Does a low immigration stance make a party/politician inherently rightwing

[rob in cal]

    In so much of the discussion about parties such as UKIP, the FN in France, and other such parties, the implication is that supporting low or no immigration to a country makes a party right-wing, unrelated to any other policy stance.  My question is, if a party was on what is usually considered the "left" regarding most or all other issues, but was for a low or no new immigration policy, would that party still be left-wing?  Put another way, in Ralph Nader's 2000 presidential campaign, he called for ending the brain drain of talented immigrants coming to the US, and thus implied support for lower immigration into the US.  Was Ralph Nader thereby a right-wing candidate?   

[politicus]

No, of course not. But in Europe such parties invariably also stand for tough law and order policies, discipline in schools etc. So they have an authoritarian bend which makes it natural to characterize them as "right wing", even those who are centrists on economics.
But left wing populist anti-immigration parties do exist. Denmark had one in the late 1980s. Fælles Kurs ("Common Direction") led by the ever swearing and colourful leader of the sailors union Preben Møller Hansen, who was a former Communist.

[rob in cal]

Politicus,
Very interesting about Common Direction. I hadn't heard of it before, and Hansen must have been a real character.  Personally, I like true independent minded political figures and it looks like Hansen was one of them.  I like how in his later years he was into cooking and wrote a cook book.

[Heimdal]

Obviously not. The communists in AKP-(ML) were against immigration during the 1970s and 1980s. AKP-(ML) was a Maoist party, and is the forerunner to the party Rødt. They opposed immigration because they believed it would create a surplus of labour, which would enable the employers to reduce the wages of the working class.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Xenophobia is right-wing, no matter how you slice it.

[Heimdal]

Xenophobia is right-wing, no matter how you slice it.

Opposition to immigration isn’t necessarily motivated by xenophobia.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Put another way, in Ralph Nader's 2000 presidential campaign, he called for ending the brain drain of talented immigrants coming to the US, and thus implied support for lower immigration into the US.  Was Ralph Nader thereby a right-wing candidate?  

Um, yes. Nader is right-wing. It's been heavily proven that Nader is a corporate puppet who accepted corporate and right wing activist money to run his campaigns and that his 2000 and 2004 campaigns were basically completely bankrolled by Republican activists, companies like Blackwater and Grover Norquist. Also even before he ran for President he accepted funding from rival corporations to the ones that he attacked, such as how he purchased stock in rival auto manufacturers to Chevrolet before writing his slanderous and discredited book that killed the Corvair. Nader has also teamed up with people such as James Dobson in his activism and has recently started advocating John Birch Society conspiracy theories about water fluoridation.

[politicus]

There are at least four possible reasons to oppose (mass) immigration from a leftist POV:

1. Wanting to avoid a surplus of labour depressing wages. Since immigrants are generally hard to organize mass immigration could also undermine the bargaining power of unions.

2. Increasing the population in countries with a high CO2 emission and high resource consumption makes it harder to combat climate change and other environmental problems. Even if immigrants have a very basic life style this is true. A poor African immigrant in Europe causes about 20 times as much CO2 emission than an average African.

3. Immigration from countries with reactionary values makes it harder to create a progressive and tolerant society. Many immigrants from non-Western countries are homophobic, sexist, anti-Jewish and - in the case of Muslims - intolerant about conversion from their own group. This puts pressure on the socially liberal society we have established and increases problems for women and minorities such as gays, Jews or atheist refugees.

4. Immigration causes brain drain of highly skilled people (such as doctors or IT-experts) better needed in their country of origin. So global solidarity (as opposed to the liberal/libertarian value of individual freedom of choice) could be used as an argument against allowing mass immigration.

EDIT: Those are arguments against mass immigration. I think it is impossible to argue against any immigration from a left wing or liberal POV, since such an argument would have to be based on an idea about not wanting foreigners to corrupt "our" way of life/morals/blood line etc. and that would be an inherently right wing way of thinking.
All though some of arguments I presented above could be used against a relatively small group (ie Indian doctors immigrating to the US).

[Хahar 🤔]

3. Immigration from countries with reactionary values makes it harder to create a progressive and tolerant society. Many immigrants from non-Western countries are homophobic, sexist, anti-Jewish and - in the case of Muslims - intolerant about conversion from their own group. This puts pressure on the socially liberal society we have established and increases problems for women and minorities such as gays, Jews or atheist refugees.

Yes, the classic far-right argument masquerading in the clothes of liberalism.

[Famous Mortimer]

3. Immigration from countries with reactionary values makes it harder to create a progressive and tolerant society. Many immigrants from non-Western countries are homophobic, sexist, anti-Jewish and - in the case of Muslims - intolerant about conversion from their own group. This puts pressure on the socially liberal society we have established and increases problems for women and minorities such as gays, Jews or atheist refugees.

Yes, the classic far-right argument masquerading in the clothes of liberalism.

So you have no counter argument to this except to call the people who say it racist?

[Simfan34]

I don't think opposing immigration that would strain limited resources is inherently rightwing.