Migration, detention, the demographic crisis and rights in a changing Europe
In many European countries, the word ‘security’ has gradually been stripped of its human meaning and filled with repressive connotations. Emergency policies, special laws, administrative detention centres, restrictions on the right to protest and constant rhetoric about order are becoming the standard response to complex social problems.
At the supranational level, the new line dictated by Meloni and Frederiksen, discussed at the recent Council of Europe summit in Chisinau, aims to strip the rules of international law that protect migrants of their meaning and practical effect, and to shift the European Union’s stance on migration even further to the right.
But we know that security is not about control, detention, deportations and the militarisation of everyday life. Real security stems from dignified living conditions, stable social relationships, functioning services and respected rights.
A model that does not work
In several countries, there are detention centres for migrants who have not committed criminal offences, such as the CPRs in Italy, which are usually presented as necessary tools for ‘managing’ irregular migration. In reality, they are places of administrative deprivation of liberty, characterised by a lack of transparency, degrading conditions and violations of fundamental rights, which lead to protests by detainees and ongoing tensions.
The results of such policies are well known: very few actual returns, extremely high costs to the public purse and no improvement in social cohesion. There is a huge humanitarian issue at stake, but it is not just about that. It is also a political, economic and social failure.
At the same time, the constant and increasingly restrictive ‘security laws’ crack down on dissent, curtail the right to protest and strengthen repressive powers, without resolving people’s real problems: precariousness, the high cost of living, the housing crisis, job insecurity and the depopulation of rural areas.
Migration: a real issue, not a slogan
Migration exists and will not disappear through walls, pushbacks or special decrees. It is a natural phenomenon as well as the result of wars, inequalities, climate crises and unsustainable economic models. Reducing everything to a dichotomy between ‘welcoming’ and ‘closing the borders’ is an oversimplification that helps no one.
Local communities need adequate services, housing policies, stable employment, infrastructure and genuine involvement in political decision-making. Migrants, for their part, need legal routes of entry, civil and social rights, opportunities to work and genuine integration, not ghettoisation.
Pitting people against one another – those with little against those with even less – is a classic strategy of any authoritarian regime.
The birth rate crisis: a social problem, not an ideological one
Many European countries are experiencing a serious demographic crisis: birth rates are falling, the population is ageing, and young people are struggling to build a stable future. Symbolic bonuses, temporary incentives or rhetoric about the ‘family’ are not enough to reverse the trend, because they do not tackle the structural causes: job insecurity, insufficient wages, difficulty in accessing housing, inadequate childcare services, unequal sharing of care responsibilities and a general lack of prospects.
People do not have children by decree; they have children when there is confidence in the future.
In this context, migration is not the problem, but part of the social and economic reality. Many key sectors of the European economy rely on migrant labour, often in conditions bordering on slavery. Continuing to deny freedom of movement and treating the phenomenon as a perpetual emergency only creates permanent precariousness, exploitation and social conflict.
Authoritarianism never brings order; it only creates divisions. Repression does not foster social cohesion; fear does not build communities; propaganda does not solve problems. When politics fails to manage complexity, it opts for the shortcut of control, but every authoritarian shortcut leaves a trail of ruin: mistrust, polarisation, isolation and conflict.
A different vision of security
A different approach to security
We believe that an anti-authoritarian approach to security must be based on a few simple principles:
- Dignity and freedom of movement: no person is a problem to be locked away.
- Responsibility: communities must be involved, not bypassed.
- Self-governance: the best solutions come from the grassroots.
- Pluralism: differences are not a threat.Practical solidarity: not rhetoric, but services, work and housing.
True security means having a roof over one’s head, a job, living in vibrant neighbourhoods that offer opportunities for participation, and knowing that rights apply to everyone.
Proposals to break the cycle of repression
It is not enough to say ‘no’; we need to build viable alternatives. Administrative detention must be abolished, and detention centres should be replaced with legal entry routes, regularisation, widespread reception, and the guarantee of a decent income or wage. Reducing irregular migration means creating legal channels, not closing them.
Policies to boost the birth rate should go beyond symbolic incentives; we need to implement social policies that guarantee affordable housing, stable employment, adequate childcare services, the sharing of care responsibilities and, in general, a dignified quality of life. And to achieve this, local communities must be able to invest in healthcare, schools, transport, local employment and community spaces. Genuine participation is equally essential: people must be able to decide on the future of their own local areas.
Protecting dissent
A safe society is also one that allows for dissent and protest.
The Anti-Authoritarian Alliance does not propose a closed ideology, but rather a pluralistic and practical one; it proposes a method: cooperation instead of command, autonomy instead of control, solidarity instead of fear.
We bring together anarchists, socialists, radical democrats, communitarians, environmentalists, people fighting for their own self-determination without sectarianism, and simply ordinary people: differences are not an obstacle, they are a source of richness. We are united by a simple conviction: no security is worthwhile if it is built on the deprivation of others’ freedom and dignity.
Conclusion
We believe that another path is both possible and necessary: more community, more dignity, more freedom, more future. Against all forms of domination. For self-governance and universal solidarity. For security that belongs to the people, not to those in power.