Europe is home to about 40 million non-European migrants and perhaps 25 million children of non-European migrants. The total is very close to the population of France and, due to the higher migrant fertility rate, will soon exceed France’s population of about 69 million.
Roughly 60,000 migrants entered Ceuta within the past week. Instead of giving each one a proper asylum hearing, the Spanish mostly pushed them out by denying them food and water (they left “voluntarily” rather than die of dehydration and hunger). This is now praised by pro-migrant European politicians, such as Ursula von der Leyen, who uses the hateful term “illegal migrants” (“no human is illegal” is now out the window?).
We can infer that Europe wants 65-70 million non-European migrants because the ones currently residing in Europe aren’t being sent home. Given that Europe considers these 65-70 million to be beneficial somehow (cultural, economic, and religious enrichment), why wouldn’t an additional 60,000 have also been considered beneficial? And if the 60,000 people who came to Ceuta recently aren’t beneficial, why wouldn’t Europe expel the 65-70 million current resident migrants as non-beneficial? Can this apparent inconsistency be turned into something vaguely logical?
(Note that if we were to add the Islamic Republic of Britain to the mix, that would be at least another 15 million and the non-European migrant+children population would be comparable to Germany’s population.)
It’s possible that “family separation” is bad when Donald Trump does it, but good when Spain does it? Those who claim to be under 18 may get whisked away to mainland Spain, while their parents are (illegally?) pushed back across the border:
Here’s a Spanish Member of European Parliament saying that refusing to accept asylum applications is an example of “dignity and respect” and “defend[ing] human rights”. (Also that Israel is the Great Satan (“genocides”) and the U.S. is the Little Satan.)
(Consistent with EU freedom of speech principles, the politician disabled comments on the above post.)
The Prime Minister, February 2026, in the New York Times, says that the migrants are “needed”:
Some additional excerpts:
Last month, my government issued a decree that makes up to half a million undocumented migrants living in Spain eligible for temporary residence permits, with certain conditions, which they will be able to renew after a year.
We have done this for two reasons. The first and most important is a moral one. Spain was once a nation of emigrants. … It is our duty to become the welcoming and tolerant society that our own relatives would have hoped to find on the other side of our borders.
This seems odd. Suppose that the dermatologist neighbor from Sheboygan invites you over for dinner on Saturday night. Do you then have an obligation to reciprocate by inviting someone from Sudan over on Sunday night? Maybe Spain could have a moral obligation to some of the countries that welcomed Spaniards in the past, but did any Spaniards emigrate to Sudan? Also, why make any economic arguments if something is a moral obligation? If one is obligated to do something does it matter whether doing it makes you better or worse off?
The West needs people. Currently, few of its countries have a rising population growth rate. Unless they embrace migration, they will experience a sharp demographic decline that will prevent them from keeping their economies and public services afloat. Their gross domestic products will stagnate. … The only option to avoid decline is to integrate migrants in the most orderly and effective way possible.
This is objectively false. See Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan as examples of GDP growth with working population shrinkage. (the Asian countries mentioned exhibit the following combination: shrinking population; more rapidly shrinking working age population; growing aggregate GDP; more rapidly growing per-worker GDP).
Here Pedro Sánchez turns out to be a prophet:
Neither A.I. nor robots will be able to prevent this outcome, at least not in the short or medium term.
How did someone with no technical education come to be more of an expert on the likely trajectory of AI and robotics than all of the AI and robot nerds in California and China?
MAGA-style leaders may say that our country can’t handle taking in so many migrants—that this is a suicidal move, the desperate act of a collapsing country. But don’t let them fool you. Spain is booming. For three years running, we have had the fastest-growing economy among Europe’s largest countries. We have created nearly one in every three new jobs across the European Union, and our unemployment rate has fallen below 10 percent for the first time in nearly two decades.
Spain is a dwarf among midgets, in other words?
Riddle me this: How do you boil a (European) frog? Answer: Gradually! If you bring too many migrants too fast, the frog, she will get scared and jump out. But you bring them slowly and voila! A well-cooked frog = a perfectly managed diverse European Union. Bon Appetit!
Do your friends call you Emmy or Manny? Anyway…do you know what else is diverse? Deez Nutz…bon appetit, President Pepe Le Pew.
Candace Owens calls my wife “Manny”. I think Candace looks like that porn star, Ana Foxxx.
You Americans would be better off getting political advice from Ana, truly.
I didn’t know the President of France/Co-prince of Andorra was important enough to have a Wikipedia page like Phil. But there it was and, uh, son — you be a granny magnet yo. You “met” your wife when she was 39 and you were 15 (age of consent in France). You thinkin’ of giving granny up for some portagee politico dude closer to your own age? Saw ya posting together. ‘Nuff said.
Phil, your post is so incredibly timely! Let me help you out a bit on the New Europeans in Ceuta and the New Socialist Europe more generally. I have noticed you have been struggling a bit with this topic in recent days. I know you have conversed an infinite amount with two of our Most Important Leaders in Europe (Keir Starmer and Luis Montenegro) and that you are in fact a New Portuguese. Congratulations and Welcome to our Inclusive New Society! Yesterday, I believe the Great Ones (Keir and Luis) explained in great detail the type of New Europeans we seek (in their post on this blog) and why:
1) Peaceful, deeply religious Islamic Families who cherish child rape, Enslavement of women (including, of course, clothing them in head-to-toe black rags), Jew Murderers, Low-IQ. And a few other things we can explain later.
The two elements that I wanted to add to their super complete and detailed response is two things: 1) Dear Leaders like myself in Europe are totally unelected by the populace, as it should be of course. Leaders like the Great Ones (Keir and Luis) choose the Overlord Dear Leaders like myself, who actually rule over the Proles (as described in George Orwell’s Great Book). 2) In Socialism, one of the most important duties of Dear Leaders like me is something we call Gaslighting. It is intended to marshal all of the Proles behind the Dear Leaders. As George Orwell described, the Proles are meant to remain completely unware of their oppression. So, when I reference these New Europeans as “illegal” you need to remember one word…are things a bit clearer now?
Advice to the next wave of illegal migrants arriving in Ceuta: bring rainbow flags, pro-Palestinian flags, and anti-Trump signs. Only then you will earn a warm welcome in Europe.