How the West lost control of immigration, crime, and antisemitism

Fault Lines examines the pressures pulling Canadian society apart and the principles that can hold it together. We look beyond headlines to understand how institutions, communities, and democratic norms are fraying. Our mission is to show how better choices can repair what is broken. In a wide-ranging and often sobering interview on the Hub Dialogues podcast, Elliot Kaufman, editor of The Wall Street Journal’s letter page, joined host Stephen Staley to unpack the deep structural shifts reshaping American politics. Kaufman, who was born in Ottawa and grew up in Toronto, examined topics ranging from immigration to crime, courts, and the alarming rise of antisemitism. Kaufman insisted that today’s turbulence is not accidental. Across the West, elites made a series of choices, often framed as moral or technocratic, that weakened borders, hollowed out public order, and sidelined ordinary citizens. Over time, those choices produced the backlash and polarization that now define democratic politics. Kaufman’s warning is stark: when institutions like governments, courts, and cultural elites stop enforcing basic norms, they create fear, radicalism, and disorder. Here are five takeaways on the current situation and future of liberal democracies. 1. Immigration enforcement didn’t collapse by accident Kaufman argues that unfettered migration across the West is not simply the product of government incompetence but of an elite culture that lost interest in enforcement, once disorder faded from daily life. When crime receded after the 1990s, immigration became less a practical governance issue and more of a moral and academic one. “As things like disorder, crime, national cohesion…become less salient. You [had] more room for all kinds of radical theories like, ‘Do we need immigration enforcement at all? What would happen if we simply stopped doing it?’” As that thinking spread through the United States’ Democratic Party and its activist and donor networks, immigration enforcement began to seem not just unnecessary but morally suspect. The system, meanwhile, quietly transformed. Illegal immigration increasingly flowed through the asylum process, where enforcement became an illusion. The Pew Research Center estimated unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. hit a record high of 14 million in 2023, up from 11.8 million the year prior, and up over 3.5 million from when President Donald Trump left office. Simultaneously, said Kaufman, economic migrants began claiming asylum. Public frustration grew, not because people opposed immigration, but because they could see that the state had lost control of a fair set of rules that kept the flow of migration manageable. 2. Ideology made competent management impossible Asked whether the crisis was the result of mismanagement or ideology, Kaufman rejected the premise that the two could be separated. Ideological red lines, he said, made it politically dangerous for officials to do the basic work of governing. “There were ideological constraints that made good management nearly impossible,” he explained. “There were lines that couldn’t be crossed.” Democratic politicians, said Kaufman, operated under intense pressure from activist groups and donors who treated enforcement as a betrayal. The greatest risk was not policy failure—it was being seen as aligned with conservatives and agreeing with Fox News. As a result, voters came to see leaders like President Joe Biden not as ideologues but as allowing ideologues to heavily influence border policies. “They didn’t see him as this far-Left ideologue,” described Kaufman. “They saw him as asleep at the switch…handing over control to people who were ideologues.” That perception of abdication proved politically devastating for the Democrats in the 2024 general election. 3. Soft on crime leads to backlash from voters Kaufman sees crime policy following the same arc as immigration. As policing and incarceration succeeded in reducing crime, progressive elites forgot why those tools existed in the first place. Violent crimes, according to FBI statistics, have dropped to less than half the rate of their peak in the early 1990s, when 750 offences were committed per 100,000 people.  With safer streets, arguments about injustice and over-policing gained traction. As crime decreased, he said people started asking, “Why are we locking up so many people?” But what ultimately drives politics is not statistical crime rates; it is lived disorder. Voters deeply felt when their public spaces became unsafe, chaotic, and hubs for antisocial behavior. 4. Courts have weakened democratic control over order Even when public opinion shifts, Kaufman warned, institutional barriers can prevent a much-needed correction. Courts, particularly, have removed many public-order questions from democratic debate. “When issues are taken out of popular democratic control, when courts end up deciding these questions, the people can feel disempowered.” Decades of litigation have narrowed police discretion, often in the name of preventing discrimination, he explained. “The ACLU [American Civil Liberties Union] fought hard and won a series of precedents that have tied the hands of cities’ police and make it very difficult to actually get common sense rules allowing police any sort of discretion, he said “Because as soon as you allow discretion…you can say, ‘Well, that’s where discrimination enters,’” said Kaufman. The result is paralysis: voters want change, but the democratic system can’t deliver it. That gap fuels cynicism and radicalism alike. 5. Antisemitism is a downstream policy failure Kaufman’s most chilling insight concerned the transformation of Jewish life in the West. What was once unthinkable is now routine. “In the span of a generation, maybe a little more, it has become the case that Jews cannot pray anywhere other than under armed guard.” He said this was the result of Western countries making the choice to import large amounts of bigoted extremists, often from the Islamic world. These individuals then face lax and forgiving law enforcement. For many Jews, the most frightening part is not the hostility—it is the sense that the state will not protect them. “What’s scary for a lot of people, including in Canada, is the sense that the police and the government aren’t on your side, and won’t be there for you.” This story draws on a Hub video. It was edited using NewsBox AI. Full program here.