecologist]

Adopting rightwing policies on issues such as immigration and the economy does not help centre-left parties win votes, according to new analysis of European electoral and polling data. Faced with a 20-year decline in their vote share, accompanied by rising support for the right, far right and sometimes the far left, social democratic parties across Europe have increasingly sought salvation by moving towards the political centre. However the analysis, published on Wednesday, shows that centre-left parties promising, for example, to be tough on immigration or unrelenting on public spending are both unlikely to attract potential voters on the right, and risk alienating existing progressive supporters.

[...]

One of the key lessons was that “trying to imitate rightwing positions is just not a successful strategy for the left”, he said. Two studies in particular, looking at so-called welfare chauvinism and fiscal policy, illustrated the point, the researchers said. Björn Bremer of the Central European University in Vienna said a survey in Spain, Italy, the UK and Germany and larger datasets from 12 EU countries showed that since the financial crisis of 2008, “fiscal orthodoxy” had been a vote loser for the centre left. “Social democratic parties that have backed austerity fail to win the support of voters worried about public debt, and lose the backing of those who oppose austerity,” Bremer said. “Centre-left parties that actually impose austerity lose votes.”

[...]

The data strongly suggests centre-left parties can build a coalition of voters who believe a strong welfare state, effective public services and real investment, for example in the green transition, are essential,” Bremer said. “But doing the opposite – offering a contradictory programme that promotes austerity but promises to protect public services and the welfare state, and hoping voters will swallow such fairytales – failed in the 2010s, and is likely to fail again.” Similarly, said Matthias Enggist of the University of Lausanne, analysis of data from eight European countries showed no evidence that welfare chauvinism – broadly, restricting immigrants’ access to welfare – was a successful strategy for the left.

[mariacallous]

Europe’s center of political gravity is veering to the right.

Center-right and far-right parties are set to take the largest number of seats in Sunday’s European Union election in the most populous nations: Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Poland.

France led the rightward lurch with such a crushing victory for the far-right National Rally that liberal President Emmanuel Macron dissolved France’s parliament and called an early election. Early results suggested the National Rally would win some 32 percent of the vote, more than twice that of the president’s party.

“The president of the Republic cannot remain deaf to the message sent this evening by the people of France,” National Rally’s President Jordan Bardella told his supporters at the Parc Floral in Paris.

In Germany, the center-right is cruising to a comfortable victory, with the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) coming second and beating Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Socialists into third place.

Voters across 27 nations have voted over the past week to select 720 members of the European Parliament, who will serve over the next five years. Their first main role with be to approve or reject the main candidate for Europe’s top job: president of the European Commission.

In a Continent that has sought to exorcise the ghosts of fascism for eight decades, the scale of the presence of far-right will be one of the hottest topics of conversation.

Even though they are highly unlikely to be able to coordinate as a unified group inside the European Parliament — thanks to divisions on topics such as Russia — they will still be able to influence the overall direction of the EU, on everything from immigration to climate policies.   

Collected together, the radical right parties would theoretically represent the second biggest bloc in the Parliament — being on track to come first in France and Italy, and second in Germany, the three biggest and most important countries in the 27-nation bloc. In Italy, Giorgia Meloni’s right-wing party secured the most support, projected to be about 28 percent.

The far-right is also expected to win in Hungary, and picked up five more seats in the Netherlands. The center-right was comfortably first in Greece and Bulgaria.

The single most ominous warning signal for the future of the EU is France, given the scale of the far right’s win over Macron. All eyes will now be on whether France’s populist wave can maintain its momentum through the impending parliamentary elections and on to presidential elections in 2027 — where a victory for far-right leader Marine Le Pen would threaten to throw the whole EU into turmoil.

The official winner of the evening looks set to be European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen whose center-right European People’s Party will still make up the single-biggest bloc in Parliament. 

With early projections showing the EPP will secure about 181 out of the 720 seats in Parliament, the center right will be the dominant force but can hardly govern alone as it will be miles from an absolute majority in the chamber.

The main challenge for von der Leyen in the coming days and weeks will be whether she can strike a deal with the traditional centrist parties — the socialists and liberals — to build a majority of 361 or more in the Parliament.

“Today is a good day for [the] EPP. We won the European elections, my friends. We are the strongest party, we are the anchor of stability … Together with others we will build a bastion against the extremes from the left and from the right. We will stop them!”

Her supporters replied with chants of “Five more years.”

In all, the three big center groups look set to have just over 400 seats. That means von der Leyen’s reapproval will go down to the wire, because she will be rejected if only about 10 percent of lawmakers from the main parties rebel against their party lines. The rebellion rate is normally higher.

This raises a big question of whether she will need to fish around for other allies, ranging from the Greens to Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s right-wing Brothers of Italy.

Von der Leyen’s center-right is quick to reject the xenophobia and euroskepticism of the far right, but it knows its voters share the same concerns on the cost of living, migration and a sense that Europe’s traditional core businesses — manufacturing and farming — are being strangled by green regulation.

Staking out its ground in the culture war over the EU’s identity, the EPP opened its EU election manifesto with its commitment to Europe’s “Judeo-Christian roots.”

[beautiful-basque-country]

Btw, A question that always puzzles me about Spain's politics. Why is Madrid despite being a big city and the capital so conservative?

Are they from upper class? Is there some weird exceptions, like demographics not being as diverse as other areas?

Kaixo anon!

Tank you for sending in such an interesting question! I've read a bit online because that was something I also ignored, and allegedly, these are the reasons:

1) Madrid suffered a great repression when fascist troops eventually entered the city: executions, missing people, and lots of (mostly) leftist people fleeing the capital. Many properties of the losing side were expropriated and given to members of the winning side, and it was repopulated by fascist supporters from other areas who were awarded a place to live in the capital. Also all the army officials and new government workers, wherever they came from, ended in Madrid. All of them fascists or ideologically close to fascism.

2) After decades of conservative policies and ongoing destruction of the public healthcare and education system, middle and lower classes are convinced private schools and doctors are better. And classism comes to play: many (not wealthy) parents send their kids to private schools to avoid immigrants' kids and poor people in general. If the kid doesn't perform well enough at the SAT to get accepted in a public uni, a private university won't be too picky and maybe they'll meet important people. It's all classism and a mirage of belonging to a higher class, so they vote as if they actually were wealthy.

3) Speaking of classism: as an immigrant, you'll get an instant residence permit if you invest 500,000€ in the city or more. So there are lots of immigrants that vote for PP and Vox: they're wealthy af immigrants, not workers. Those ones aren't as easily welcome.

4) Madrid is sort of a tax haven for companies: many of them, born and made big in other regions, move to Madrid to pay less taxes, and to avoid to pay their debts to the government of their region of origin. This means that big fortunes and companies are settled there, voting for their best interests.

So... Yeah, quite understandable after all this, right?

[etirabys]

argentina

Here is my story of Argentina. My credentials are that I have I spent the first three hours of my flight to Argentina reading its Wikipedia page plus followup google search results.

Argentina was rich. Then it became poor for no clear reason. It could become very rich again.

Let’s start with the last one.

Argentina is a major agricultural exporter that’s not even tapping its full biocapacity. Without making any prescriptive statements about whether they should, it’s descriptively true that they could be leaning on their natural resources much harder than they currently are.

The wind potential of the Patagonia region (southern third of Argentina) could in theory provide enough electricity to sustain a country five times more populous. But the infrastructure isn’t there to pipe it where it needs to go. Argentina is very urbanized, with 92% of its population in cities. (This is actually weird – if you look at countries ordered by urbanization, you get a bunch of tiny or fake countries like Bermuda or Macau, and then central category member countries like Uruguay, Israel, Argentina, and Japan.)

Argentina had a pretty good nuclear program. Decent record as a locus of scientific progress despite all the political problems and crumbling infrastructure. It’s got a high literacy rate.

It kind of reminds me of... (person who's only been to 7 cities voice) Berkeley?

Okay. Now let’s skip back to 1861. Argentina has won independence from the Spanish Empire. It’s about to get very Italian in here.

At time of independence, Argentina had the familiar-looking South American mix of white+native+black. But soon after independence the state started (0) genociding/expanding into the south (1) enacting liberal economic policies, and (2) encouraging European immigration. Italians liked this idea for some reason, so today, 60% of Argentinians are full or part Italian.

This wave of immigration changed Argentinian society enormously. In this period, Argentina became very wealthy and productive. In 1910 it was the seventh richest country in the world.

Twenty years later, dissatisfaction over the Great Depression fueled a coup and kicked off 50-70 years of political instability.

I like this graph. Look at the Y axis values – this is a log graph.

I have no clean explanation for what happened, but I can at least describe what happened after 1930.

In between coups, Argentina stays neutral in both world wars up until the US pressured it into declaring war on the Axis Powers in 1945. But then the Europe part of WWII ended a month later, so they probably didn't have to do too much. In 1946, Peron takes power.

(Sidenote: why did so many Nazis famously flee to Argentina? Argentina had lots of German immigrants & close ties to Germany. Peron, who'd found Hitler's ideology appealing since he was a military attaché in Italy during WWII, straight out ordered diplomats and intelligence officers to establish escape routes for Nazis, especially those with military/technical expertise.)

I still don’t know much about Peron. There's the socialist stuff: nationalized a lot of industries and improved working conditions. There's the dictator stuff: beating up and firing people to bring them into line, including university teachers (of course) and union leaders that Peron didn't like. He was really liked for a while, and then very disliked, and got exiled to Spain after a decade of rule.

Then there's a phase where no one manages to rule successfully, in part because getting approved by both Peronists and anti-Peronists is hard. This 1955-2003 phase reminds me a lot of Korean history around the same time – lots of military coups and assassinations and journalists getting tortured. Whenever I hit this phase in a country's Wikipedia page it just reads like TV static, interchangeable variable names swinging in and out of scope... even though there's got to be more than that.

When I first started reading about US Republicans and Democrats I got really confused because either they had 0 major differences or 70. Now that I've been in the States for a decade I have a sense for what major visions and underlying values differences they have, but it'd be hard to explain succinctly or in a way that other people will agree with. So something like that has to have been going on with various flavors of anti, sub, and classic Peronism that’s inscrutable to an outsider who’s spending 3 hours on learning about this.

At some point, comically, Peron comes back, wins an election with his wife as vie president, and dies of a heart attack. His wife takes power and does things like empowering the secret police to destroy her enemies, but girlbosses too close to the sun and is ousted after a year.

All this turmoil flattens out somewhat in 2003. I have no idea what went right. They tried Peronism! They tried anti-Peronism! They tried leftist terrorism and rightist terrorism! They tried OG Peron again! They tried Peron's third wife! They tried nationalization and privatization! They tried protectionism and not-protectionism!

Nestor Kirchner, whose rule coincided with the improvement, had "neo-Keynesian" policies, but who knows if that was it. He didn't run for reelection but said "try my wife, she'll do fine", and so she won the next cycle. Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner did well enough that she was reelected. People didn’t like her successor and brought her back as a vice president, but there were what sound like normal-for-South-America levels of corruption scandals during much of her time in office, and last month she was sentenced to six years in prison and a lifetime ban from holding public office.

I have a number of hypotheses as to why Argentina crashed so hard when it had and has so many prerequisites for success, and they all sound stupid when I write them out, so I won’t. But I will gesture at my confusion and amazement.

[wherelibertydwells]

The most popular host in US cable news history, Tucker Carlson has released the first episode of his new show since his April 24 firing from Fox News. The episode, which for now appears exclusively on Twitter, immediately went viral, having been seen by millions.

The reaction from the corporate media, which often struggle to attract a fraction of that audience, was as predictable as it was negative. CNN expressed that he "has given voice to some of the most extreme ideas in right-wing politics".

The Washington Post called him a "far-right pundit" whose monologue was "tinged with conspiratorial thinking and drenched in disdain by other media and political figures".

The Guardian claimed, without evidence, that the episode was "received with widespread derision" and seemed particularly upset that he "insulted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky".

However, if someone stops to see what he said, he will realize that the terms "left" and "right" have lost their meaning in US discourse, becoming just labels used to stigmatize dissidents.

Calling someone an "extreme right" no longer reveals almost anything about their convictions. Carlson's debut monologue focused almost entirely on the proxy war in Ukraine, waged by the US and NATO against Russia. The Ukrainian war effort is being armed and funded by the US and its Western allies and is the CIA's top priority.

Carlson opposed US involvement from the beginning. In his debut monologue on Twitter, he once again questioned the policy of fueling a war involving the US and Russia, owners of the largest nuclear stocks on the planet; expressed skepticism about Ukrainian claims that it was Russia that blew up the Kakhovka dam , citing numerous examples where Ukraine lied in similar situations, such as when it accused Russia of blowing up the pipeline itself or of being behind the drone strikes against the Kremlin; and recalled that the greatest advocates of this war are the same neoconservatives who falsely told the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

This stance of opposition to the US/NATO war puts Carlson on the same side as people like Noam Chomsky, an icon of the global left, from important sectors of left parties in Germany, Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy; the African National Congress in South Africa; the president of Mexico, the leftist Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador; and, in Brazil, Lula.

If Carlson, therefore, is in agreement with much of the global left, how can he be characterized as an "extreme right" ? It is clear that this term had its meaning completely emptied, starting to be used against anyone who differs from the neoliberal consensus of the West in relation to wars, espionage, censorship and the economic guidelines of the so-called Washington Consensus.

By far what most marks Carlson's work over the last six years is the extreme skepticism, and sometimes disdain, with which he treats America's main institutions of power. Its most frequent targets have been the CIA, the FBI, the NSA (National Security Agency), the corporate media, big tech.

He waged a two-year crusade in favor of pardoning Julian Assange, whom he treats as a hero, in yet another point of convergence with Lula and the international left.

These perspectives, central to Carlson's worldview, are closely associated with the classical left. I felt so comfortable appearing on Carlson's Fox show because the targets of his fiercest criticism are precisely the intelligence agencies and neoliberal institutions that I have denounced in my journalistic career. Carlson's show was one of the few places on US television where this kind of opposition could be heard.

There are, of course, several disagreements between Carlson and most progressives. He is a vehement opponent of illegal immigration and the use of medication and surgery for trans minors, for example.

At the same time, progressive stars like Senator Bernie Sanders and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez voted to authorize $40 billion to fuel the war in Ukraine and rarely, if ever, express skepticism about the claims of the CIA or the Pentagon.

Carlson is far from a leftist, but there is no world in which he and his core views can be defined as "extreme right", except a world in which that term is just a weaponized instrument to stigmatize dissent from established dogma.

Labeling someone the extreme right today is not about ideology, but only serves to coerce anyone who expresses skepticism about the policies of the US military-industrial complex.

Glenn Greenwald

[thecpdiary]

The Unseen Costs of Brexit

Brexit has undeniably altered the UK’s relationship with the EU and had significant consequences on various aspects of daily life, from travel and living abroad to education and employment opportunities. Through writing, I focus on the points that drive home the message of the tangible impacts of Brexit and the need for progressive leadership.

A Call for Change Brexit was sold as a move to reclaim sovereignty and control, but the reality for many has been a profound loss. As we navigate the aftermath, it becomes increasingly clear that the promises made have led to unforeseen consequences for all citizens.

Political Reaction

Immigration became a central issue in political debates. Parties and movements advocating for Brexit, such as the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and the Leave campaign, capitalised on public concerns about immigration. They argued that leaving the EU would allow the UK to regain control over its borders and immigration policy.

Loss of Freedom to Travel and Live Abroad

The ability to travel and live freely across EU countries has been curtailed. For many, this has meant giving up dreams of retiring in sunny Spain, pursuing careers in cosmopolitan cities like Paris or Berlin, or even just experiencing the richness of European cultures firsthand. Travel Restrictions

Visa requirements and limited stays in EU countries have replaced our previously seamless travel experience.

Relocation Barriers

Moving abroad now involves complex immigration processes, impacting those who once planned to retire, study or work in the EU. Education and Employment Opportunities

Younger generations, who were just beginning to explore their futures, have been particularly hard hit. The opportunities to study, live, and work in the EU, which were once easily accessible, have become complicated and prohibitively expensive. Erasmus Withdrawal

Students have lost access to the Erasmus+ programme, which provided opportunities to study across Europe, enriching their academic and cultural experiences.

Job Market Challenges

Employment in the EU now comes with additional hurdles, limiting career prospects that were once easily accessible and attainable. Economic and Social Impact

Brexit’s economic fallout has led to job losses and business closures. The promise of newfound economic prosperity seems hollow as industries struggle and communities face financial uncertainty. Trade Barriers

New tariffs and regulations have disrupted supply chains, increased costs and have created many challenges for businesses, especially small enterprises.

Social Division

The referendum and its aftermath have deepened societal divisions, with communities becoming polarised and national discourse often mired in conflict. Politicians' Disconnect

While many politicians who championed Brexit continue to lead comfortable lives, still enjoying the benefits of EU residency or citizenship, ordinary citizens are now facing the brunt of the fallout. The Hypocrisy of Brexit

David Cameron, Nigel Farage, and Boris Johnson who appear to remain unaffected, highlighting a glaring disparity between the rhetoric used to amass votes, and the reality for the average person. There is a growing need to hold leaders accountable for the promises made versus the outcomes delivered. A Call to Action: Make Your Vote Count

As we approach the General Election, it is crucial to advocate for politicians who recognise the damage done and are willing to pursue policies that can repair and rebuild our connections with the EU. We need leaders with vision and a commitment to reversing the detrimental impacts of Brexit. Support Forward-Thinking Leaders

Choose candidates who are focused on restoring opportunities, enhancing economic stability and fostering unity both within the UK and with our European neighbours; advocate for policies that will ease travel, education and employment barriers, ensuring that future generations do not miss out on the opportunities we have taken for granted. Brexit has undoubtedly changed the landscape of the UK. By voting and demanding accountability, we can strive towards a future that reclaims the lost freedoms and opportunities, ensuring a brighter and more inclusive path moving forward. This approach underscores the concrete impacts of Brexit while appealing to a sense of agency and the need for action, encouraging us to vote for much needed change in the upcoming election.

Informed Writing for Democracy I hope my efforts to write about these issues will contribute to a more informed electorate. Writing about important topics can inform and educate the public, which is essential for a healthy democracy. By sharing my perspectives and insights, I aim to spark conversations, challenge prevailing narratives and encourage others to think critically about the issues that matter when choosing the party they vote for.

For more relatable, inspirational and lifestyle blogs, please check out my site https://www.thecpdiary.com

[tmarshconnors]

Macron Calls Snap Election 2024

The political landscape of Europe has been rocked by a seismic shift as French President Emmanuel Macron calls for snap elections. This move comes amid a significant surge in support for far-right parties, particularly Marine Le Pen's National Rally, which has made historic gains in the recent European elections. Macron's decision underscores a palpable sense of urgency and perhaps even nervousness within the centrist camp, as the far-right momentum shows no signs of abating.

A Nervous Macron

Emmanuel Macron, who swept into power in 2017 with promises of reform and rejuvenation for France, now finds himself in a precarious position. The rise of far-right sentiment across Europe, and particularly in France, has posed a direct challenge to his presidency. The recent European elections highlighted this shift, with Marine Le Pen's National Rally securing a significant share of the vote, reflecting widespread discontent with Macron's policies.

The decision to call snap elections can be seen as a strategic move by Macron to consolidate his position and rally his base. However, it also reveals a recognition of the growing power and influence of the far-right, an influence that can no longer be ignored or underestimated.

The Surge of the Far-Right

Marine Le Pen's National Rally has capitalised on a variety of issues that resonate deeply with many French citizens. Concerns about immigration, national identity, and economic stability have all played into the hands of the far-right. Le Pen's party, with its nationalist and anti-immigration stance, has struck a chord with voters who feel left behind by globalisation and disillusioned by the traditional political elite. It's important to clarify that the term "far right" does NOT automatically equate to being a Nazism. The far right encompasses a broad spectrum of ideologies, ranging from conservative to extreme nationalist positions.

The recent European elections were a testament to this growing support. The National Rally's historic gains are not just a reflection of discontent with Macron but also a broader trend across Europe, where far-right parties are gaining traction. Countries like Italy, Germany, and Spain are witnessing similar surges, indicating a continental shift towards right-wing populism. I wish here in my own country the United Kingdom we had such a surge of wisdom. 

The Immigration Debate

One of the most contentious issues fuelling the rise of the far-right in France is immigration. Macron's policies have been criticised by many as being too lenient, leading to perceptions of increased crime and social unrest. This narrative has been effectively leveraged by Le Pen and her party to galvanise support. They argue that Macron's government has failed to protect French identity and values, allowing immigrants to "run rampant" across the country.

This rhetoric has found a receptive audience, particularly in regions hit hardest by economic stagnation and social change. The fear and frustration of these communities have translated into votes for the National Rally, further eroding Macron's support base.

The Road Ahead

As France heads towards snap elections, the stakes could not be higher. Macron faces the daunting task of reclaiming the trust of a divided nation while countering the growing influence of the far-right. His ability to address the concerns of ordinary French citizens, particularly around issues of immigration and national identity, will be crucial.

Marine Le Pen and the National Rally will continue to push their agenda, buoyed by their recent successes. The upcoming elections will serve as a critical juncture for France, determining whether the country will continue on its current path or take a decisive turn towards the right.

The call for snap elections by Emmanuel Macron is a clear indicator of the shifting political dynamics in France and Europe. The rise of the far-right, driven by issues like immigration and national identity, presents a formidable challenge to the established political order.

As the election date approaches, all eyes will be on France to see how this pivotal moment unfolds. I’m throwing my full support behind Marine Le Pen in the 2024 French election. Her vision for national sovereignty, stricter immigration policies, and economic reform is what France needs for a stronger future.

[female-malice]

ik you're not our secretary but to make myself clear: i am not stating Spain didn't influence latino colorism and racism. It is obvious they did, 500 years of colonization are no joke. I'm saying that the USA also influences how we view race due to its closeness and its pervasiveness. Both systems are anti-black and discriminatory towards indigenous people but who gets to be "white" differs. I'm saying that nowadays who gets to be "white" is dictated by usian standards, not by spanish ones.

The spanish caste system wasnt based on genetics or our modern view of race, they thought you could change color depending on what you ate. The modern category of race was invented somewhere in the XIX Century and the categorization of race based on heritage (genetics) "how many parents and grandparents are white/black" was invented by usians. This is more or less the current view we also have of race as latinos too. Before there wasn't a clear cut link between genetics and physionomy because those didnt exist, and nowadays those concepts are key when discussing race.

Which actually gives you a point: Spain and LatAm aren't interchangeable and "hispanic" is a dumb category. Brazilians and Colombians have more in common than Colombians and Spaniards.

"The modern category of race was invented somewhere in the XIX Century and the categorization of race based on heritage (genetics) "how many parents and grandparents are white/black" was invented by usians"

The US did not invent casta. That entire thing was based on "how many parents and grandparents are white/black."

Spanish/Portuguese colonial status quo was defined by strictly controlled racial integration. English/Dutch colonial status quo was defined by strictly controlled racial segregation. Interracial sex was taboo in English/Dutch colonies but widespread in Spanish/Portuguese colonies. This is the main difference in historical race relations.

In the 20th century, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay had open immigration policies that attracted Europeans. Most white Latinos are descendants of 20th century European immigrants. Most white people in the US and Canada are descendants of European settlers who came here in the 1700s. While Southern European colonists were intermarrying, Northern European colonists were mostly inbreeding the entire time.

20th century US conceptions of race were not defined by TV executives or modeling agencies. They were defined by Teddy Roosevelt, the most influential macho figure in US culture. He did not invent US imperialism of Latin America for economic reasons. He invented it for race reasons. Teddy could've economically exploited Canada. But according to Teddy, it isn't right for white people to exploit each other. And Teddy believed Latin America needed to have a white overlord. It didn't matter how Spanish or indigenous anyone was because in Teddy's worldview, Spaniards were not white.

Teddy's racial pseudoscience is influential but not eternal. Italian Americans managed to change their racial social status from brown to white. Maybe US Latinos want to be like Italian Americans and break out of the racial category Teddy assigned them. But I don't think that's politically possible at the moment. Race is not how you identify. Race is how society identifies you. It's about creating an other in order to define who belongs in society and who doesn't. Southern Europeans were able to become white in the US because the Cold War ended. Americans no longer needed to define themselves in opposition to the peasants that introduced unions to the US. Now, US society defines itself in opposition to Latino immigrants. Every piece of US policy comes back to that from housing and infrastructure to the war in Ukraine.

[beardedmrbean]

The new government's programme includes the introduction of a citizenship test as part of its plans to tighten the requirements for obtaining Finnish citizenship or permanent residence in Finland.

In its programme for government published last month, Finland's right-wing ruling coalition said it plans to introduce a citizenship test as part of efforts to tighten rules around the granting of permanent residence and citizenship permits.

"Passing a citizenship test and a language test will be made a requirement for naturalisation," the programme states.

The Finnish citizenship test will be modelled on similar evaluations used in other European countries.

Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns) told Yle that her ministry has started work on drafting the citizenship test, but the process will take time.

Examples from across Europe

Among the EU's 27 countries, nearly half — or 13 — currently have a citizenship test. They include the Netherlands, Spain, Greece, Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, France, Germany, Denmark, Czech Republic, Hungary and Estonia.

In addition, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein — which are not members of the EU but are part of the Schengen area — also have a citizenship test.

In general, the tests feature questions about the history, culture, society and population of the host country. The assessments may also ask about living in a democracy and other aspects of a particular country's politics, such as in Estonia and Greece, or about the country's national anthem, as in Latvia.

In each country, the test is organised by an official body.

Rantanen previously told tabloid Ilta-Sanomat that the exams could be organised by community colleges, for example.

From multiple choice quizzes to interviews

In an interview with Yle soon after taking office, Rantanen said that her ministry will perform a "u-turn" on immigration and refugee policies during her term, and she reiterated that position this week.

"I am glad that we are reaching the pan-Nordic level, and that we will not be the only country in the Nordic region with lax rules," she said.

Among the Nordic countries, the citizenship test is used in Denmark and Norway.

The Danish test has 45 multiple-choice questions about the country's society, culture and history — 35 of which are based on provided study material while 5 questions deal with topical issues taken from Danish media and politics. There are also five questions on Danish values.

At least 36 correct answers are needed in order to pass the Danish test. In addition, they must correctly answer at least four of the 10 questions that are not included in the study material.

The citizenship test in Norway has 36 questions, of which 24 must be correct. Norwegian authorities also offer the option of completing a social studies course (75 hours) with a final exam in Norwegian.

Luxembourg also provides the option of taking a social studies course instead of the citizenship test.

In Slovakia, there is no formal citizenship test but the required language test does ask basic information about the country.

Study material helps participants

In almost every European country where a citizenship test is mandatory, participants are provided with study material.

In Spain, the test consists of 25 multiple-choice questions selected from a list of 300, which can be practised in advance with an app.

The tests are also often multiple-choice, although one notable exception to this is France, where the 'test' is conducted as an interview.

In Europe, the citizenship test is often multiple-choice, but one exception is France, where the exam is conducted as an interview. Study material is also provided.

In addition to the citizenship test, each country has other conditions which must be met if the applicant is to receive citizenship or a permanent residence permit — such as a certain income threshold.

Although Austria has no citizenship exam, people applying for citizenship or permanent residence must have lived continuously in the country for at least 10 years and prove their intentions to stay.

Rantanen noted that the proposed citizenship test is also intended to help speed up integration into Finnish society.

"The idea is for people to integrate into Finland, to learn our language and our social system. With integration, the citizenship and language tests should not prove to be too difficult," Rantanen said.

Citizenship test previously proposed in 2019

The possibility of Finland introducing a citizenship test has been mooted before.

In 2019, then-Interior Minister Kai Mykkänen (NCP) presented a package of measures he said was aimed at preventing and combating crimes committed by foreign-background individuals, especially sexual offences.

The draft bill at the time stated that "the practices of other countries in the use of citizenship tests will be studied and a test suitable for Finland will be introduced".

However, the citizenship test was not advanced during the following government's term in office.

[personalcareexpo]

Visa-free! 🎉Entry policy relaxed!🎉 Visa waiver added!🤝 Relax visa requirements for foreigners!😆

🐼Relaxing visa conditions for foreigners， More convenient for overseas visitors✈️ To visit exhibitions in China for business cooperation💼🥂 ! ! !

In 2023, the transit policy and visa process will be optimized, international flights will resume and increase at a faster pace, and multiple entry favorable policies will further facilitate international business exchanges. China's door to the world will open wider and wider!🐼💖🤗

01✨

Shanghai port issued a new visa-free transit reminder📣 The National Immigration Bureau issued a new visa-free transit policy in November, 23📣

At present, the 72/144-hour visa-free transit policy is implemented at 31 ports in 23 cities in 18 provinces for people from 54 countries. Namely Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Monaco, Russia, United Kingdom, Ireland, Cyprus, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Albania, Belarus, Norway, the United States, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Brunei, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and other countries, totaling 54 countries with valid international travel documents and confirmed dates and seats within a limited time. Persons from 54 countries who transit from China to a third country (region), with valid international travel documents, and connecting passenger tickets with fixed dates and seats within a limited time, may apply for transit visa exemption to the port entry inspection authorities of the cities that implement the transit visa exemption policy, and the exit border inspection authorities will handle the temporary entry formalities for them. The duration of visa-free stay starts from 00:00 on the next day of entry.

❤️[Please see the table at the bottom for details of Shanghai ports]👇👇

02✨

📢New news on visa-free policy released in November 📢China’s new visa-free policy promotes high-level opening-up

On November 24, 2023, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that China has decided to try to expand the scope of unilateral visa-free countries and implement a unilateral visa-free policy for ordinary passport holders from six countries: France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and Malaysia. From December 1, 2023 to November 30, 2024, ordinary passport holders from the above countries who come to China for business, tourism, visiting relatives and friends, and transit for no more than 15 days can enter China without a visa.

03✨

New news on convenient foreign personnel coming to China released in January📣 The National Immigration Administration has officially implemented five measures to facilitate foreign nationals to come to China📣

Another good news has come recently. Starting from January 11, the National Immigration Administration has officially implemented five measures to facilitate foreigners coming to China, which mainly include:

Relax the conditions for foreigners coming to China to apply for port visas. For foreigners who urgently need to come to China to engage in non-diplomatic and official activities such as business cooperation, visits and exchanges, investment and entrepreneurship, visiting relatives, and handling private affairs, and who do not have time to apply for a visa abroad, they can apply for a port visa entry to the port visa authority with relevant proof materials such as invitation letters.

For foreigners, 24-hour direct transit passengers at nine international airports including Shanghai Pudong, Beijing Capital, Beijing Daxing, Hangzhou Xiaoshan, Xiamen Gaoqi, Guangzhou Baiyun, Shenzhen Bao'an, Chengdu Tianfu, and Xi'an Xianyang are exempted from border inspection procedures.

Foreigners in China can apply for visa extension, replacement and reissue at their nearest location.

Foreigners in China who need to enter and exit multiple times can apply for a re-entry visa.

Simplify the application materials for visa documents for foreigners in China.

04✨

📢Starting from February 9, China and Singapore will exempt each other from visas

On January 25, representatives from the government of the People's Republic of China and the government of the Republic of Singapore signed the 'Agreement between the Government of the People's Republic of China and the Government of the Republic of Singapore on Mutual Visa Exemption for Ordinary Passport Holders' in Beijing. The agreement will officially enter into force on February 9, 2024 (Lunar New Year’s Eve). By then, people from both sides holding ordinary passports can enter the other country without a visa to engage in tourism, family visits, business and other private affairs, and their stay shall not exceed 30 days. If you enter the other country to engage in activities that require prior approval, such as work or news reporting, or plan to stay in the other country for more than 30 days, you must obtain the corresponding visa before entering the other country.

As of January 25, China has concluded mutual visa exemption agreements covering different passport types with 157 countries, and has reached agreements or arrangements with 44 countries to simplify visa procedures. Comprehensive mutual visa exemption has been achieved with 22 countries including Singapore, Maldives and Kazakhstan. In addition, more than 60 countries and regions offer visa-free or visa-on-arrival convenience to Chinese citizens. The convenience for Chinese citizens to leave the country has been greatly improved, and the 'gold content' of Chinese passports will become increasingly valuable. (Source: CCTV News)

05✨

Starting from March 1, China and Thailand will exempt each other from visas📣

On January 28, the government of the People's Republic of China and the Royal Government of Thailand held a signing ceremony in Bangkok for an agreement on mutual visa exemption for ordinary passport holders. The agreement will take effect from March 1, 2024.

After the news was released, data from a travel platform showed that the search popularity of Thailand-related keywords on the platform increased by more than 7 times compared with the previous day. Among them, air tickets and hotels increased by more than 6 times compared with the previous day. (Source: CCTV News)

In addition, recently, China has stated that it will grant unilateral visa-free treatment to Sweden and Ireland. This is the second time that China has granted visa-free treatment to European countries after France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and Italy.

#visa #China #chinesevisa #visafree #entrypolicy #visawaiver #businessinchina #transitpolicy #internationalflights #internationalbusinessexchanges #business #Shanghaiport #transitvisaexemption #tourism #visitrelatives #visitfriends

[head-post]

Morocco blocks attempted mass migration to Spain’s Ceuta

Moroccan authorities prevented dozens of migrants from reaching the Spanish enclave of Ceuta after calls on social media for a mass migration attempt, according to Euractiv.

Spain’s two enclaves on Morocco’s Mediterranean coast, Ceuta and Melilla, share the European Union’s only land borders with Africa. The territories face waves of attempted crossings by migrants trying to reach Europe.

In the latest attempt, dozens of migrants gathered in Fnideq on Sunday and began throwing stones at Moroccan security forces. However, police prevented them from approaching the Ceuta fence.

Moroccan authorities stated that they arrested at least 60 people last week for using social media to incite migrants to attempt mass border crossings. Mohammed Ben Aissa, a local human rights activist, said:

This is the heaviest security deployment ever in Fnideq with authorities acting pre-emptively by setting up multiple checkpoints on roads to northern Morocco.

Most of the migrants are Moroccan youths, joined by a small number of migrants from sub-Saharan Africa. Morocco and Spain strengthened their co-operation in the fight against illegal migration since they settled a separate diplomatic feud in 2022.

Morocco stopped 45,015 people from migrating illegally to Europe in the first eight months of this year, according to the interior ministry. Stricter surveillance of Morocco’s northern borders also prompted a growing number of migrants to try the risky and long Atlantic route to the Canary Islands.

Read more HERE

[mariacallous]

BRUSSELS — While no European leader or bureaucrat has threatened to deport 20 million people or ban Muslims — except, perhaps, former President Donald Trump’s favorite European, Hungarian strongman Viktor Orbán — the European Union and Trump are closer on the issue of migration than words may suggest.

EU countries have individually pushed to crack down on migration after substantial surges in support for anti-immigrant parties in various European elections this year.

While they mostly eschew the racist, xenophobic rhetoric Trump uses to describe immigrants, in the cold, hard light of policy their positions are not all so different. At a meeting in Brussels, EU leaders spent hours discussing migrant processing centers, speedier deportations and “hybrid warfare” by hostile powers using migrants to destabilize EU countries.

“A new wind is blowing in Europe,” said the Dutch anti-Islam, anti-immigration populist Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders in Brussels on Thursday after a meeting of far-right leaders.

Migration has been at the forefront for Europe’s politicians since 2015, when more than a million migrants, many of them Syrians fleeing war, made their way to the bloc.

In the ensuing decade, the EU collective has shifted from the “we can do it” stance of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel to trying to shoo new arrivals away from the EU border altogether. In 2023 fewer than 300,000 people made it to the continent; this year the EU’s border agency, Frontex, estimates about 160,000 migrants have reached Europe.

In recent months, nearly a dozen European countries have instituted some form of border restrictions in an attempt to deter migrants, refugees and asylum seekers.

Poland this month announced a temporary halt to processing asylum requests from migrants arriving from neighboring Belarus, invoking a security threat. Germany’s Olaf Scholz instituted border controls this summer to stop undocumented migrants from crossing into Germany after a Syrian man stabbed eleven people, killing three. Six other countries, including Italy, France and Austria, have introduced border checks. 

Some analysts say if Trump were to return to the White House, it would put more wind in the sails of those who have matched and mirrored his administration’s ambitions on migration.

“Certainly, many member states that have pushed for a restrictive approach to migration will be watching the American elections very closely. This will give [EU countries pushing for more restrictions] further bargaining chips to push for their preferences both in the U.S. as well as in the EU,” said Alberto-Horst Neidhardt, head of European migration and diversity at the European Policy Centre.

Returns and deportations

The vague terminology around “return hubs” and “processing centers” mirrors Trump’s “Migrant Protection Program.” The initiative, colloquially known as “Remain in Mexico,” took effect in 2019 and forced tens of thousands of non-Mexican migrants back across the U.S. border to Mexico to await migration decisions there.

In a letter to leaders this week, Ursula von der Leyen, head of the EU’s executive branch, endorsed the idea of what she called “return hubs,” buildings to detain migrants in non-EU countries. (Spain’s prime minister, a relatively lonely voice on the matter, on Thursday rejected the idea after the EU leaders met.)

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has inaugurated “processing centers” in Albania where people headed to Italy will be transported — echoing Australia’s policy of sending asylum seekers to Papua New Guinea to have their claims processed.

Meanwhile, France is pushing to change EU law to facilitate deportations to third countries. And the EU already has thousands of kilometers of physical fencing at its external borders — a setup that far exceeds Trump’s ballyhooed but abortive border wall with Mexico.

Some experts argue that the mainstreaming of hardline rhetoric is leading to policy changes that favor Europe’s right.

“If you listen to Orbán and Meloni at times and others like [France’s far-right leader Marine] Le Pen over the years, the rhetoric has been as harsh and as virulent as what we hear from politicians like Trump in the United States,” said Judith Sunderland, associate Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. 

“There is an intent to make it sound like it’s legal, like it is in line with international law.”

The policy changes have similar aims to those of Trump and his running mate, J.D. Vance: Reducing the number of new arrivals and sending people back to their countries of origin, even if those places are potentially unstable or unsafe.

“We have to recognize the current solutions don’t work,” said one EU diplomat who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about the conversation.

That is something Trump and many EU leaders would agree on. 

What’s in a word?

The major difference, though, is in style and tone. Europeans tend to tiptoe around contentious issues.

Take the d-word: “Deportations.”

For Trump, who has vowed to deport between 15 and 20 million people from the U.S. if re-elected in November, using the word “deportation” is a badge of honor. 

“Under the Trump administration, if you came in illegally, you were apprehended immediately and you were deported,” the Republican presidential hopeful crowed at a rally in July. “That’s why, to keep our family safe, the Republican platform promises to launch the largest deportation operation in the history of our country.”

For European leaders and officials, though, the d-word (which is linked, for many in Europe, to Nazi deportations to death camps during World War II) is almost taboo. The bloc’s officials speak gingerly of “returns” or “return hubs” to describe the enclosed camps or detention centers they’ve set up outside the EU.

And when it comes to describing how migrants reach its borders, EU leaders tend to tread carefully again. 

While Trump has no qualms about qualifying some migrants as “illegal” and decrying “illegal immigration,” in the EU migration that doesn’t come via airports or other official routes is officially described as “irregular.”

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is the one EU leader to buck the trend, doing away with European niceties and fully embracing Trump-style rhetoric, and straight-up villainizing migrants with his right-wing nationalist stance. The strongman leader vowed earlier this month to bus migrants to Brussels, copying a similar vow by Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who sent migrants in his state to Martha’s Vineyard, a posh vacation spot in Massachusetts.

“I have been chest-deep in the bloodbath of the migration debate for quite some time,” Orbán recently told a press conference in Brussels, channeling Trump.

Forging ahead

But it’s not all smooth sailing for Europe’s migration hardliners — some leaders are facing setbacks in real time.

This week, Meloni proclaimed Italy’s migration policy “a model for Europe.” But on Thursday, while she gathered with other European leaders in Brussels, her offshore detention centers in Albania hit their first hurdle. 

Four of the 16 migrants sent to Albania have already been put on a boat back to Italy because they were children or were considered vulnerable (only male adults who are not considered vulnerable can be taken to Albania after a screening at sea under Italy’s own rules). 

Opposition groups and NGOs immediately called the project a failure.

“It will have very real consequences on people around the world, potentially, because those other countries look at what the EU is doing to them and say, well, you know, why should we guarantee people’s rights?” said Sunderland from Human Rights Watch.

The bigger concern, for some critics, is that harsh rhetoric and measures on migration will open the door to other policies.

“Migration has really become a Trojan horse for conservative forces to then push an agenda that goes beyond migration,” said the European Policy Centre’s Neidhardt.

[mchiti]

You have fascist government descendent from Nazi era fascist dictator and you are acting so shocked that fascism and racism is so big in Italy? Of course it is. It is what your country voted for and has always been in its bones since many hundreds of years the history of Italy is full of discrimination in every way possible

who's acting surprised? 😅

secondly, yes there's a fascist government right now in power. I just want to suggest you and everyone else to not close your eyes to all fascist inspired governments in Europe, because this is not an easy moment by any means in the world. In France there's Le Pen who's always there on the verge to take the power (and she scares me). In the Netherlands, a so called "progressive democracy" they have just voted for a president who campaigned against the dutch-moroccan community all his life (just check him out, he's a fascist pig) and who said my favourite footballer should have been deported for choosing to represent morocco over the netherlands. Go figure. And he's in power now, voted and elected. Hungary has Orban who is another fascist cunt do I even need to say more about him. Poland, another fascist government in power. And let's not pretend Tories in Uk don't have a lot of fascist tendencies with their migrant policies and international affairs.

I don't know what you mean with "hundred of years" because Italy has become a State only in 1861 and had a long socialist & liberal tradition, whatever happened with fascism & mussolini it's part of a course of historical events that sadly can be extended to all totalitarianism states: spain had one with franco, portugal had one with salazar, all sadly lasted way past fascism in italy and nazism in germany.

This is not me trying to excuse italy since I live here and it can be hell as a second generation immigrant, this is me trying to make it a collective, european problem as a whole. Because it is a problem everywhere right now the way people are voting and the way certain propagandas are winning.