"The problem is that the willingness to cough up taxes for a government bureaucracy to support people with whom you sense some identity draws on a tribal instinct. You might not love it but you put up with it because you somehow identify with the people on the receiving end. There but for the grace of God go you. But the less you personally identify with those on the receiving end, the less sympathetic you are and the less willing you are to pay.One of the first of those societies being Germany, the country who pioneered the welfare state in the late 1800s. Many readers will be one step ahead here, knowing this period leads to the Nazi party and National Socialism. In this light the state welfare system starts to look like the recipie for that disaster. The ingredients are: laws enforcing national health insurance, a pension, minimum wage, workplace regulation, vacations and unemployment insurance. The catalyst for this toxic brew to ferment into fascism, via democracy, is a popular emphasis and awareness of the nation's diversity.
This is a fascinating observation because the ethic of the welfare state pretends to be benevolent toward marginalised groups. In practice, it only works by bolstering and feeding on identity politics. The larger the welfare state, the more the payers demand that it only benefit others like themselves.
The more diverse the society, the less likely you are to feel as if your tribe is winning in this redistribution game. You are now vulnerable to political manipulation. The first demagogue to come along and say “look at the creeps who are winning at your expense” wins the game. It’s an enormously powerful message. It taps into a deep sense of injustice that people have. Diversity becomes the proverbial straw that breaks the welfare camel’s back.
What does this breakage look like? It looks exactly like what we see around the developed world: the rise of nativism, police state authoritarianism, the boiling up of racialist feelings and movements, protectionist trade policies, centralisation of power in the hands of people who have no sympathy at all toward non-majority religions, races, and language groups.
In practice, this political dynamic can get really wicked. Social welfare states, such have been built since World War II, are only politically stable in exactly the kinds of societies that are incompatible with the kind of world the left wants and the kind of people the left believes we should be."
It took around 50 years to produce an Adolf Hitler from such an enviroment. Our post-war welfare state is now of a similar age. The question facing us is: which do you prefer multiculturalism or welfare? The more multiculturalism you have, the less likely people are to support Government welfare. Just as the more your state welfare prevails your country enforces the more likely it is to turn toward national socialism and fascism in its purest form.
The argument here is not that our presiding political leadership are fascists. Instead it is being said that the conditions necessary for fascism have been created in our time and country. They are an unintended consequence of our welfare system, coupled with our promotion of cultural and ethnic diversity.
 Further reading.
Choose: Diversity or the Welfare State
Marching to Bismarck's Drummer: The Origins of the Modern Welfare State