Stephen Miller, a key former advisor to Donald Trump, has forcefully re-entered the contentious immigration debate with a provocative critique. He argues that the West's strategic choices following World War II have led to a period of deliberate self-weakening.
Miller's Scathing Critique on Social Media
In a detailed post on the social media platform X, Miller launched a broadside against what he termed the flawed immigration approach of previous Western governments. He asserted that these nations prioritised opening their borders over the welfare of their own citizens.
"Not long after World War II the West dissolved its empires and colonies and began sending colossal sums of taxpayer-funded aid to these former territories," Miller wrote. He added a contentious claim that these regions had already been made "far wealthier and more successful" by their colonial rulers.
The Core of the 'Neoliberal Experiment'
Miller's argument centres on the concept of what he calls a "reverse colonization." He contends that Western nations did not merely admit migrants but actively provided them with welfare benefits, full political rights, and in some instances, preferential legal and financial treatment compared to native populations.
"The West opened its borders... while extending to these newcomers and their families not only the full franchise but preferential legal and financial treatment over the native citizenry," he stated. Miller summarised this decades-long policy framework as "the neoliberal experiment," which he described as "a long self-punishment of the places and peoples that built the modern world."
Miller's Controversial Background and Policies
Stephen Miller is no stranger to immigration controversies. He was a central architect of several hardline policies during the Trump administration. He is particularly known for his role in the highly criticised family separation policy, where authorities separated children from parents who crossed the US-Mexico border illegally.
His latest comments are seen as a continuation of his long-held anti-immigration stance, now framed within a broader historical and geopolitical narrative about Western decline and post-colonial guilt.
By framing modern immigration as a form of self-inflicted decline, Miller's statements are likely to fuel ongoing debates in the United States, Europe, and other Western nations about border control, national identity, and the legacy of colonialism.
