After Janmaat it was silent for a while on the extreme right of the political spectrum. We all figured that we where still a very tolerant country and continued as we always had done, ignoring the problems that we had created ourselves until Pim Fortuyn came to the stage. Now don’t get me wrong. Fortuyn was not nearly as bad as Janmaat and he was among the first to openly speak about the real problems we had created however many people felt he was doing so in a populist way
In 1992 Fortuyn wrote “Aan het volk van Nederland” (To the people of the Netherlands), declaring he was the successor to the charismatic but controversial 18th-century Dutch politician Joan van der Capellen tot den Pol. A one-time communist and former member of the social-democratic Labour Party, Fortuyn was elected “lijsttrekker” of the newly formed Livable Netherlands party by a large majority on 26 November 2001, prior to the Dutch general election of 2002.
On 9 February 2002, he was interviewed by the Volkskrant, a Dutch newspaper (unfortunately not archived). His statements were considered so controversial that the party dismissed him as lijsttrekker the next day. Fortuyn had said that he favoured putting an end to Muslim immigration, if possible. Having been rejected by Livable Netherlands, Fortuyn founded his own party LPF (Pim Fortuyn List) on 11 February 2002. Many Livable Netherlands supporters transferred their support to the new party.
As lijsttrekker for the Livable Rotterdam party, a local issues party, he achieved a major victory in the Rotterdam district council elections in early March 2002. The new party won about 36% of the seats, making it the largest party in the council. For the first time since the Second World War, the Labour Party was out of power in Rotterdam.
Fortuyn’s victory made him the subject of hundreds of interviews during the next three months, and he made many statements about his political ideology. In March he released his book The Mess of Eight Purple Years (De puinhopen van acht jaar Paars), which he used as his political agenda for the upcoming general election. Purple is the colour to indicate a coalition government consisting of left parties (red) and conservative-liberal parties (blue). The Netherlands had been governed by such a coalition for eight years at that time.
In August 2001, Fortuyn was quoted in the Rotterdams Dagblad newspaper saying, “I am also in favour of a cold war with Islam. I see Islam as an extraordinary threat, as a hostile religion. In the TV program, Business class, Fortuyn said that Muslims in the Netherlands did not accept Dutch society.He appeared on the program several times. It was moderated by his friend Harry Mens. Since his death, commentators have suggested Fortuyn’s words were interpreted rather harshly, if not wrongly. For instance, he said that Muslims in the Netherlands needed to accept living together with the Dutch, and that if this was unacceptable for them, then they were free to leave. His concluding words in the TV program were “…I want to live together with the Muslim people, but it takes two to tango.”
After his death a statue was placed at his home in Rotterdam
On 9 February 2002, additional statements made by him were carried in the Volkskrant. He said that the Netherlands, with a population of 16 million, had enough inhabitants, and the practice of allowing as many as 40,000 asylum-seekers into the country each year had to be stopped. (This figure was higher than the actual numbers, and immigrants were decreasing at the time.). He claimed that if he became part of the next government, he would pursue a restrictive immigration policy while also granting citizenship to a large group of illegal immigrants.
He said that he did not intend to “unload our Moroccan hooligans” onto the Moroccan King Hassan. Hassan had died three years earlier. He considered Article 7 of the constitution, which asserts freedom of speech, of more importance than Article 1, which forbids discrimination on the basis of religion, life principles, political inclination, race, or sexual preference. Fortuyn distanced himself from Hans Janmaat of the Centrum Democraten, who in the 1980s wanted to remove all foreigners from the country and was repeatedly convicted for discrimination and hate speech.
Fortuyn proposed that all people who already resided in the Netherlands would be able to stay, but he emphasized the need of the immigrants to adopt Dutch society’s consensus on human rights as their own. He said “If it were legally possible, I’d say no more Muslims will get in here”, claiming that the influx of Muslims would threaten freedoms in the liberal Dutch society. He thought Muslim culture had never undergone a process of modernisation and therefore still lacked acceptance of democracy and women’s, gays’, lesbians’ and minorities’ rights. He feared Muslims would try to replace the Dutch legal system with the shari’a law.
He said he was concerned about intolerance in the Muslim community. In a televised debate in 2002, “Fortuyn baited the Muslim cleric by flaunting his homosexuality. Finally the imam exploded, denouncing Fortuyn in strongly anti-homosexual terms. Fortuyn calmly turned to the camera and, addressing viewers directly, told them that this is the kind of Trojan horse of intolerance the Dutch are inviting into their society in the name of multiculturalism.”
When asked by the Dutch newspaper Volkskrant whether he hated Islam, he replied:
I don’t hate Islam. I consider it a backward culture. I have travelled much in the world. And wherever Islam rules, it’s just terrible. All the hypocrisy. It’s a bit like those old reformed protestants. The Reformed lie all the time. And why is that? Because they have standards and values that are so high that you can’t humanly maintain them. You also see that in that Muslim culture. Then look at the Netherlands. In what country could an electoral leader of such a large movement as mine be openly homosexual? How wonderful that that’s possible. That’s something that one can be proud of. And I’d like to keep it that way, thank you very much.
Fortuyn used the word achterlijk, literally meaning “backward”, but commonly used as an insult in the sense of “retarded”. After his use of “achterlijk” caused an uproar, Fortuyn said he had used the word with its literal meaning of “backward”.
On 6 May 2002, at age 54, Fortuyn was assassinated in Hilversum, North Holland, by Volkert van der Graaf. The attack took place in a parking lot outside a radio studio where Fortuyn had just given an interview. This was nine days before the general election, for which he was running. The attacker was pursued by Hans Smolders, Fortuyn’s driver, and was arrested by the police shortly afterward, still in possession of a handgun. Months later, Van der Graaf confessed in court to the first notable political assassination in the Netherlands since 1672 (excluding WW II events). He was sentenced to 18 years in prison. (and will be released on probation this month after having served 12 years)
The assassination shocked many residents of the Netherlands and highlighted the cultural clashes within the country. Various conspiracy theories arose after Pim Fortuyn’s murder and deeply affected Dutch politics and society. Politicians from all parties suspended campaigning. After consultation with LPF, the government decided not to postpone the elections. As Dutch law did not permit modifying the ballots, Fortuyn became a posthumous candidate. The LPF made an unprecedented debut in the House of Representatives by winning 26 seats (17% of the 150 seats in the house). The LPF joined a cabinet with the Christian Democratic Appeal and the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy, but conflicts in the rudderless LPF quickly collapsed the cabinet, forcing new elections. By the following year, the party had lost support, winning only eight seats in the2003 elections. It won no seats in the 2006 elections, by which time the Party for Freedom, led by Geert Wilders, had emerged as a successor.
During the last months of his life, Fortuyn had become closer to the Catholic Church. To the surprise of many commentators and Dutch TV hosts, Fortuyn insisted on Fr. Louis Berger, a parish priest from The Hague, accompanying him in some of his last TV appearances. According to the New York Times, Berger had become his “friend and confessor” during the last weeks of his life.
And so we come to Geert Wilders, the New Janmaat (and by some even compared to Goebels and even Hitler). Wilders is a man that makes no secret of how he sees out Dutch?Arabic citizens, he doesn’t care if they are born here, he doesn’t care if they do well at school, work hard and are fully intergrated into society. Geert Wilders has just one M.O… getting into power over the back of the immigrants and their kids.
In 1997, Wilders was elected for the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) to the municipal council of Utrecht (same as me), the fourth largest city of the Netherlands He lived in Kanaleneiland,(again, same as me.. in fact same street as I do) a suburb with cheap social housing and high apartment blocks, and which has a relatively high number of immigrants. While a city councilor, Wilders was mugged in his own neighbourhood; some have speculated that this may have catalysed his political transformation. He was not rewarded for his time on the municipal council of Utrecht, for in the following elections he would score well below the national average in the University city.
A year later, he was elected to the Netherlands’ national parliament, but his first four years in parliament drew little attention. However, his appointment in 2002 as a public spokesman for the VVD led Wilders to become more well known for his outspoken criticism of Islamic extremism. Tensions immediately developed within the party, as Wilders found himself to be to the right of most members, and challenged the party line in his public statements. He was expelled from the VVD parliamentary party, and in September 2004, Wilders left the VVD, having been a member since 1989, to form his own political party, Groep Wilders, later renamed the Party for Freedom. The crunch issue with the VVD party line was about his refusal to endorse the party’s position that European Union accession negotiations must be started with Turkey.
The Party for Freedom’s political platform often overlaps those of the assassinated Rotterdam politician Pim Fortuyn and his Pim Fortuyn List. After his death, Fortuyn’s impact remained, as more and more politicians sought to gain political mileage by directly confronting topics such as a ban on immigration that were, from a politically correct point of view, considered unmentionable in the Netherlands until Fortuyn came on the scene and upended the Dutch tradition of consensus politics with an anti-immigration stance. Wilders would position himself to inherit Fortuyn’s constituency. The Party for Freedom called for a €16 billion tax reduction, a far stricter policy toward recreational drug use, investing more in roads and other infrastructure, building nuclear power plants and including animal rights in the Dutch constitution. In the 2006 Dutch parliamentary election, their first parliamentary election, the Party for Freedom won 9 out of the 150 open seats.
In March 2009, in a party meeting in Venlo, Wilders said “I want to be prime minister“, believing the PVV will eventually become the Netherlands’ biggest party. “At some point it’s going to happen and then it will be a big honour to fulfil the post of prime minister”.
Polling conducted throughout March 2009 by Maurice de Hond indicated the Party for Freedom was the most popular parliamentary party. The polls predicted that the party would take 21% of the national vote, winning 32 out of 150 seats in the Dutch parliament. If the polling results were replicated in an election, Wilders would be a major power broker. Under such circumstances, there would also be some likelihood of him becoming Prime Minister of the Netherlands. This has been partially attributed to timely prosecution attempts against him for hate speech and the travel ban imposed on him by the United Kingdom, as well as dissatisfaction with the Dutch government‘s response to the global financial crisis of 2008–2009.
Wilders (right) with the leaders of VVD and CDA following the 2010 election.
On 3 March 2010, elections for the local councils were held in the municipalities of The Netherlands. The PVV only contested these local elections in the Dutch towns The Hague and Almere, because of a shortage of good candidates. The big gains that were scored indicated that the party and Wilders might dominate the political scene in the run-up to the parliamentary elections scheduled on 9 June 2010. The PVV won in Almere and came second to the Dutch Labour party in The Hague. In Almere, the PVV won 21 percent of the vote to Labour’s 18 percent, preliminary results showed. In The Hague, the PVV had 8 seats—second to Labour with 10 seats.
On 8 March 2010, Wilders announced that he would take a seat on the Hague city council, after it became clear he won 13,000 preference votes. Earlier he had said he would not take up a seat if he won. In the parliamentary elections on 9 June 2010, the PVV went from 9 to 24 seats (out of 150) resulting from over 15% of the vote. This made the PVV the third party in size. With a fragmented parliament, at least three parties were required for an absolute majority. A coalition of VVD and Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) was negotiated with parliamentary support by the PVV. The PVV did not become part of the government formed by VVD and CDA but actively participated in the negotiations and thus policy decisions and – as part of the outcome agreed that they would not support any motion to dismiss ministers concerning topics listed in a so-called “support agreement” – much like the Danish model where the Danish People’s Party plays a similar role. The very fact of the participation of Wilder’s party in these negotiations caused fierce discussions in political circles.
On 21 April 2012, Wilders withdrew his support from the Rutte cabinet because of new austerity measures that were about to be taken. Commenting on his withdrawal Wilders blamed the “European dictates” pointing to the 3% rule on budget deficit for European countries although his party had supported these rules earlier on. The cabinet blamed Wilders for what they call his “lack of political will” and “political cowardice” in regards to addressing the economic woes of the Netherlands.Wilders’ withdrawal from the negotiations led to new elections in September. Wilders and the PVV ran on a campaign to have the Netherlands withdraw from the European Union and for a return to the guilder. The PVV won only 15 seats in the election.
Then two weeks ago during the City Council elections he made some controversial remarks again. When he was in the Hague on a campaign trail he asked the crowd “Do you want more or fewer Moroccans in your city and country” the crowd chanted “Fewer Fewer Fewer” after which Wilders responded “then we going to take care of that” The fact that he said it, the crowd responded and he made the promise was not even what shocked me. I was absolutely not surprised and actually glad he showed his true colors at last (he always claimed NOT to be a racist and he was always careful in his wording not to target a specific group from a specific country) No, what shocked me was the poll a few days later which showed that a whopping 45% of the people questioned about it had absolutely no problem with what he said (thank God the majority still does)
Soo… If you still think the Netherlands is such a tolerant country think again. We have become a country that has just as much racists as for example Germany, the USA or the UK We have a long way to g before we are free from this hate mongering lunatic and as long as this man is around I am afraid I can not call my country a “tolerant and welcoming country”
Of course the Netherlands is still filled with millions of beautiful people from all walks of live and all religions, cultural backgrounds and there still are loads of tolerant people, we just aren’t the most tolerant country anymore.