The opposition party led by Dutch MP Geert Wilders is often characterised as "the anti-Islam Freedom Party". Four researchers at Tilburg University have attempted to find a more specific definition. Is the Freedom Party right-wing, populist, extremist?
The four researchers studied the party's publications and public statements, on the basis of which they defined its ideology as "national-democratic". To some that will sound like an echo of the word "national-socialist" which was used to classify Adolf Hitler's fascist party. The Tilburg University report says that although the Freedom Party does not have any roots in the traditional extreme-right movement, its views show a certain affinity with the far right.
Researcher Hans Moors told public radio, in typically academic style, "What we mean by a national-democratic ideology is that the Freedom Party's view contains elements which make it appear as a party expressing that foreign elements are undesirable in Dutch society. That is part of an extreme right-wing ideology."
New right-wing radical
The researchers emphasise that the Freedom Party can not unequivocally be characterised as radically right-wing. They label Mr Wilders' party as "new right-wing radical". The report cites the Freedom Party's preference for what is "our own", its abhorrence of what is "alien" and its penchant for authoritarianism. The findings are part of a wider study on radicalisation and polarisation in the Netherlands.
"Our report describes leftwing radicalism, rightwing radicalism, Islamic extremism, animal rights extremism, and is about the current polarising tendencies in Dutch society. People in general are expressing themselves more fiercely than before, as you can observe on the internet. It is even evident when reports like ours are published, and people immediately have an opinion about it, which is not always well-founded. And rightaway they turn against the researchers."
Mr Wilders reacted furiously, saying that the report was "scandalous and contained a lot of nonsense, such as equalising defending the national interest with being radically rightwing".
"Less Islamisation"
Publication of the report coincided with the presentation of the Freedom Party local election programme the cities of The Hague and Almere. The party is only taking part in these two cities in the March local elections because it is not able to field candidates elsewhere.
In its programme for The Hague, the Freedom Party says it wants "less islamisation" in the city. It also plans to put a stop to prestigious building plans. "The citizens of The Hague have had far too many megalomanic projects forced onto them. Nobody wants that. Let's economise on culture and multicultural projects and spend more on care for the aged, on public security."
The Hague's Freedom Party is campaigning for a public order councillor. Local party leader Sietse Fritsma told reporters, "I've spoken to many people in The Hague over the past weeks. Nine out of ten feel unsafe. On New Year's Eve the city looked like a war zone with many cars being set on fire. A public order councillor should investigate such problems and take adequate measures." Mr Fritsma, who is also an MP, caused a furore in 2007 when he suggested that holders of two passports, such as Rotterdam's Moroccan-born mayor Ahmed Aboutaleb, should not be allowed to serve in official positions.
In the new town of Almere, the local Freedom Party wants to bar low-income earners from settling there. "We're not sitting here and waiting to receive [nearby] Amsterdam's problem cases." Local party leader Raymond de Roon told reporters that Almere's own people should get preferential treatment when they are looking for another home in the town. The Freedom Party is also proposing to introduce street guards who will be allowed to arrest people and be armed with handcuffs.
The Dutch local elections will be held on 3 March.
© Radio Netherlands Worldwide
Email this Article
Printer-friendly version
De organisatie (Irakese Bond) deelt u mede dat ze toestemming heeft gekregen om een protest demonstratie te organiseren voor asielzoekers uit Irak die geen verblijfsvergunning hebben in Nederland. De demonstratie vindt plaats op 5 februari 2010 van 12.00 tot 15.00 uur voor het Parlementsgebouw in Den Haag. De verwachting is dat er meer dan 1000 mensen komen.
De demonstranten eisen de volgende dingen:
Stopzetten van gedwongen terugsturen naar Irak
Stopzetten van de psychische onderdrukking van Irakese asielzoekers
Stopzetten van mentale onderdrukking zoals slaan en in een gevangenis opsluiten van geweigerde asielzoekers.
Asielzoekers moeten een verblijfsvergunning krijgen zonder dat er additionele voorwaarden aan zitten zoals het terugsturen naar Irak indien het daar weer veilig wordt.
Wij hopen dat er zoveel mogelijk mensen komen om meer impact te maken.
Vertegenwoordiger van het organisatie (Irakese Bond) in Nederland
E-mail (info@iraqi-refugees.org)
Well. Hiram, I am sorry to disappoint you, but I am not a politician. However, you are certainly to be congratulated for doing what the University of Tilburg could not, that is define Geert with a term which did not yet exist and do so with complete accuracy. Honestly, I have never before this heard of the term "backhand slapshot", inside or outside of ice hockey. Think of this as a physical impossibilty akin to a quarterback in football throwing a backwards "Hail Mary" pass the better part of a football field, and you'll get the general idea. But then again, we all know to expect the impossible when Geert is involved!! "getting the ball rolling", the manipulation is all on Geert's part! He just sells himself, as this topic is currently up there on the "most popular now" list, no matter when or what a controversy is about him!! Geert sells news space!! It is merely a statement of fact, not any manipulative power over RNW on my part!! If I could control RNW, I would actually get money (and plenty of it) for being able to do so!! Alas, I am a mere mortal as are all other contributors to this Forum, who can only respond to the issue of Geert apart from other topics. Don't worry, Hiram, I leave the domination of free speach to Geert and his cohorts. David Berridge.
Slapshot, it is was joke my friend. Wilders is playing a hockey match with the public and his speeches are like a slapshot in a hockey game. No wonder the Canadians very seldom win a match against the Yanks.
It sounds like four eggheads from Tilburg University wasted lots of time and public money on defining Mr. Wilders' true political hue, rather than engage specifically on the issues he is highlighting. Wikipedia currently describes him as being centre-right and that definition is good enough for me. “Far” and “extreme” are often used as synonyms for “bad”, slung at opponents whose views differ markedly from one’s own, especially when one is at a loss for reasonable counter-arguments.
Mr. Wilders “extreme” outspokenness is an asset to us all. He exposes the cowardly stance of political establishments that will not stand up to bullies, hooligans and freeloaders in the name of vague, muddled “left wing” ideologies. These ideologues have been promoting a dangerous harmony with an invading, hostile culture.
Instead, Mr. Wilders is provoking a healthy debate in the west that is also bound to have a long term positive effect within Islamic communities where criticism and dissent are dealt with brutally. One does not have to agree with everything he says to appreciate this.
If the eggheads wanted to cite an example of an extreme right wing ideology, they ought to have started with this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuAAK032kCA
Incidentally, the “study” mentioned in this article, was ordered by a sitting member (Guusje ter Horst), of the Dutch Labour party (PVDA), who stand to lose big to Mr. Wilders' party in the upcoming Dutch elections.
Youtube canceled the above account. The link in now here:
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2009/10/17/muslim-protestors-call-fo...
knirb, Well said. The charges against Wilders in itself are politically motivated and this Tilburg University study ordered by Guusje ter Horst only confirms what many who support Wilders have said from the beginning. PVDA and CDA are very low in the polls, they are running scared and their desperation shows. The lowest politicians can stoop is to delibrately try to bring down another politician in such a cheap, sneaky and dirty fashion. That in itself is an abuse of power and CDA and PVDA know very well that the voters will see right through this. This only brings more voters towards Wilders with the PVV, because Wilders is being silenced for political motivations.
The Matter is simple for Muslims the Islamic things and persons are HOLLY like the prophet Mohamed (peace be upon him) is higher for All Muslims than their own mothers and fathers so the people got to respect that same as they don't like their mothers and fathers to be non-respected, would you like if someone insult your mom? I bet not so it is the same for the Muslims don't speak bad about islam or something from it as you don't like it to happen to you or to your family, if you do it it means you don't care for others feelings and you want war to be rised.
Is that a threat? We in the west do not think that criticism and insults are the same thing. Criticism is not intended to hurt, but to be truthful even if others disagree or feel hurt. Insults are saying nasty things with only the intention of making others feel bad. We do not like this either, but we do not kill anyone or threaten to do so when this happens. A mature person or culture can accept this and deal with it non violently.
NO it is NOT a threat you see you misunderstood, most of the people MISUNDERSTAND what Muslims are about, the people who kill innocents are NOT MUSLIMS they do things in the name of Islam but they are not Muslims cause Islam never claimed to kill innocents, and because of the Media that makes it Big as soon as an Arabe kill someone they say A MUSLIM man killed that and that NOT all Arab are Muslims while if an american or european kill they say for example jhon or David or...etc did that and that and his doctor said he is healthy in his mind (to make him innocents) so why for Arab the Media mention their Religions FIRST and for Europeans or Americans they DON'T? is it fair? for example Hitler killed thousands of people why people don't call him a terrorist? why that word is only for the Arabs?others they don't kill? Europeans don't? Americans don't? Chinese don't? Africans don't? there only some reasons to kill FOR DEFENDING SELF OR FAMILY IF ATTACKED OR THE LAND MEANING A NATION and I guess if someone attacked your wife or daughter to rape her you will not just stand there and watch will you? and if someone attacked you to kick you out from your own house by force I guess you will not just stand there and watch will you? so for only these reasons you have a right to kill and that's what you see in Palestine against Isreal so if innocents people die just in vain for fun so NO that's not from Muslims I mean True Muslims not the ones who use Islam for killing for fun I hope you understand
As evil and twisted as tyrants like Hitler, Saddam and Idi Amin were, they are not referred to as terrorists. Baader Meinhoff (Germany), FLQ (Canada), IRA and UDA (Ireland), are 4 western paramilitary (terrorist) groups, so the term is not exclusively used for Arabs or Muslims.
The Muslims who kill in the name of Islam do not kill for fun. They have no sense of humor.
Wilders is a product of Dutch society, not a by-product. His concern about extreme Islamists is reasonable. To hell with the extreme Islamists;they will harvest whirlwinds.
What happened to the other theory - the one that said Wilders was uber Dutch for having parentage of which originated from Indonesia !! What was it again -- he was driven to over emphasize his Dutchness to compensate for the ... well... for his parents insecurities of being Dutch but not quite Dutch from the colonies.
Maybe the Dutch should accept that Wilders is a by-product of the Dutch society - any society that 'is' something - there is usually a reason for it. The Dutch society was said to be 'tolerant' - but then this tolerance - was was maintained by efforts used to silence those who did not toe the line.
Most people don't mind toeing the line for real tolerance - equal rights etc.. - but become outraged when they are asked to tolerate the intolerant. Many of the things some of the Muslim groups are asking for - are intolerant.
Nevertheless to maintain the tolerance facade - in the face of increasing Islamization demands - the Dutch used extra measures to silence people - arresting artists - censorship - discrediting people - who speak out or protested against this - Hirsi Ali ex. - to the point where you are going to get a Wilders - a reflection of the people's outrage, concerns and dismissal.
Let's identify the 'foreign element' that is political Islam - has the whole of Europe concerned - this is not a Dutch problem - indeed in Turkey they are also dealing with it - with more honesty I might add - they took their leader to court over his attempts to Islamize Turkey.
There must be a better way to integrate Muslims than to Islamize the Netherlands. Few mind a mosque that quietly goes about its business - of worship. But when the political element emerges - that wishes to make changes to long established and hard won rights - then the mosque and the Islamic religion become a political entity. And this is why examination and criticism is a must. What many Muslims groups are saying is - we want to establish Shari'a law - but we don't want you to be able to criticize it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi9w9FhO9VU
This article shows the conflict - here Wilders' politics are compared to the Nazi party's - but to compare the Koran which is the basis for Shari'a - to the same - has landed Wilders in court. This is why it is so important to maintain freedoms. The writer would not want to be arrested for this article or the researchers for their research. Here is a case of - first they came for Wilders and because I was not Wilders... then they came for me...
No matter whatever generic term the researchers may wish to attach to the PVV, it can only be truly descibed for what it really is: manipulative. This should get the ball rolling again! David Berridge.
"This should get the ball rolling again! David Berridge."........David Berridge, it is manipulative. In politics it is called a Backhand Slapshot in which the politician manipulates his party in an awkward stance and then points it views in the direction of it's target.
Post new comment
Please be reminded all comments must be in English, short and to the point - guideline 250 words. Abusive and inappropriate comments will be removed.