The Hypocrisy of “Go Back Home”

The same tired phrase resurfaces in political discourse and street-level hostility every few years, sometimes every few weeks: “If you don’t like it here, go back home.”
Or, more bluntly, “Go back to where you came from.”

It is a line aimed at Muslims, immigrants, refugees, and second-generation citizens whose names sound “foreign,” whose skin is darker than the majority, or whose religious practices make some people uncomfortable. It is shouted at protests, muttered in casual conversation, and weaponized in policy rhetoric.

At first glance, it pretends to be a call for national cohesion or cultural pride. In truth, it is neither. This phrase is not an argument. It is an emotional outburst disguised as political analysis. It deserves to be confronted for what it truly is: historically ignorant, morally hollow, and logically flawed.

The notion that Europe ever belonged exclusively to white Christians is fiction. Europe has always been diverse. It has been shaped by conquest, trade, migration, and intellectual exchange throughout history.

The Roman Empire was Mediterranean and included North Africa and the Levant. The Moors ruled southern Spain for over seven centuries. The Ottoman Empire controlled much of Eastern Europe for generations. Muslims have lived in the Balkans since the fourteenth century. Jewish communities, African communities, and Roma populations have long been part of the European story.

To claim that Muslims are outsiders disrupting some pure European identity is to erase thousands of years of pluralism. No one owns Europe by default.

Millions of Muslims in countries like France, the United Kingdom, Germany, and the Netherlands were born there. Many of their parents were invited by the states, who are now trying to push them out. These Muslims speak the national language, work in public services, and contribute daily to the economy.

To tell someone born in London, Paris, or Berlin to “go home” because of their faith or ancestry is to reduce citizenship to racial conformity. It is not just offensive. It is the language of ethnic nationalism, not civic belonging.

When people ask why Muslims are “here,” the answer is simple. Europe went to them first.

The United Kingdom, France, Belgium, and others built empires across the Muslim world. They extracted wealth, redrew borders, displaced populations, and left behind political messes that still destabilize those regions today. Colonial subjects were told they were part of the empire and were needed for labor. Their lands were mined. Their people were exploited. Their cultures were studied, appropriated, and regulated.

If a Pakistani moves to Birmingham or an Algerian to Marseille, it is often because Britain and France moved into their countries long before they ever left them.

You cannot colonize someone’s homeland for a hundred years and then act surprised when they appear on your doorstep.

The stereotype that Muslims are lazy, criminal, or parasitic is not just false. It is the opposite of reality.

Muslim immigrants and their children are often overrepresented in hard labor sectors. They drive the buses, clean the streets, deliver the packages, and staff the hospitals. In the UK, for example, a significant percentage of doctors in the National Health Service come from Muslim backgrounds. Muslim-owned businesses generate billions in economic activity. Muslims pay taxes and help sustain the infrastructure of aging European societies.

If Muslims “went home,” entire sectors of the economy would collapse. It is not Muslims who are dependent on Europe. It is Europe that depends on them.

European countries pride themselves on being liberal democracies that champion freedom of speech, religion, and thought. Yet these same freedoms are often withheld from Muslims.

Muslims are demonized for wanting halal food, for wearing hijab, for building masajid, and for organizing politically around their beliefs. From France’s niqab ban to Switzerland’s minaret restrictions, laws are passed that disproportionately target Muslim religious expression.

You cannot have it both ways. If Europe is to be a land of liberty and equality, it must apply those values universally. Otherwise, these freedoms are nothing more than selective privileges for those who conform to cultural norms.

Far-right politicians often talk about immigrants as a burden, while in the same breath, they lament declining birth rates and labor shortages. This is the contradiction at the heart of anti-immigrant rhetoric.

Who will pay the taxes to support pension systems? Who will care for the elderly in hospitals and care homes? Who will sustain the workforce as native populations age and shrink?

The answer is clear. Immigrants will—many of them Muslim. Europe’s future is not being threatened by immigration. It is being kept afloat by it.

In conclusion, the phrase “Go back home” is not a policy. It is not constructive criticism. It is not rooted in law, ethics, or history. It is a reactionary slogan aimed at excluding people based on ancestry and appearance.

Muslims are not visitors. They are not guests. They are citizens, taxpayers, workers, neighbors, and fellow human beings.

If Europe truly believes in justice, equality, and democracy, it must reject this rhetoric and everything it represents.