On September 25th, 2025, Kristina Boréus, Professor of Political Science at Uppsala University in Sweden, delivered a lecture on contemporary European identity and migration entitled “Migrants and Natives - “Them” and “Us: Radical Right and Mainstream Political Rhetoric in the Western European Shift to the Right.” Sponsored by the Institute of EuropeanStudies, the Center for Right-Wing Studies, and the Berkeley Interdisciplinary Migration Initiative, Boréus spoke to around 15 attendees, with additional participants attending virtually.She highlighted the cultural shift in European rhetoric that has advanced since 2015, where migrants and refugees are increasingly being perceived as threats – not just to public safety, but to cultural norms.
Boréus first provided context on migration trends relevant to the rise of the far-right, focusing on what she calls the “solidarity crisis,” rather than the popularized “refugee crisis.” In 2015, the EU struggled with two million asylum applications, almost triple the amount from the year before. The majority sought refuge from the Syrian Civil War, but others fled Iraq, Eritrea, Afghanistan, and more. This immigration surge and the EU’s response became a catalyst for
intense debates on security and cultural normativity. As radical far-right parties gained traction, a rightward shift infiltrated mainstream discourse. While many assume political rhetoric is merely language for advancement, Boréus argues it is fundamental to shaping social norms, behavior, and policy. To prove this, she drew from an analysis of speeches, statements, ads, and manifestos across Sweden, Austria, Denmark, Germany, Norway, Spain, and the UK. Boréus centered on the question of “Who belongs?” and its subsequent consequences in legislation and public acceptance.
Through her analysis, Boréus found five main frameworks: threat, charity, rights, native dominance, and equality. The threat frame, used mostly by radical parties, portrays migrants as security risks and criminals who may disrupt native societies. This leads to stricter asylum rules,heightened border control, and increased deportations. In contrast, the charity frame views migrants as fairly in need of help, as long as they contribute economically and culturally, a view
at odds with radical ethnonationalism. The native dominance frame stresses assimilation, claiming migrants must conform to native culture and norms. Boréus cited France’s secularization policies, including the burqa and niqab ban. The rights frame reiterates humanitarian and legal principles such as the Geneva Refugee Convention, advocating for due process beyond just citizens. Lastly, the equality frame asserts migrants deserve full political, economic, and social equality. While perhaps the most positive, it has largely been overshadowed by the threat frame and native dominance due to rising anti-immigrant sentiment.
Though she observed this shift across Europe (except notably in Spain), Boréus emphasized Sweden as an enlightening case study. Post-war Sweden’s social democratic openness to migrants aligned with its welfare state philosophy. However, beginning in the 1990s, neoliberal reforms reduced public assistance.. Boréus argued that Sweden’s current conservative dominance frames migration as a “problem that needs fixing,” leading to stricter borders and restrictions on asylum seekers. Overall, Boréus stressed the cultural shift of seeing migrants as “threats” instead of “victims,” and the policy implications of said shift. The lecture concluded with discussion on connections between the business sector, neoliberal think tanks, and the far-right, along with the impact of hate speech on migration trends. Sparked by a Q&A with attendees, Boréus also compared European far-right rhetoric to the populist right in the United States under Trump.