While I don't have a position on @Peter_Turchin's theories overall, I do think that the idea of reducing immigration in order to raise wages makes no sense. Data shows immigration has little effect on wages, and skilled immigration actually raises wages. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/can-history-predict-future/616993/

If @Peter_Turchin wanted to make an anti-immigration argument, his "elite overproduction" thesis would be a more natural fit. He might argue that skilled immigration is displacing educated native-born Americans from the elite positions they had expected to inherit...

In fact, I think there is something to that argument. And I think it's a low-key, little-discussed reason why Dems will probably allow Trump's cuts in legal skilled immigration to stand... https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1275479489447735297?s=19

This WaPo article sort of confirms my suspicion. It says Biden will act to let in more asylum seekers and refugees, but will balk at restoring legal immigration (which is mostly skilled).

https://www.google.com/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/12/biden-is-already-signaling-big-moves-immigration-that-bodes-well/

And @wesyang has argued - persuasively, in my view - that various attacks on elite high schools and standardized tests involve an element of protectionism by a white elite afraid of being displaced by an up-and-coming Asian elite. Much as WASP elites once feared Jewish elites...

So unfortunately I think @Peter_Turchin is right to think a long-term bipartisan anti-immigration backlash is in the cards...I just think it will focus on skilled immigration (mostly from Asia).

(end)