The simple truth

On one side, reality, on the other, its perception.
Logic would say the opposite, yet very often the second is stronger than the first.
With the issues of immigration, this is how it works.
Beyond the numbers, the profiles of those who migrate, the very extent of the phenomenon, unilateral readings prevail, very often fueled by fear and alarmism.
The exact opposite of what is needed to build social cohesion and friendship.
Maurizio Ambrosini is a sociologist at the State University of Milan, among the leading experts in Italy in the study of migration.
He doesn't mince his words: the current narrative on immigration is simply false.

Which is the true one?
Unfortunately, we are greatly influenced by the sovereignist narrative that tells us of an exponentially growing phenomenon, closely linked to landings. In reality, since 2010, immigration has been stationary, since after the 2008 crisis it has practically not grown. In Italy there are approximately 5.3 million regular immigrants, between 400,000 and 600,000 irregular immigrants, 400,000 are asylum seekers.
Half are women, half are European, 3/5 from countries with a Christian tradition. In 2021, the European Union welcomed less than 10% of the world's refugees. And in Italy we are well below average. It is crazy to think that Europeans have been led to believe that they are being invaded by immigrants and that our country is the refugee camp of the continent. The data says the opposite, but people do not want to be convinced.

Why?
The problem is the communicative and political exploitation of certain aspects of migration.
Let's take the Italian case. We have 2 million and 400,000 immigrants who work regularly, 10% of total employment. In 2022 we welcomed the Ukrainians, demonstrating that it is possible to do so. The current government continues this type of welcome, while raising its voice on the issue of general immigration. At the same time, with the flows decree it was decided to open the doors to 450 thousand workers for the next few years.
Clearly, with respect to these people, we are not talking about an invasion or ethnic substitution. There is a survey that is periodically proposed on the perception of the number of migrants in our country. The real figure is 9%, but the perception is 26%. That would mean almost 18 million people!
Public opinion projects its own fears, anxieties for the future, many frustrations.
And immigrants are the scapegoat for all this.

How do we overcome this problem?
We must take a step forward with respect to toxic narratives and base them on truthful data. I repeat: we must not limit the discussion to landings and the management of landings. Italy has demonstrated an unsuspected capacity to welcome that was not foreseeable years ago. All this happened through amnesties, a posteriori. We have managed it in an approximate and emergency way, but all in all it worked, especially thanks to the families who have been the main employers of this immigration: think of the phenomenon of foreign carers. In my opinion, the limit is another.

Which one?
Our integration is linked to poor, subordinate work.
There is still no room for foreigners in top positions. So many young people go to other countries because they find greater opportunities there.
Our management is not organized or even far-sighted.
And yet, our society has been able to patch things up and integrate beyond the institutions.

What should be done to make the reception system more balanced?
The European Union has recently reiterated its hard line...
The recent European closures were decided for electoral reasons. The issue is trying to beat the sovereignist forces, accepting part of their indications. But there is also a cultural issue linked to how we ask questions.
If we ask average citizens: "What do you think about immigration?", that's one thing. But if we ask: "Do you want doctors and nurses?", it's a whole different story. Likewise, "Do you want people who take care of your loved ones?" More precise questions would lead us to better answers and reasoning. So we can reason about what would be needed.
Thinking about economic migrants, among the solutions I think of the figure of the "sponsor", reference figures who help integration and guarantee work. As for refugees, there are already many solutions, but there is no political will to apply and implement them. In Canada, for example, there are private sponsorships: entities, associations, religious groups that make themselves available to welcome at their own expense.
Another tool is that of humanitarian corridors and I could go on. First of all, political will is needed...

How is true integration built?
The term integration generates discussions, but there are no alternatives. We need to start from three fixed points for those arriving.
The first is to have a dignity of life in the new country, the second comes from the relationship and exchange with the inhabitants, the third from the possibility and desire to be part of that community through the instrument of citizenship.
All this often does not happen and the obstacle is in the institutions that often discriminate against immigrants. Let's think about the criteria for the assignment of social housing or the provision of many services.
Various associations have denounced the situation, but it is not enough, also because immigrants do not protest.
They are the first to accept a certain subordination and this mix does not favor true immigration. The task is not only up to politics, but also to society and the market. When the economy grows, there is a greater possibility of absorbing immigration as a workforce.
 

Matteo Spicuglia
NP Focus
May 2024