It then becomes a response to some national policy ordered by the authorities of the country of origin that is judged too authoritarian or inadequate. Sometimes those who leave feel torn between the fear of abandoning or betraying their country and the urgency of choosing to leave for their own survival or safety. But for these people, leaving is the best response to a country that no longer knows how to take care of its people.
When Russian politics forced people to leave the country
In early May 2022, the Russian Federal Security Service noted that 3.8 million Russians had left the country since January. That is 2% of the country's 140 million inhabitants. This is a surprisingly high figure. Russian exodus has been going on for decades, but it was kept hidden. It was not that the authorities refused to face reality. On the contrary, for the country, it was all about getting rid of "troublemakers": human rights activists, opponents of the regime, business leaders whose spirits were not " in phase " with the vision of the State, avant-gardists, and artists who did not comply with the current regime.. They were all seen as "nail heads" trying to hinder the smooth running of the country. With the war, this argument is no longer acceptable. Those who leave today are precisely taking their distance due to unjustified violence.
Most of them condemn the authoritarian toughening of current rules. For example, anyone caught spreading "false information about the Russian army" risk up to 15 years in prison. Those who dare to say "no" to the war can or participate in protests risk being arrested. The Kremlin has been particularly targeting NGOs, journalists, artists, activists, and human rights activists with such sanctions, as these are usually against the government's policies. However, not everyone has the choice to leave, even if they want to. Some of them are compelled to stay and take care of their families. Others are rushing to neighboring countries like Georgia, Kazakhstan, Armenia and Turkey, away from persecution.
The Chinese policy that restricts entrepreneurial freedom
In China, too, moving abroad as a sign of protest is not a new phenomenon. In fact, it has increased with the country's economic expansion. But although China opened up to the free market economy in the 1980s, economic power remains in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Chinese business leaders speak of "economic insecurity". Liang Wengen, one of the country's wealthiest citizens in 2012, said that "his property and his life belong to the country." And this view is shared by most entrepreneurs in the country.
During the same period, according to a study by China Merchants Bank, 27% of Chinese entrepreneurs had moved abroad, while 47% were thinking of doing so. Most of these entrepreneurs considered the CCP's many constraints on their freedom to do business a significant hindrance. The party's control is a bottleneck as the government combines a liberal economy and authoritarianism. Entrepreneurs who dare to speak out risk heavy sanctions. In fact, in 2020, several leading business leaders were sentenced by the Chinese justice system. Ren Zhiqiang, a leading real estate entrepreneur, was sentenced to 18 years in prison, and Li Huaiqing, a philanthropic entrepreneur, was sentenced to 20 years. Still, the CCP maintained its pressure. In November 2021, it urged Chinese companies to leave the Wall Street stock exchange to better control their investments. The message is therefore clear for the Chinese entrepreneurs: if they want to live freely, it will be outside China.
Chinese youth seeks freedom too
Chinese youth is also eager to leave, and the Covid pandemic has only accelerated their desire to move abroad. However, procedures are tedious, and young people fear being stopped at customs. Many say the pandemic triggered their desire to leave, blaming the government's zero Covid policy. They feel trapped in their own country, traumatized by the harsh rules, which locked them down overnight and made their everyday lives miserable. They fear that such policing will become the norm. For these young middle-class people, moving abroad means freedom. Recently, journalists Michaël Peuker and Jérémie Favre published on the RTS website (Swiss media), an analysis by the head of a consulting and support agency for immigration. Although no study has yet quantified the number of young Chinese people leaving, he believes this phenomenon will last long. "In the coming years, pandemic or not, the internal pressure will increase. The whole population is under pressure, whether young people, students, working people, or wealthy retirees. Inflation will rise, the depreciation of the national currency is looming, and professional opportunities are shrinking. It will be more and more difficult for people to improve their standard of living there. So the exodus is going to continue."
Moving abroad was better than supporting Trump
Authoritarian regimes are not the only ones concerned with this phenomenon. In the aftermath of Donald Trump's election, many Americans were anxious. Living for four years under the presidency of the former businessman known for his controversial statements was no less than a torment for them. During the campaign, many said they would leave the country if ever Trump won. And the media did put it into perspective, recalling that similar voices were raised during the Bush election. At that time, there had been a two-fold increase in emigration to Canada. However, it seemed that there was no direct correlation with Bush's election.
According to a Gallup poll, 16% of Americans said they wanted to leave the country because of Trump politics. This compares to 10% under Obama and 11% under Bush. Among those who refused to be governed by Trump were 20% women. Two times more women (40%) aged under 30 did not want to stay. In addition, 30% of the most precarious also said they wanted to leave the country, and 22% of Trump's opponents were also considering moving abroad.
Never has a president been so controversial. Not surprisingly then, the most neglected section of the population are those who have the greatest desire to leave the country. The same concerns are emerging as the Republicans reconstitute themselves, and those on the right end of the political spectrum are already positioning themselves as potential candidates.
To conclude
Should we speak of ''exodus''? The term might be too strong to describe the situation in the US, but it might be appropriate for Russia and China because they will be missing out on an important part of their active populations. These countries seem to be confronted with other forces emanating directly from their own. In China, Xi Jinping has a strategy to make up for the departure of wealthy Chinese and expatriates: compel the wealthy lot to return and train the Chinese youth who remained loyal to the CCP. However, many believe that there are few chances for this scenario to materialize. The market economy would not support a country retrenching into itself. But others point out that this is precisely the turn China has chosen to take, especially since the Covid pandemic. There is every reason to believe that emigration in opposition to the regime will continue. This phenomenon also applies to other political regimes plagued by corruption, authoritarianism, and the enslavement of populations.
