The left vs right lens through which you seem to be looking at this is a distraction.

There are two essential ideologies actually at play here.

The first is based on that, as Aristotle wrote, 'Humans are social animals', i.e. that humans don't live alone, as isolated individuals, but rather as communities/societies/nations.

Accordingly, your country is a kind home/garden for its people. Generations of your ancestors have been building it up, defending it, taking care of it, etc. The country doesn't belong to private interests. It belongs to all its citizens. In that spirit, its laws will be designed to protect these citizens from sociopathic private interests ... and not do the exact opposite.

The second ideology pretends (nobody actually believes it) in a borderless globalist world. A people's hard-fought-for country belongs as much to complete foreigners as to its people, those whose ancestors build, fought for and maintained the country. Only private ownership matters and it is to be opened up to and always kept open for globalist plutocrats errr 'investors'.

According to this ideology, if some primitive medieval-minded nation should happen to make its own country into an absolute shithole, its nationals must be encouraged to leave it (instead of evolving and fixing it) and to go to some 'nice' other people's country, which, depending on how many flood in, risks turning it into the very same kind of shithole they fled from.

This necessarily divides and weakens nations from within. It also places a huge strain on 'national' social services (to be 'saved' by privatization). It basically only benefits a globalist financial/economic clique.

This attempt to destroy any and all nations is of course clothed in ... 'kindness'.

And that, in a nutshell, is it.