Dutch Elections: The reality of voting Wilders and the Haider Comparison

Anti-Islam, anti-Immigration, anti-EU "Freedom Party Leader" Wilders

The Dutch General Elections of 9 June 2010 resulted not only a defeat for the previous Government but an increase in seats for the anti-Islam, anti-EU, anti-Immigration, far-right, one-member Freedom Party (PVV) of Geert Wilders.   The question is why?  Is, perhaps, the concept of radicals that the public is stupid and need to be told what to think and do?   I think not.

As with everything, there are causes, concerns and genuine fears in the public’s eye and that needed to be addressed and if not found by mainstream, those that shout the loudest get the hearing.   Wilders spent a great deal, not on policy formation, but public affairs and it paid off.  

Radicals will use and abuse any real and rational concerns that exist.  Immigration is a concern, the very vocal and abusive radical Islamist movement in my country is serious and annoying to everyone.  Their anti-integrationist stance and blatant abuse of the Dutch good will to outsiders is pushing the limit.    Though it is a problem, it is not at the level that Wilders will have you believe, and of course, his solutions are ugly, unjustified and repugnant.  Either way, the con to a degree is working and the fragmented multiple-party method of voting in governments in The Netherlands has allowed someone with under 20 per cent of the vote to become the third largest party.

However, the results will not allow Wilders to be part of a government even though he is asking and even saying he is willing to compromise to do so.  That will fall on flat ears because Labour refuses to be in a coalition and the liberal VVD has no need for the PVV who will have no Senators to back-up any votes.  To add to it, everyone knows to give further acknowledgement already to this extreme change would be a disaster.   Both leading parties simply know that the next Dutch Parliament (at least in the lower house) is going to be a noisy and wild one.

There is a precedent of this happening before, but not in The Netherlands, but to the East in Austria and the Jörg Haider period.   Similarities are certainly there, and would be a good lesson for the establishment to advertise to give a bit of perspective back to the 15 or so percent of the Dutch people whom have fallen for the well-oiled and maintained Wilders con.

Anti-Semitic, anti-immigration, anti-EU "Freedom Party" leader Haider

Jörg Haider was an Austrian Nationalist, anti-Semite, anti-Immigration, anti-EU (starting to see the pattern now?) politician who ran the “Freedom Party” of Austria (FBO)  and became the Governor of the State of Carinthea.   During his short but very controversial reign, he formed a coalition with the Christian-Conservative “People’s Party” that pushed back Austria’s image as a tolerant liberal member of the EU to a level of boycotts, accusations of blatant national anti-Semitism and still with sympathies to its dark Nazi connections.  The other EU Member States simply refused to deal with Austria during that period.

Haider was sympathetic to and defended many Nazi-era actions.  Haider compared the deportation of Jews by the Nazis to the expulsion of Sudeten Germans from Czechoslovakia after World War II.  Haider had contacts with Holocaust deniers – a crime under Austrian law and understandably the relations between Austria and Israel collapsed.   Haider gleamed, from his anti-Jewish stance, support from certain leaders of the Arab Nationalism movement whom had taken on the anti-Israel/anti-Semitic stance.  Haider failed miserably over the next election, his party rejected him and he tried a come-back with a new break away (and more extreme) party.  

He died in a car accident in October 2008, the results of his being drunk at the wheel and speeding at over 140km/h in a 70 zone.  After his death, his deputy, very close friend and successor Stefan Petzner admitted that he had a relationship with Haider that was “more than very close” and with the “full knowledge of Haider’s wife”.    Under strict Austrian laws covering privacy and since Haider was dead, comments in the media about Haider’s alledged homosexuality and how he constantly surrounded himself with young handsome men was considered a “breach of personal and privacy rights”.

Though different in many aspects, there are some very clear similarities based on principles of radicalism.

Both Wilders and Haidar are closet fascists and support ultra-nationalist concepts to gain popularity.  Both target minorities and outsiders as the cause and enemy of all their country’s problems. Both willingly demand that the nation cross the line of acceptability and standards to combat these perceived evils. Both seek isolationism rather than pan-European cooperation, mostly to do with its incompatibility to the proposed radical legislation sort.

Both, though exposed and aware of what policies work, never proposed workable economic, social and political agendas or manifestos.   This was due to their preoccupation of getting the maximum popularist support at the price of simply offering effective national leadership.  Both search for scandal, attacking individuals or communities and saying what is not generally accepted, to ensure their names were constantly being mentioned in the press or in the cafés.

Haider was anti-Semitic and would go as far as to support radical Arab-nationalists that have chosen that line for their own benefits in their conflict with Israel.  Wilders, in a similar move, has pushed pro-Israeli views, built a strong relationship with the far-right of that country and even tried to introduce the Dutch Likud representative as a candidate for his party.  That was overturned by the Dutch Security Services when the person in question was deemed a “serious risk to national security”.

I think it is right to use the Haider example over the risks of allowing and tolerating Wilders to perform his radical con on the Dutch population.   Though I am confident that he will be eventually caught out.  If found guilty in the hate-crimes he is charged with and then the court system will have done the job for the people.   The risks, though, is increased isolation and distrust of my country and during hard economic and social times, that is important.

About donny2811
Trots Nederlands, goed gereist en een begerige politieke centrist met een speciale afkeer voor basissen.

5 Responses to Dutch Elections: The reality of voting Wilders and the Haider Comparison

  1. eslaporte says:

    Donny, I have an extensive amount of information on Dutch Muslims from various souses, including academic papers and journals, including in the field of criminology. I see very little evidence in the body of literature that Muslims in the Netherlands are some kind of “threat to Dutch society” and “want to islamifiy the Netherlands.”

    I do see two things also: First, that the “Dutch model” is probably working just fine. Second, problems with crime are not unique to Moroccan youth, but similar to problems in the US cities with poor-socially excluded youth living in areas with poor schools and no job prospects. There are also examples out of the Netherlands of outstanding people of Muslim-minority background that do manage to climb out of the social blackhole.

    The other is that the demographic and social literure show that the Netherlands and Europe are not being Islamified and that this is a myth. This Islamification myth is the center of gravity around which Wilders and his PVV part revolve. Knock out the Islamification myth, and Wilders is nothing – but the public will proably get tired of the Islamification myth before its really exposed as the horrible fraud that it is.

    If the VVD has less in common with the PvdA – they both have more in common (except economic plans) with each other than with Wilders’ PVV. I’ve read the VVD’s statements in favor of free expression, including in religion, and opposition to all forms of discrimination, including religious. Geert Wilders and his PVV party are not even compatible with larger Dutch society. The PVV is more like a hate group and is a pathology of the sickness of Dutch national character and identity. It is hoped that Mark Rutte is able to see that no further damage should be done to his country by excluding Wilders from a cabinet post.

    The “great success” of Wilders and his PVV appear to be protest votes against the Christian Democrats, perhaps by the CDA’s own supporters. We can see this in the great losses for the CDA and the success of the PVV. It is hoped that Rutte and the VVD will understand this gain by the PVV as what it is: A protest vote by CDAers and not some “cry to be heard” on the “Islamification” issue (myth) to the major political parties.

    You might not agree with me, but Pim Fortuyn, Theo van Gogh and Geert Wilders have done incalculable damage to their own country and its once great, proud heritage of religious freedom. The Netherlands is a country of panics, as well as minorities, especially when it comes to Muslims and Moroccan youth. If you haven’t see this blog entry I did on the Smiley Rape gang panic: http://blog.yellow-stars.com/2010/04/19/smiley-rape-gang-and-legends-about-muslims-in-the-netherlands/

    • donny2811 says:

      Actually, I agree with you in almost every aspect and that which I have doubts, it is only at the level, not the point. Your comments are more than appreciated and respected.

      If there are any points that I wish to highlight it is that perspective and perception is critical, it is what is first valued even before logic.

      Wilders’ vote was certainly a protest vote but it was also a sign of fear an concern and a protest that the CDA was unable to counter those concerns. Wilders intelligently took those not so large but real fears and made them grow and the CDA (well the government actually) was unable to counter that increasing fears.

      Still, having said that, were there is smoke there is fire. Yes there is an anti-integration element amongst some Muslim communities, particularly in my city of Rotterdam, parts of Amsterdam and very much present in Breda and Tilburg with both of them links to Antwerp and Brussels communities that do not make a distinction between Belgium and The Netherlands (family, social and other connections).

      They are not as vocal, in-your-face, or rabid as say UK4Islam (or whatever they are calling themselves now) but they are certainly organized and attempting their own agenda. They are supporters of radical Islamism, meaning that they “insist” everything is religous based and that somehow Europe must follow its standards and morals on thier interpretations of Islam. They do exist and they have made their presence felt and Wilders capitalized on them, adding and generalizing, and the usual rubbish that you and I know about.

      I agree with you totally, the majority of the Dutch-Muslim community is nothing like that, they are and have proven that there is a proud European but disitnctly Muslim community and the success of many is there, I know some of them personally, up to and including the Mayor of my city.

      For me it boils down to perception, because if we like it or not, it is the perception of the people (the voters) that wins and that is all that the Wilders or the Haiders of this world care about and will work, invest towards and target.

      Cheers and take care


  2. truthful says:

    it’s way too far to compare wilders to haider..
    although he is not a diplomat, he is right on a lot
    of issue’s.. you can’t judge from behind a desk..

    • donny2811 says:

      Thanks for your input.

      Who is judging from behind a desk? I live in Rotterdam, I have even represented my city on the local Council, including a large, poor and economically depressed Muslim population. I have seen the worst and the best that they can offer and I think I know the reality well enough.

      Showing a video only shows an event and it does not represent anything more or less than that event. Perspective is needed and not reactivism for a purpose.

      Wilders has an agenda, and the similarities to Haider are more compelling than a single or even a flood of such videos. To become important, Wilders has chosen the radical way and has made his scapegoat – Muslims to win it. Why? Is it because he failed in mainstream politics, is it his own personal and family history? That is still to be debated and the story is not over. Read some of the other items about Wilders, including the views of some professionals about the deep-seated reasonings he may have.


  3. truthful says:

    you’re right, it’s not a religion issue.. the problem is not Islam,
    the left elite judges what’s right for the people, but they don’t
    have to live amongst the havoc their visions cause..
    my grandparents lived in r’dam untill they were harassed
    out of their home.. the left blindness created wilders.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: