Being American, I'm not familiar with the behavior of PVV, SD, etc, other than generally hearing about their far-right populism. I've heard quite a bit about UKIP though which sound like the far right wing of the Republican party.
Well, I can't really speak for my neighbouring countries, but here's my thoughts on the position of populism in Dutch politics:
The current refugee crisis is not what has made Wilders populist party (PVV) suddenly rise to power.
Populists have been gaining support, and peaking in polls for nearly 20 years now.
While part of their electoral succes undoubtedly stems from the support of anti-immigrant, anti-islam or otherwise generally racist voters,
their strongest power base stems from a general discontent amongst the electorate, with the government that rules them.
Anti-EU sentiment being a big one there. One main slogan for the populists has been, is, and will be "We will not let Europe shove shit down our throats and take away our national democratic rights!"
Another big one is the destruction of social security, that has been ongoing in Europe ever since Thatcher, and went into overdrive with the convergence to the Euro and the Treaty of Lisbon.
Traditionally, we have always had the labour party (PvdA), that would stand up for the worker's rights, and social security for the sick, elderly and poor, and which could find enough voting backup amongst left wing opposition, and coalition partners from the christian democrats, to provide a balanced counterweight for keeping our welfare state from succumbing to neo-conservative views of the 'liberal' party (VVD).
But there has been a shift of balance in 1995, when the PvdA made a 180, and decided that forming unbalanced coalition governments with the neo-conservative party, was worth sacrificing standing up for labour rights and social security, and going full "EU über alles" for. Their foreman literally said in his speech that "it is time to shake off our ideological feathers"
This left a large part of their electorate, mostly lower income class workers, and social liberals completely desillusioned.
At first, this gap was for one part filled by small local parties, which although populist, were too scattered to get much influence in national government, for another by the socialist party (SP), and to a lesser extent, the green liberal (pro-EU) party (Groen Links).
This changed when Pim Fortuijn, former member of one of these local parties, got kicked out of his local party, and formed his own nationally-oriented party called LPF, in 2002.
Now the LPF was a populist party pur sang. Their main slogan was that they thought the current government stood too far away from the people in their ivory tower. And that's exactly what the desillusioned voters wanted to hear. They did adress the issue of failed multi-culturalism, but it was nowhere near as prominent, nor as racist or hate inciting back then, as Wilders' current retoric is, nor was it the main reason for their electoral success. It was the first time however, that talking about multicultural problems was lifted from it's taboo in the political arena.
With Pim Fortuyn being a charismatic media person, LPF was soon hyped, and polls predicted that it was very possible that he would become the next prime minister.
But then, on the 6th of may 2002, he was murdered by a left-wing activist. Volkert van der Graaff, a lawyer specializing in environmentalist cases, ambushed him when he exited the media complex right after an interview, and shot him in the head. He motivated his actions before the court by stating that in his opinion "Pim Fortuijn was a danger to the weak amongst society".
In the subsequent elections, the LPF, despite their main candidate being dead, won 26 seats in parliament, which gave them a position in government. The left wing opposition parties see some loss, probably due to the killer's alleged affiliation.
From this point on, the LPF starts profiling itself more and more against immigrants. Not before too long though, the party disintegrates because of internal arguments and mudslinging.
What remains though, is the lingering public debate on multiculturalism and immigration.
When in 2004, Dutch entertainer Theo van Gogh is shot dead with 8 bullets in broad daylight by a muslim extremist, who pins a note on his dead chest with a knife, threatening Ayaan Hirschi Ali that she is next, things go south pretty quickly. Our national thinktank, the Clingendael Institute, says the murder of van Gogh has had much more of an impact on anti-islam sentiment than 9/11 ever had.
At first there's Rita Verdonk, who secedes from the VVD, and forms her own 'Proud on the Netherlands' party, promising less immigration.
She lacks any charisma though, and after a few political missteps, she and her party sink into oblivion.
In 2004, Geert Wilders also secedes from the VVD to form a one man party, which he later turns into the 'Party for Freedom', which first joins the elections in 2006, gaining 9 seats in parliament, which is pretty significant for a newcomer. Ever since, he has been slowly rising in popularity, with a small dip after a government fell which was 'endorsed' by his party.
Now what Wilders is doing differently than the other populist parties before him (except the LPF), is that while he uses anti-islam and anti immigration as a very important tool for hyping, he also keeps stressing that he wants out of the EU, that he wants our poor elderly to get proper care, that he wants people who work to have a decent income, and that more money will go to schools and hospitals.
More generally, he is going back to the basics that got LPF to peak out of nowhere;
He is saying that the current government, as well as the opposition have lost all contact with the people.
What has helped him a lot with the anti-EU part is the fact that a majority of the Dutch voted NO! when a referendum was held on the European Constitution in juli 2005. The Treaty of Lisbon that circumvented that, is still a painful issue for a lot of Dutch voters.
Him appearing on the media all the time to cry for social rights and promise old ladies they'll get cleaned more often has drawn a lot of lower income class voters that used to vote labour or socialist, to vote for him. The media's lust for hype is partly to blame there. The socialist party's foreman is less charismatic, and too polite too shout as loudly, so that has less media value.
But what I'm trying to say is that, even without the refugee crisis, or the Paris attack, his party was peaking big regularily in the polls, and not just because, foreigners, but largely, because general discontent and lack of solid presentation of any alternative.
Not saying that the refugee crisis or Paris doesn't benefit him though. Wilders is a very shrewd spin doctor, and should not be underestimated.
Author
Topic: The friendly and polite Europe related terrible jokes thread (Read 991186 times)