Do Muslim immigrants resist assimilation?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Research does not support a simple answer that “Muslim immigrants resist assimilation.” Multiple studies and reviews show mixed outcomes: some work finds Muslim immigrants assimilate at similar rates to other immigrant groups and adopt host-country norms over time [1] [2], while other research finds backlash, discrimination and local context can slow assimilation — for example, higher post‑9/11 hate crimes in U.S. states correlate with slower gains in English, higher rates of intra‑marriage and other markers of lower assimilation [3]. Demographic studies also stress diversity within Muslim migrants globally and regionally, meaning experiences vary by country, generation and local institutions [4] [5].
1. A simple stereotype, complicated by data
Public claims that Muslim immigrants “resist” assimilation rest on anecdotes and selective indicators; systematic reviews emphasize there is no single Muslim experience and that many measures show assimilation similar to other immigrant groups. CEPR’s review of British data finds no clear difference in the pace of assimilation between Muslim immigrants and other immigrant communities, and argues political rhetoric often exaggerates cultural distance [1].
2. Evidence of rapid social change in U.S. Muslim communities
Survey-driven accounts show rapid attitudinal shifts among U.S. Muslims on issues like social liberalism and intergroup ties. Cato’s summary of Pew findings notes trends such as falling share of third‑generation Muslims and growing acceptance of liberal social views, which the author interprets as signs of assimilation into broader American norms [2].
3. Backlash matters — discrimination can slow assimilation
Empirical research links anti‑Muslim backlash to measurable slowdowns in assimilation. A CEPR analysis finds that U.S. states with larger increases in Muslim‑targeted hate crimes after 9/11 saw slower rises in English proficiency, higher intra‑marriage (marrying within Muslim-origin groups) and labor‑force and fertility patterns consistent with less assimilation [3]. That research highlights assimilation as a two‑way street shaped by host‑society behavior as much as immigrant choices [3].
4. Diversity of origins and destinations changes the picture
Population and migration studies show Muslim migrants are concentrated across varied regions and come from diverse origins, so assimilation patterns differ by context. Pew’s global stock estimates place roughly 80 million Muslim migrants worldwide (29% of migrants), clustered across Middle East‑North Africa, Asia‑Pacific and Europe, indicating that regional labor markets, legal regimes and social reception will produce different assimilation outcomes [4]. Research on Germany suggests demographic shifts, upward mobility and increasing intermarriage could reshape boundaries over time [5].
5. Economic and generational assimilation often progress despite cultural retention
Longitudinal labor‑market studies emphasize immigrant earnings growth and human‑capital investment as central to assimilation narratives. Historical work on immigrant earnings convergence indicates sustained upward mobility over generations for many immigrant groups, which implies economic assimilation even when cultural or religious practices persist [6]. This echoes arguments that cultural retention (e.g., religious practice) and socioeconomic integration can coexist [6] [2].
6. What the literature does not settle
Available sources do not mention a single authoritative, cross‑national metric that proves Muslim immigrants either uniformly resist or uniformly embrace assimilation; instead, studies report conditional effects tied to local prejudice, policy, generation and country of origin [3] [1]. Sources here do not provide a definitive global ranking of assimilation by religion, nor do they supply exhaustive longitudinal cohort charts comparing all immigrant groups across multiple countries [6] [4].
7. Bottom line for policymakers and citizens
The evidence shows assimilation is conditional: many Muslim immigrants assimilate on social and economic measures at rates comparable to other groups, but discrimination and concentrated backlash measurably retard assimilation in some places. That pattern means policy choices — reducing hate crimes, enabling language access, and opening labor markets — matter as much as cultural explanations. Sources informing this assessment include CEPR analyses on backlash effects [3], comparative reviews on assimilation rates [1], Cato’s synthesis of Pew trends in the U.S. [2], global migrant statistics from Pew [4] and historical labor‑market work on immigrant earnings convergence [6].