The Politicization of Immigration in Portugal: Assessing the Reciprocal Relationship Between Public Perceptions and the Making of Political Agendas

Immigration, as any other social phenomenon, is subjected to collective representations and perceptions quite revealing about the dynamics it holds with its host societies. Though narratives about the presence of immigrants can be quite heterogeneous (therefore, with room for both positive and negative ones), we are concerned with narratives structured on ethnic and cultural biases about migrant residents and social groups with a migrant background. Prejudices and stereotypes tend to be immune to the lack of empirical support, since they are embedded more in emotional rather than in rational evaluations about reality. In parallel, they are capable of influencing and shifting the priorities of political agendas; the terms in which political discourses relating to migration are produced; and, ultimately, the outputs of decision-making, that is, the formation of public policies regarding the inclusion of migrants and ethnic minorities. Prejudices and stereotypes are therefore quite powerful and resistant to rational clarifications when it comes to feed polarizing attitudes against 'others' as vulnerable as immigrants. Recalling studies on collective representations and human attitudes, Dennison and Vrânceaunu (2022) summarize the main works which highlight some of the most relevant determinants of public opinion regarding immigration, stressing the effects of economic interests and feelings of economic threat; socialization; psychological predispositions; experiences of contact with immigration; and political positioning. Having this in mind, and focusing on the Portuguese case in the period between 2014 and 2024, we seek to identify and understand changes that may have occurred in the perceptions about immigration and in the contents of speeches of politicians and opinion makers, particularly in the context of anti-immigration and pro-immigration protests and demonstrations in Portugal. 1) How should we read the growing polarization of arguments regarding immigrants, in a country that, on the one hand, seemed rather immune to far-right nativist discourses until recently, and on the other hand struggles with severe demographic shortages in strategic economic sectors? 2) In which terms can economic and social contexts (national and international) help explaining the deepening of this polarization? Do those terms corroborate or contradict previous empirical findings present in studies about other societies? 3) How much is the politicization of immigration in Portugal a symptom of a general growth of polarization of societies, following thus European and global trends? 4) What relationship can be identified between the political parties with seats in the national parliament (Assembleia da República) in the last decade, and their discursive strategies and positions on migration issues? These are some of the questions that we deem important to (re)visit for a better understanding of how immigration is being socially and politically perceived over the past decade in Portugal, a Southern European country whose profile also as an immigration country has rapidly evolved.