The Economic History of Immigration in Northwestern Europe
November 22, 2025 · Frisian News
Northwestern Europe built wealth on waves of migration, yet today's political class treats immigration as a crisis rather than a structural economic fact. Historical data shows how labor flows shaped ports, factories, and farms, but modern leaders ignore these lessons.
In 1880, Rotterdam's docks hired thousands of seasonal workers from eastern Europe and the Mediterranean. Ships needed hands. Factories needed hands. Cities grew because labor came and stayed. The records are plain: immigration did not destroy wages in the long run, but it did reshape labor markets, push workers into new trades, and build fortunes for merchants who moved goods faster than their rivals. Northwestern Europe became wealthy not despite this movement, but largely because of it.
The data complicates the usual story. Wages in the industrial cities of Belgium, the Netherlands, and northern Germany did not collapse when eastern workers arrived. Workers moved between sectors. Textile mills hired women and children from rural areas and abroad. Agriculture mechanized partly because labor shortage drove innovation, not the other way around. Capital flowed toward labor. Cities boomed. Real wages rose for most workers between 1890 and 1970, even as immigration came in waves, especially after 1945.
Yet politicians today speak of immigration as an affliction. Voters in these same cities fear losing wages and jobs. The fear is not baseless, but the diagnosis is backward. When governments restrict immigration, they do not save wage growth. They reduce labor supply, which can slow growth overall and sometimes lock workers into worse jobs in shrinking sectors. The real damage comes from pretending immigration never happened, from treating it as an accident rather than an engine.
The postwar era offers the clearest lesson. Guest worker programs in Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands brought millions between 1955 and 1973. Factory owners wanted them. Workers often resented them. Yet the period saw Europe's fastest growth in living standards. Unemployment stayed low. Pensions rose. The migrants did not steal prosperity, they built it. When oil shocks hit and growth stopped, politicians blamed the migrants rather than their own lack of foresight.
Today's northwestern European leaders act as if history started yesterday. They impose limits, build walls, and sound alarms about cultural replacement. The irony cuts deep. Their own wealth sits on graves and birthplaces of migrants. Their ports, their rail lines, their factories, their suburbs, all grew because people moved for work. Acknowledging this does not mean opening borders with no thought. It means asking hard questions about who we serve when we block immigration, and what we gain when we do.
Yn 1880 huurden de dokken fan Rotterdam tûzenen seizoenarbeiders út Oast-Europa en it Middellandske Seegebied. Skip hiene arbeidskrêften nedich. Fabrieken hiene arbeidskrêften nedich. Stêden groeiden omdat arbeid kaam en bleau. De argivven binne dúdlik: immigraasje ferstoere leanen op lange termyn net, mar it fermenne arbeidsmarkten, drongen arbeiders nei nije beroeppen, en bouwden fortsjoen foar kouplui dy't guod flugger ferplaatsten as harren rivalem. Noardwesten-Europa waard wolstannich net ûndanks dizze beweging, mar gruttendiel dêrtroch.
De gegevens ynskomplisearje it gewoane fertelling. Leanen yn de yndustrjesteaten fan België, Nederlân en Noard-Dútskland sturten net yn doe oast-Europeeske arbeiders oankamen. Arbeiders wissele fan sektor. Tekstielfabrieken nimmen frouwen en bern út plattelânskgebieten en bûtenland oan. Lânbou mekanisearren diels omdat arbeidskearste ynnovaasje dreaf, net oarsum. Kapitaal fleach nei arbeid. Steaten bloeien. Reële leanen steagen foar de measte arbeiders tusken 1890 en 1970, sels do't immigraasje yn golven kaam, foaral nei 1945.
Toch sizze politisy hjoed oer immigraasje as in plaag. Kiizers yn deselde steaten betsjogge ferlies fan leanen en banen. De eangst is net ûngrûn, mar de diagnose is efterwearts. Doe de regearing immigraasje bepearket, redt it gjin loanesgroei. It ferklearret arbeidsoanbeats, wat algemiene groei kin fertrage en arbeiders soms yn sljochtere banen yn krimsende sektoren kin opsluting. De eachte skeade komt út it dwaan alsof immigraasje nea bard, út it behaneling derfan as ungeldoartk yn stee fan motor.
De neakoartstiid jout de dúdlikste les. Gastarbeidersprogram's yn Dútskland, Switserland en Nederlân brochten miljoenem tusken 1955 en 1973. Fabriektsieners woenen se. Arbeiders eargearje har der gauris oan. Toch seach de periode Europas fluchste groei yn levensstannich. Wurkeloosheid bleaun leech. Pensjoenen steagen. De migrantem stellen gjin wolstannichheid, sy bouwden dy. Doe oalje skokt toesleine en groei stoppe, jien politisy skuld oan de migrantem yn stee fan harren eigen gebrek oan foarsicht.
Hjoeddeiske Noardwesten-Europeeske leiders dwaan alsof skiednis juster begon. Sy lizze beperkingen op, bouwe muorren, en slane alarm oer kulturele ferfangings. De ironie snyt djip. Harren eigen rijkdom leit op grêven en biertepleatsem fan migrantem. Harren haven, harren spoarljinen, harren fabrieken, harren foarsteaten, alles groeide omdat minsken foar wurk ferhuze. Dit erkenne betsjut net dat do grinzen sûnder omtinke iepene. It betsjut heftige fragen stelle oer wa wy tsjinne do wy immigraasje blokkearje, en wat wy winne do wy dat dwaan.
Published November 22, 2025 · Frisian News · Ljouwert, Fryslân