The Myth of Welfare Magnetism: How Anti-Immigrant Sentiment Dominates German Politics

The Spectre of "Welfare Tourism"

As Germany heads to the polls, the issue of migration looms large, not as a discussion about fulfilling the country's critical labor needs, but as a battleground of restrictive border policies and deportation promises. The political landscape has been dramatically reshaped by anti-immigrant sentiment, fueling the rise of the far-right AfD and pushing established parties like the Christian Democrats, Liberals, and even the SPD rightward.

Even traditionally left-leaning parties like the Greens and the Left have grappled with internal divisions on the issue, culminating in the departure of the anti-immigration BSW from the Left party.

The "Welfare Magnet" Fallacy

One of the most potent weapons in the anti-immigrant arsenal is the notion of "welfare magnetism," or as it's more crudely termed by the AfD and others, "Sozialtourismus" (welfare tourism). This narrative paints migrants as exploiting Germany's social safety net, blaming them for strains on everything from minimum income support and child benefits to education and healthcare access.

For decades, German politicians have clung to this idea, implementing welfare exclusions for EU migrants in 2006 and 2016. Yet, these measures have yielded little more than normalized xenophobia.

Extensive research, including a major project conducted from 2019 to 2024, consistently debunks the welfare magnet myth. Study after study finds no evidence that welfare benefits significantly drive large-scale migration.

Weak Evidence, Strong Rhetoric

Even proponents of the welfare magnet theory struggle to produce compelling evidence, often relying on highly specific, and often contrived, scenarios. While immigration economist George Borjas suggests welfare benefits create “strong magnetic effects," he himself acknowledges the empirical evidence as “relatively weak," admitting there may be "alternative stories" to explain the data.

One study claiming "causal evidence" analyzed a situation in Denmark where asylum seekers were largely barred from working and had their belongings confiscated. Hardly a realistic depiction of free choice.

The Real Drivers of Migration

A primary driver of international migration is conflict. Refugees fleeing war often have no option but to rely on social support. Cutting these lifelines may force them to seek refuge elsewhere, but this is a matter of survival, not “welfare tourism.”

The Perils of Pandering

Centrist politicians often justify their adoption of anti-immigrant rhetoric by arguing they must address public fears, even if unfounded. However, research suggests mimicking the far-right only normalizes, rather than weakens, their extremist views.

Furthermore, such policies can exacerbate hardship in already struggling communities. Research in Dortmund's Nordstadt neighborhood reveals how welfare exclusions for migrants, coupled with economic disadvantage, lead to precarious living conditions and exploitative working situations.

A Crossroads for German Politics

Despite the lack of evidence, anti-immigrant sentiment continues to gain traction. Recent acts of violence by asylum seekers have provided further ammunition for the far-right, emboldening calls for stricter immigration policies and even leading to unprecedented cooperation between the Christian Democrats and the AfD.

The upcoming election presents a stark choice for Germany. While the current slate of candidates appears united in their portrayal of migrants as a threat, the political tides can shift. The question is, will Germany choose evidence over fear?