When the open borders crowd has lost Denmark. . .the Danes must be racist.

The Washington Post bemoans the fact that Denmark — “polite and progressive” — is taking a hard line on asylum seekers from the Middle East:

Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, of the center-left Social Democrats, has touted a vision of “zero” people arriving to Denmark outside the U.N. resettlement system. A key priority for her government: working with European Union allies to set up claims-processing centers far away.

This seems reasonable enough. If the U.N. has a resettlement system, why shouldn’t all immigrants to whom it applies be processed through that system before being settled in Denmark or anywhere else?

The Post doesn’t answer that question. Instead, it offers, in essence, an ad hominem argument — the “far right” (a label it uses four time in the article) favors the immigration policies in question:

The Danish case offers a vivid example of how far-right ideas are flourishing, even where the far right has struggled to gain power.

But if the restrictive immigration policy is flourishing under a center-left government, maybe that idea isn’t a “far right” one. Maybe it’s a common sense idea shared across most of the political spectrum.

Certainly, the “shared” part of that sentence is correct. The Post acknowledges this reality, but tries to spin it. It quotes a critic of Denmark’s policy who says that, with the influx of Middle East refugees in 2015 and 2016, Denmark’s political parties are “competing about being harder-line hard-liners.”

Right. Because Danes of nearly all political persuasions didn’t want the influx of people from an alien culture to continue unchecked. As the Post admits, Denmark’s current restrictive immigration policy in Denmark “has become the political center.”

The Post quotes a lawmaker who came to Denmark from Afghanistan as a child in the 1990s. He says immigrants can thrive in Denmark, if they embrace the country. The same is true throughout Europe.

The problem is that many immigrants from the Middle East and/or their children don’t embrace their European country of residence or a European identity. The adverse consequences, including terrorism, are there for all to see.

The Danes see them and are saying no thanks.

Denmark isn’t sending asylum seekers back to Syria, though. According to the Post, it can’t because Denmark doesn’t recognize the Syrian government.

Instead, Denmark detains immigrants in a “return center” while they await further word on their cases. If it’s determined that they meet the humanitarian criteria of the U.N. resettlement system, they can enter Danish society. But in the meantime they are not allowed to seek employment and must be present for daily check-ins. Combined with a lack of transportation, this restricts how far they can go.

The Post quotes a human rights activist who calls this approach “racist, duplicitous and hypocritical.” But no amount of name calling can overcome the logic of Denmark’s approach: If you haven’t been shown to be eligible for entry into a country, you shouldn’t have the run of that country.

The Post laments that the Danish approach may become the European mainstream. I lament that the thinking behind that approach doesn’t seem to be the American mainstream.