Given the numbers you outlined and the way it feels on the streets, I am beginning to think that maybe those calling to keep Muslim immigrants from war torn countries out, might have a point. Especially men of soldiering age.
This is about religious politics that go all the way back to crusades, isn't it?
Given the facts you presented it is hard not to question my liberal attitudes to others.
Seems like an extremely poor post, which is a shame.
At a minimum you should have referenced the US to compare - for the past hundred+ years, immigrants both legal and illegal have been UNDERrepresented in incarceration statistics
Back to Europe specifically, or more generally, a review of immigration and crime in the OECD. https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.38.1.181 - No correlation of immigration and crime (where they use homicide as a proxy for crime overall)
I'll quote the paper
>The frequent overrepresentation of incarcerated immigrants relative to overall
population, depicted in Figure 3, might be due to two measurement issues quite
specific to immigration-crime statistics. One is that irregular aliens (that is, those
not officially registered by the appropriate process in that nation) would be counted
in the share of immigrants in the prison population, but not in the share of immigrants in the resident population. The other is the potential harsher treatment of
foreigners by the police and the judiciary system due to discrimination or unequal
access to legal services and noncustodial measures, such as bail or home-detention.
Alone, not enough to explain it all, as they say, but then add in the adjustments by age, education, income, etc and I think you're getting somewhere.
More importantly, you didn't discuss integration or potential biased enforcement of laws at all in your post. Which is a glaring oversight.
I haven't looked it up, but I'd assume the graph which plots "Muslim majority" countries as distinct from "liberal democracies" is from some anti immigration group, because otherwise that's some whacky categorization and should have been an immediate red flag for you
I believe you're too willing to accept "crime isn't about money" too - a small study where people are given a few hundred dollars is not something that people can plan their lives around nor, would I think, likely to stop a criminal from committing crimes. You're accepting something as evidence when it's barely telling us anything, let alone about why people commit crimes or end up living a life of crime
Here's a section of the above OECD paper
>A different policy experiment in Italy involves the online procedure used to
award work permits. Prospective employers of immigrant workers must send an
electronic application on given “Click Days,” starting at 8 AM, and such applications
are processed on a first come–first served basis until available quotas of permits are
exhausted. Exploiting discontinuities in “click time” to compare those just eligible
for work permits to those not eligible, Pinotti (2017) finds that those eligible to
work are significantly less likely to be arrested during the following year. The size
of the effect is very large and remarkably similar, in relative terms, to that estimated
by Mastrobuoni and Pinotti (2015)—a drop of more than 50 percent relative to the
baseline crime rate—in spite of the fact that the two papers focus on very different
populations; that is, former prison inmates and applicants for work permits.
As it turns out, when people want to but can't work, they have no other option than to steal or starve. The EU is full of countries that make it harder than necessary to work as an immigrant, or hell just make it hard to work in general.
And while I'm at it some more sources that you might like
Immigrants in Portugal net contributed to the state 5:1, or in other words, 5 euros paid per euro taken in benefits
Really just a very poor post on your part, where you seem to uncritically repost stuff you see floating around on twitter or whatever and don't look into any of the actual research or even give lip service to questioning the source or how reliable it is. If this is what I can expect from you I don't know why I should stay subbed
If you notice, he avoids dealing with US immigration in detail, other than to try and imply/claim that US statistics are irrelevant because most Muslim immigrants are more educated in the US. Yet Minnesota has more Somali immigrants than any other US state, and its crime rate is low. And they were not all PhDs.
Compared to the people Trump pardoned and still pardons? Or compared to Operation Minnesota Siege itself?
"Operation Metro Surge", which state Republicans Tom Emmer, Lisa Demuth, Joe Marble and others created with the help of fraudulent video maker Nick Shirley, has to date cost Minnesota 10,000 lost jobs, two lost lives (Renee Good's and Alex Pretti's) and $854 million in lost business revenue and wages, none of which will be recovered, because the Minnesota Republican legislators are blocking Minnesota Democratic efforts to make the businesses whole. Feeding Our Future, the biggest of the actual fraud cases to go to court, cost at $250 million less than a third of that, a lot of the money (at least $45 million) was recovered, and no one was shot to death by ICE and CBP's mall cop rejects as a result of it.
Trump pardoned Philip Esformes who stole $1.3 billion from Medicare. But he's white, so you're OK with that.
As for Feeding Our Future: the ringleader was a white woman.
Did you notice that even JD Vance had to back off the "billions" bullocks in last week's press conference? In fact Joe Thompson, the guy who last year started the Billions lie you are still in love with, is no longer defending that lie on behalf of the Trump administration. Not after it was used to kill Renee Good and Alex Pretti. Thompson's slumbering conscience got woke, literally, and he not only quit the US Attorney’s office, he's now working as one of Don Lemon's defense attorneys in the Cities Church case.
I'm not okay with pardoning Esformes; also, it has nothing to do with his race, but feel free to make all the assumptions you want. Same with Aimee Bock.
Where did you get that I am in love with a lie about "billions?" And someone used those "billions" to kill Good and Pretti?
I guess you're ok with people disrupting and terrorizing religious services--see how this works?
Great info. Yes unfortunately it seems like this Substack is off the deep end. The other comments on this post referencing the "crusades" and so forth are a good indication...
This is a weird turn from "here are some facts" to "we should not judge"
When countries are "good at taking immigrants" it usually means, the people suffering under the consequences get ignored. Like the victims of sexual assaults.
What does that figure have to do with the fact that certain types of immigrants are absurdly overrepresented in sex crimes?
Immigrants are often known to non-immigrant victims. And assuming that figure for Ireland holds true for the countries discussed in the piece, the state still has to expend resources on investigating and prosecuting sex offences committed by immigrants against immigrants, as well as cleaning up the aftermath (eg, providing some level of care to the immigrant victim)
Immigration status is not what causes someone to commit sexual violence. Sexual offences exist in every society, across every ethnicity, nationality and social class.
Reducing the issue to “immigrants” ignores the broader reality of how and where most sexual violence actually happens.
If you want to discuss crime rates among specific demographics, that’s a separate conversation. But it still wouldn’t change the fact that most sexual violence is committed by someone the victim already knows (their partner, family member, friend…)
You will get a lot of criticism for this post from the Left despite simply stating facts. I am left leaning for what it's worth but the data evidence is undeniable.
Ingesting immigrants of such a radically different way of life is detrimental to Anglosphere countries. The Right is not rising because they are fooling the public, they are rising because the Public sees with their own eyes what is happening to their towns and cities.
And that doesn't mean you are racist to say that. It means you are logical and follow the evidence, which you would assume the Left would appreciate, but I guess they don't.
This is an extraordinarily difficult subject to write about honestly, especially about/ in Europe, so credit for attempting it seriously and with data rather than slogans.
One thing that stands out to me is how quickly discussion of immigration, integration, crime, or social cohesion can collapse into moral labeling. You can already see in some of the comments that simply raising concerns risks someone being branded “far right” or racist. That’s dangerous for democratic discourse. If every mainstream person who talks about visible integration problems is treated as morally illegitimate, eventually only actual extremists will be willing to discuss them publicly.
The problem is also complicated by the gap between reality and social media amplification. Many Europeans clearly do encounter real issues around integration, public order, parallel communities, or cultural tension in everyday life. But online discourse then extrapolates those realities into sweeping civilizational panic. Both denial and hysteria distort the picture.
I suspect this dynamic partly explains the rise of parties like AfD in Germany and similar movements elsewhere. A lot of voters may not necessarily be ideological extremists; they may simply feel that established parties refuse to acknowledge obvious tensions.
What makes the situation especially hard is that Europe doesn’t appear politically capable of either a truly hardline right wing solution or an expansive, expensive, long-term integration-heavy left wing solution. So the most likely outcome is probably what Europe often does best: muddling through incrementally, imperfectly, and unevenly.
Tomas, your reporting has become anti-muslim. This article could be straight out of Far-right books of Kubitschek and other people of the 'Great Replacement Theory'. Feel reach out if you might change your intention of reporting. I cannot support this Substack becoming a haven for far-right extremists as you can see from the comments. Feel free to reach out to me.
I am very sad to see this development. But I am not angry.
>after a well-documented research writes as a conclusion that "Immigrants are nearly always fiscally expensive", "Immigrants commit substantially more crime than any other group" and "Immigration reduces local trust and social capital"
In European discourse, saying “Europe does not need immigration” immediately places one near the hard identitarian/right-populist camp. By affirming immigration in principle, he signals he is not anti-foreigner,
No? Yes, we will remigrate them. You will not destroy thousands of years of our civilization with cognitively impaired hordes of orcs just because you don't have any balls.
Every single one of these things you listed is fake and easily changed. Legally impossible? Change the law. Morally impossible? Lol. Diplomatically? Are you serious? Nobody cares, especially the US or China. Economically - the argument has just been made, you dolt, that they are a net drain. Paying them to leave, even, would make more sense than keeping them on welfare.
You're preaching to the choir, mate. You don't have to persuade me about the stats; neither did Tomas. His entire piece confirms my priors. However, I also believe that Europe as it stands cannot actually solve this problem. The frustrating bit is that you're correct to call the solutions easy and the challenges fake. That's what makes it more annoying.
Wow, that's a wild set of data. I did a quick look for data for here in Canada, and similar to the US the crime stats reverse. If you want neighbourhood crime to go down _increase_ the number of immigrants. e.g. https://johnhoward.ca/blog/immigration-and-crime/
At a first guess it's the Canadian immigration policy point system which increases the likelihood of solidly employable people, combined with the difficulty of getting here sorting for capability and class. There are regional pockets with problems, but in general everything goes smoothly.
I need to do more research to match against your data sets, but yeah, lots of immigrants in my suburb and it's so peaceful it's boring ;)
The body of the article is so focused on dysfunction and risk that the closing “Europe needs immigration” line can read less like the natural conclusion of the evidence and more like a moderating caveat, a credibility signal, or an attempt to remain within acceptable elite discourse boundaries. That doesn’t necessarily make it insincere. It may simply reflect the tension many European conservatives now hold simultaneously
The numbers don't lie, and the story they tell is that our western sensibilities in Europe and the USA were caused by what Professor Gil Saad describes as the West's suicidal empathy. He has just written a book with the same title that I would urge those that wonder how we got here should read...truly a remarkable book.
As always, nothing is ever perfectly cut and dry, but a huge component of what has caused these problems in the West is the empathy shown towards the many that take advantage of the privilege and the many who are unwilling to adopt the culture of the West.
I am reminded of the Japanese legend that says....
If you get on the wrong train, get off at the nearest station, as the longer it takes you to get off, the more expensive the return trip will be.
I believe it fits the dilemma the West now has to grapple with.
I'm shocked. After all that data you conclude that "massive waves of deportation should not occur". Immigrant behavior doesn't converge to local performance. Three generations of Danish data demonstrate that. What more do you require to conclude that immigrants are detrimental to a thriving Europe?
To all those who claim this post lacks past or present data analysis from the US, I think it is not the right place to expect them. Clearly, the focus here was Europe, and US data is merely anecdotical.
I find the piece VERY interesting. Thought provoking. What I expect from your posts.
One question Thomas: is there a way to correlate unemployment with crime (a very hard word, legally inadequate), not merely statistically but through data laying out the occupation of “criminals” at the moment of their “crime”?
Many years ago, a right-wing friend of mine gave me a copy of Reflections on the Revolution in Europe (2009) by Christopher Caldwell. I found it very interesting at the time despite it being well to my right (I'm an American) but may make for an interesting read ~20 years later. Seems apposite to your post.
Why do you think Europe needs immigrants?
Given the numbers you outlined and the way it feels on the streets, I am beginning to think that maybe those calling to keep Muslim immigrants from war torn countries out, might have a point. Especially men of soldiering age.
This is about religious politics that go all the way back to crusades, isn't it?
Given the facts you presented it is hard not to question my liberal attitudes to others.
Seems like an extremely poor post, which is a shame.
At a minimum you should have referenced the US to compare - for the past hundred+ years, immigrants both legal and illegal have been UNDERrepresented in incarceration statistics
https://ranabr.people.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj26066/files/media/file/immigration_incarceration_jan2024.pdf
The US comparison for welfare usage - immigrants use far less welfare than native born https://www.cato.org/blog/immigrants-use-less-welfare-native-born-americans
Back to Europe specifically, or more generally, a review of immigration and crime in the OECD. https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.38.1.181 - No correlation of immigration and crime (where they use homicide as a proxy for crime overall)
I'll quote the paper
>The frequent overrepresentation of incarcerated immigrants relative to overall
population, depicted in Figure 3, might be due to two measurement issues quite
specific to immigration-crime statistics. One is that irregular aliens (that is, those
not officially registered by the appropriate process in that nation) would be counted
in the share of immigrants in the prison population, but not in the share of immigrants in the resident population. The other is the potential harsher treatment of
foreigners by the police and the judiciary system due to discrimination or unequal
access to legal services and noncustodial measures, such as bail or home-detention.
Alone, not enough to explain it all, as they say, but then add in the adjustments by age, education, income, etc and I think you're getting somewhere.
More importantly, you didn't discuss integration or potential biased enforcement of laws at all in your post. Which is a glaring oversight.
I haven't looked it up, but I'd assume the graph which plots "Muslim majority" countries as distinct from "liberal democracies" is from some anti immigration group, because otherwise that's some whacky categorization and should have been an immediate red flag for you
I believe you're too willing to accept "crime isn't about money" too - a small study where people are given a few hundred dollars is not something that people can plan their lives around nor, would I think, likely to stop a criminal from committing crimes. You're accepting something as evidence when it's barely telling us anything, let alone about why people commit crimes or end up living a life of crime
Here's a section of the above OECD paper
>A different policy experiment in Italy involves the online procedure used to
award work permits. Prospective employers of immigrant workers must send an
electronic application on given “Click Days,” starting at 8 AM, and such applications
are processed on a first come–first served basis until available quotas of permits are
exhausted. Exploiting discontinuities in “click time” to compare those just eligible
for work permits to those not eligible, Pinotti (2017) finds that those eligible to
work are significantly less likely to be arrested during the following year. The size
of the effect is very large and remarkably similar, in relative terms, to that estimated
by Mastrobuoni and Pinotti (2015)—a drop of more than 50 percent relative to the
baseline crime rate—in spite of the fact that the two papers focus on very different
populations; that is, former prison inmates and applicants for work permits.
As it turns out, when people want to but can't work, they have no other option than to steal or starve. The EU is full of countries that make it harder than necessary to work as an immigrant, or hell just make it hard to work in general.
And while I'm at it some more sources that you might like
Immigrants in Portugal net contributed to the state 5:1, or in other words, 5 euros paid per euro taken in benefits
https://joaonevesanalytics.substack.com/p/contributory-impact-of-migrants-in#:~:text=2024%3A%20Preliminary%20data%20show%20another,contributions%20in%202024%20rr.pt.
And another for Portugal, areas with more immigrants as a share of population have lower crime rates https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/news/portugal-municipalities-more-immigrants-see-less-crime-2024-10-17_en
Really just a very poor post on your part, where you seem to uncritically repost stuff you see floating around on twitter or whatever and don't look into any of the actual research or even give lip service to questioning the source or how reliable it is. If this is what I can expect from you I don't know why I should stay subbed
He's posting whatever fits his prior bigotries.
If you notice, he avoids dealing with US immigration in detail, other than to try and imply/claim that US statistics are irrelevant because most Muslim immigrants are more educated in the US. Yet Minnesota has more Somali immigrants than any other US state, and its crime rate is low. And they were not all PhDs.
Their fraud rate seems a tiny bit high, no?
Compared to the people Trump pardoned and still pardons? Or compared to Operation Minnesota Siege itself?
"Operation Metro Surge", which state Republicans Tom Emmer, Lisa Demuth, Joe Marble and others created with the help of fraudulent video maker Nick Shirley, has to date cost Minnesota 10,000 lost jobs, two lost lives (Renee Good's and Alex Pretti's) and $854 million in lost business revenue and wages, none of which will be recovered, because the Minnesota Republican legislators are blocking Minnesota Democratic efforts to make the businesses whole. Feeding Our Future, the biggest of the actual fraud cases to go to court, cost at $250 million less than a third of that, a lot of the money (at least $45 million) was recovered, and no one was shot to death by ICE and CBP's mall cop rejects as a result of it.
https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/04/23/report-operation-metro-surge-cost-minnesota-thousands-of-jobs-in-hospitality-construction/
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2026/04/21/workers-lose-240-million-during-ice-surge-survey-estimates
$854 million is bad and still standard deviations below the amount of fraud committed by Minnesota Somalians.
"But trump..."
Why is Nick Shirley "fraudulent?" Seems he was pretty on the mark with that "learing center."
Not sure what the deaths of the two ICE protestors have to do with this topic.
What are the 854 million in lost revenues due to?
Also "Feeding our Future only cost taxpayers $250 million" is probably not the flex you think it is.
Trump pardoned Philip Esformes who stole $1.3 billion from Medicare. But he's white, so you're OK with that.
As for Feeding Our Future: the ringleader was a white woman.
Did you notice that even JD Vance had to back off the "billions" bullocks in last week's press conference? In fact Joe Thompson, the guy who last year started the Billions lie you are still in love with, is no longer defending that lie on behalf of the Trump administration. Not after it was used to kill Renee Good and Alex Pretti. Thompson's slumbering conscience got woke, literally, and he not only quit the US Attorney’s office, he's now working as one of Don Lemon's defense attorneys in the Cities Church case.
I'm not okay with pardoning Esformes; also, it has nothing to do with his race, but feel free to make all the assumptions you want. Same with Aimee Bock.
Where did you get that I am in love with a lie about "billions?" And someone used those "billions" to kill Good and Pretti?
I guess you're ok with people disrupting and terrorizing religious services--see how this works?
Great info. Yes unfortunately it seems like this Substack is off the deep end. The other comments on this post referencing the "crusades" and so forth are a good indication...
Yes anyone who questions the "advantages" of massive waves of immigrations from MENA is off the deep end. Spot on, mate!
This is a weird turn from "here are some facts" to "we should not judge"
When countries are "good at taking immigrants" it usually means, the people suffering under the consequences get ignored. Like the victims of sexual assaults.
83% of sexual offence suspects were known to the victim
Why link this issue to immigration?
(source: https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-rvsoaso/relationshipbetweenvictimsandreportedsuspectsforsexualandassaultoffencesq32021-q32022/)
What does that figure have to do with the fact that certain types of immigrants are absurdly overrepresented in sex crimes?
Immigrants are often known to non-immigrant victims. And assuming that figure for Ireland holds true for the countries discussed in the piece, the state still has to expend resources on investigating and prosecuting sex offences committed by immigrants against immigrants, as well as cleaning up the aftermath (eg, providing some level of care to the immigrant victim)
Feel free to share the figures and studies you’re referring to, like I did
And if these suspects are immigrants, sure noone knew them, because they are immigrants and noone native knows any immigrant because they are racist?
Immigration status is not what causes someone to commit sexual violence. Sexual offences exist in every society, across every ethnicity, nationality and social class.
Reducing the issue to “immigrants” ignores the broader reality of how and where most sexual violence actually happens.
If you want to discuss crime rates among specific demographics, that’s a separate conversation. But it still wouldn’t change the fact that most sexual violence is committed by someone the victim already knows (their partner, family member, friend…)
You will get a lot of criticism for this post from the Left despite simply stating facts. I am left leaning for what it's worth but the data evidence is undeniable.
Ingesting immigrants of such a radically different way of life is detrimental to Anglosphere countries. The Right is not rising because they are fooling the public, they are rising because the Public sees with their own eyes what is happening to their towns and cities.
And that doesn't mean you are racist to say that. It means you are logical and follow the evidence, which you would assume the Left would appreciate, but I guess they don't.
This is an extraordinarily difficult subject to write about honestly, especially about/ in Europe, so credit for attempting it seriously and with data rather than slogans.
One thing that stands out to me is how quickly discussion of immigration, integration, crime, or social cohesion can collapse into moral labeling. You can already see in some of the comments that simply raising concerns risks someone being branded “far right” or racist. That’s dangerous for democratic discourse. If every mainstream person who talks about visible integration problems is treated as morally illegitimate, eventually only actual extremists will be willing to discuss them publicly.
The problem is also complicated by the gap between reality and social media amplification. Many Europeans clearly do encounter real issues around integration, public order, parallel communities, or cultural tension in everyday life. But online discourse then extrapolates those realities into sweeping civilizational panic. Both denial and hysteria distort the picture.
I suspect this dynamic partly explains the rise of parties like AfD in Germany and similar movements elsewhere. A lot of voters may not necessarily be ideological extremists; they may simply feel that established parties refuse to acknowledge obvious tensions.
What makes the situation especially hard is that Europe doesn’t appear politically capable of either a truly hardline right wing solution or an expansive, expensive, long-term integration-heavy left wing solution. So the most likely outcome is probably what Europe often does best: muddling through incrementally, imperfectly, and unevenly.
Garrett in this very thread has already debunked the post:
https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/the-criminal-socialm-and-economic/comment/265526591
Tomas, your reporting has become anti-muslim. This article could be straight out of Far-right books of Kubitschek and other people of the 'Great Replacement Theory'. Feel reach out if you might change your intention of reporting. I cannot support this Substack becoming a haven for far-right extremists as you can see from the comments. Feel free to reach out to me.
I am very sad to see this development. But I am not angry.
>after a well-documented research writes as a conclusion that "Immigrants are nearly always fiscally expensive", "Immigrants commit substantially more crime than any other group" and "Immigration reduces local trust and social capital"
> proceeds writing "Europe needs immigrants"
Bro are you ok?
In European discourse, saying “Europe does not need immigration” immediately places one near the hard identitarian/right-populist camp. By affirming immigration in principle, he signals he is not anti-foreigner,
not ethnonationalist,
and not arguing for total closure
No? Yes, we will remigrate them. You will not destroy thousands of years of our civilization with cognitively impaired hordes of orcs just because you don't have any balls.
Total immigration restriction is probably impossible in Europe: legally, economically, diplomatically, and morally within current European norms.
Every single one of these things you listed is fake and easily changed. Legally impossible? Change the law. Morally impossible? Lol. Diplomatically? Are you serious? Nobody cares, especially the US or China. Economically - the argument has just been made, you dolt, that they are a net drain. Paying them to leave, even, would make more sense than keeping them on welfare.
You're preaching to the choir, mate. You don't have to persuade me about the stats; neither did Tomas. His entire piece confirms my priors. However, I also believe that Europe as it stands cannot actually solve this problem. The frustrating bit is that you're correct to call the solutions easy and the challenges fake. That's what makes it more annoying.
PS: the name calling does remind me of Twitter
Wow, that's a wild set of data. I did a quick look for data for here in Canada, and similar to the US the crime stats reverse. If you want neighbourhood crime to go down _increase_ the number of immigrants. e.g. https://johnhoward.ca/blog/immigration-and-crime/
At a first guess it's the Canadian immigration policy point system which increases the likelihood of solidly employable people, combined with the difficulty of getting here sorting for capability and class. There are regional pockets with problems, but in general everything goes smoothly.
I need to do more research to match against your data sets, but yeah, lots of immigrants in my suburb and it's so peaceful it's boring ;)
Modern Western civilization is no match for people's coming from countries where arguments are settled by throwing stones.
Immigrants from Africa/MENA cost much more than they contribute yet we need more? We lose on every item but make it up on the volume?
The body of the article is so focused on dysfunction and risk that the closing “Europe needs immigration” line can read less like the natural conclusion of the evidence and more like a moderating caveat, a credibility signal, or an attempt to remain within acceptable elite discourse boundaries. That doesn’t necessarily make it insincere. It may simply reflect the tension many European conservatives now hold simultaneously
The numbers don't lie, and the story they tell is that our western sensibilities in Europe and the USA were caused by what Professor Gil Saad describes as the West's suicidal empathy. He has just written a book with the same title that I would urge those that wonder how we got here should read...truly a remarkable book.
As always, nothing is ever perfectly cut and dry, but a huge component of what has caused these problems in the West is the empathy shown towards the many that take advantage of the privilege and the many who are unwilling to adopt the culture of the West.
I am reminded of the Japanese legend that says....
If you get on the wrong train, get off at the nearest station, as the longer it takes you to get off, the more expensive the return trip will be.
I believe it fits the dilemma the West now has to grapple with.
I'm shocked. After all that data you conclude that "massive waves of deportation should not occur". Immigrant behavior doesn't converge to local performance. Three generations of Danish data demonstrate that. What more do you require to conclude that immigrants are detrimental to a thriving Europe?
To all those who claim this post lacks past or present data analysis from the US, I think it is not the right place to expect them. Clearly, the focus here was Europe, and US data is merely anecdotical.
I find the piece VERY interesting. Thought provoking. What I expect from your posts.
One question Thomas: is there a way to correlate unemployment with crime (a very hard word, legally inadequate), not merely statistically but through data laying out the occupation of “criminals” at the moment of their “crime”?
This article is sponsored by 'The Kremlin - stoking Western division by carefully selecting statistics' programme
Many years ago, a right-wing friend of mine gave me a copy of Reflections on the Revolution in Europe (2009) by Christopher Caldwell. I found it very interesting at the time despite it being well to my right (I'm an American) but may make for an interesting read ~20 years later. Seems apposite to your post.
Garrett's debunked the entire post:
https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/the-criminal-socialm-and-economic/comment/265526591?
"debunked"
Why don't you read it, Kleagle?
I did.
"Kleagle" is hilarious, especially since I have never registered as a Democrat. But I heard a lot of Kleagles and Exalted Cyclopes did.
Have a good day.