By legalising half a million migrants, the Spanish government is making a demographic and political gamble. Will its continued parliamentary survival be worth it? By Kaiser Bauch.
Good overview. To add, Spain already has a pathway (arraigo) for Latin Americans to obtain citizenship after 3 years of residency (legal or illegal). The "regularization" is just a stunt to keep Sanchez's far left coalition together, and will benefit precisely *non-Latino* migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Morocco.
Spain has among the highest immigration in the world, ~1.2M arrivals per year (2.5% of the 49M population *per year*) since the pandemic (2022-2025). So yes, Spain has had significant immigration since joining the EU, but this is at an unprecedented scale and speed.
If you mean the regularisation it's not unprecedented in scale and speed. It happened before in 2004 with Zapatero (or was it 2005?).
It has a lot to do with the way Spanish immigration laws work. Spain needs a lot of cheap labour, but moving to Spain legally isn't easy, but a bureaucratic nightmare. But that's a short term advantage for many industries (agriculture, restaurants, etc.), which avoid taxes by hiring people in the black market.
After a while, the country is full of people who use services but pay naught in national insurance and other contributions. So Spain does what they always did: act contra legem and incorporate ½ M people in one go by not applying the law.
When they governed the Americas, they had a saying: “se acata pero no se cumple”. “We accept the law but we don't enforce it”.
Good point. I was referring to the scale and speed of immigration to Spain. But I only looked at data back to 2008. 2002-2007 was a huge wave of immigration.
“Se acata pero no se cumple” had a very particular meaning. The central power was in Spain, that is situated far away from the Americas. When News of the orders arrived in América, the situation could have evolved differently and so enforcing the order could be stupid or have unforseeing consequences. It was not an idea of “we are not enforcing the law because we don’t want to”: It was a matter of trust in the people appointed for the post to actually decide what they should do. Then, when their time in government there ended, they could be demanded in court for their actions (trial of residency). So that sentence you quoted had a much deeper meaning than what people normally consider when quoting it.
I would understand Spain's decision if it had the means of supporting and integrating the newly regularized immigrants, but the issue is even more confusing because it doesn't.
Italy is a similar example (despite Meloni's populist bolstering).
Its truly wild but the people who pushed for this are disconnected from reality. It would also be a good decision if they passed a law and did actions to prevent a new wave of illegal migrants which will need regularization in 10 years
I hope the consequences are delayed, but they will arrive, this century.
Pakistan is ground zero for endogamous patrilocality, as you have told us, KB.
Half a million Pakistani men import their parents and cousin-wives: two million people using the welfare state in Spain. Add wife’s parents, and siblings to taste: four million?
Endogamy produces sick people. These people will make higher than average demands on Spain’s health system. And they will not integrate into the local culture. Far from it.
We are already seeing the breakdown in Britain and France of coalitions between the left and socially conservative migrants.
Once they are numerous enough, they will cast their leftist allies aside or commandeer the coalitions. Its already been predicted far in advance.
They cannot coordinate waiting until they are sufficiently numerous to do so because the genuine believers will not adhere to that strategy.
Good overview. To add, Spain already has a pathway (arraigo) for Latin Americans to obtain citizenship after 3 years of residency (legal or illegal). The "regularization" is just a stunt to keep Sanchez's far left coalition together, and will benefit precisely *non-Latino* migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Morocco.
Spain has among the highest immigration in the world, ~1.2M arrivals per year (2.5% of the 49M population *per year*) since the pandemic (2022-2025). So yes, Spain has had significant immigration since joining the EU, but this is at an unprecedented scale and speed.
https://www.ine.es/dyngs/Prensa/en/EMCR2024.htm
If you mean the regularisation it's not unprecedented in scale and speed. It happened before in 2004 with Zapatero (or was it 2005?).
It has a lot to do with the way Spanish immigration laws work. Spain needs a lot of cheap labour, but moving to Spain legally isn't easy, but a bureaucratic nightmare. But that's a short term advantage for many industries (agriculture, restaurants, etc.), which avoid taxes by hiring people in the black market.
After a while, the country is full of people who use services but pay naught in national insurance and other contributions. So Spain does what they always did: act contra legem and incorporate ½ M people in one go by not applying the law.
When they governed the Americas, they had a saying: “se acata pero no se cumple”. “We accept the law but we don't enforce it”.
Good point. I was referring to the scale and speed of immigration to Spain. But I only looked at data back to 2008. 2002-2007 was a huge wave of immigration.
“Se acata pero no se cumple” had a very particular meaning. The central power was in Spain, that is situated far away from the Americas. When News of the orders arrived in América, the situation could have evolved differently and so enforcing the order could be stupid or have unforseeing consequences. It was not an idea of “we are not enforcing the law because we don’t want to”: It was a matter of trust in the people appointed for the post to actually decide what they should do. Then, when their time in government there ended, they could be demanded in court for their actions (trial of residency). So that sentence you quoted had a much deeper meaning than what people normally consider when quoting it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_residence
thanks!
I would understand Spain's decision if it had the means of supporting and integrating the newly regularized immigrants, but the issue is even more confusing because it doesn't.
Italy is a similar example (despite Meloni's populist bolstering).
Its truly wild but the people who pushed for this are disconnected from reality. It would also be a good decision if they passed a law and did actions to prevent a new wave of illegal migrants which will need regularization in 10 years
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/esp/spain/gdp-per-capita
Spain's GDP per capita peaked at $35,000 in 2008. It's $33,000 today.
In the same period the USA went from $48,000 to $82,000.
This reminds me a lot of Canada. It also opened the immigration floodgates and has been in a per capita recession.
A stagnant economy with low birth rates importing low productivity prime age workers to prop up pensions who will themselves need pensions one day.
I hope the consequences are delayed, but they will arrive, this century.
Pakistan is ground zero for endogamous patrilocality, as you have told us, KB.
Half a million Pakistani men import their parents and cousin-wives: two million people using the welfare state in Spain. Add wife’s parents, and siblings to taste: four million?
Endogamy produces sick people. These people will make higher than average demands on Spain’s health system. And they will not integrate into the local culture. Far from it.