RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/11/23/the-humiliation-of-the-dutch-establishment/

To say the victory of Geert Wilders in yesterday’s Dutch elections came as a shock might be the understatement of the century. Not even his aides in the PVV (Party for Freedom) were fully prepared for the earthquake to come. The tiny, cramped venue where it held its election party last night was booked just four days ago, after Wilders enjoyed a last-minute surge in the polls.

With almost all the votes now counted, Wilders’s PVV has won 37 of the 150 seats in the Dutch parliament, with 24 per cent of the vote, trouncing his nearest rivals, a coalition of the Labour and Green parties. Make no mistake: this is a humiliation for the Dutch establishment and another political earthquake in Europe.

Before yesterday’s elections, European elites would have told you that a ‘sensible’ country like the Netherlands was immune to populism. The 2017 elections were heralded across Europe as the death of Dutch populism, when the PVV lost to long-serving centrist prime minister Mark Rutte. Wilders’s party slumped further in 2021, scoring just 11 per cent of the vote. With the peroxide-haired right-winger seemingly sent packing, moderation and centrism had apparently prevailed. Anti-establishment anger had been quelled. Or so they thought.

Even in recent days, the prospect of a ballot-box rebellion had been written off by European media. On the day the Netherlands went to the polls, a BBC News feature on the elections mentioned Wilders only in passing. Its two tips for the next Dutch PM came in third and fourth place. And just last week the Financial Times declared that these ‘elections are tapping into a mood for dry moderation’. ‘The Dutch don’t do wild political leaps’, it insisted. Such complacency has now been shattered.

These elections are as much a win for Wilders as they are a loss for the centrist establishment. The centre-right VVD, which has held power under premier Mark Rutte for 13 years, was knocked back into third place. Perhaps more significant has been the failure of Frans Timmermans, former vice-president of the European Commision, who led a newly formed Labour-Green alliance to defeat.

The failure of Timmermans is a stinging blow to the EU (Wilders is a staunch Eurosceptic who has promised an in-out ‘Nexit’ referendum). It also shows that opposition to climate policy is now a significant driver of European populism. After all, as Commission vice-president, Timmermans was the face of Brussels’s stringent climate policies, including the so-called European Green Deal.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-wilders-message-from-the-netherlands-9224c43d?mod=opinion_lead_pos2

Dutch elections rarely stir much excitement abroad, but the voting in the Netherlands Wednesday marks an exception. The big winner was Geert Wilders, a veteran right-wing campaigner, and the freakout his victory has triggered across Europe is something to behold.

Mr. Wilders’s Freedom Party (PVV) won a plurality of 37 seats in the 150-seat legislature. His next nearest competitor, a Labor-Green coalition led by Frans Timmermans, won 25 seats. Politicians will now negotiate to form a governing coalition, a process that often takes months in the Netherlands’ highly fragmented electoral system, and Mr. Wilders may not emerge as prime minister. But voters have sent a clear message.

To wit: Voters are fed up with a stale consensus on issues such as immigration and climate policy. The PVV’s biggest campaign issue for two decades has been immigration. Some 400,000 immigrants arrived last year in a country with a total population of nearly 18 million. While last year’s number may have been skewed by refugees from Ukraine, immigration has exceeded 200,000 every year since 2016.

This creates a substantial fiscal burden under the generous Dutch welfare state and strains the housing market. It’s also becoming a culture-war issue as voters worry the country isn’t properly assimilating Muslim migrants from the Middle East and North Africa. Mr. Wilders can present himself as a tribune of these fears, having lived under police protection since an Islamist murdered film director Theo van Gogh in 2004.

Centrist politicians heap scorn on Mr. Wilders’s proposed solution, which is to ban the Quran, new mosques and Islamic schools. This is extreme, and Mr. Wilders had to walk back those proposals to achieve the vote totals he did Wednesday. But if any other Dutch politician has better ideas for achieving assimilation, voters would be all ears.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/wilders-wins-big/

It’s about time. On November 22, seventeen years after its founding by Geert Wilders, the Party for Freedom (PVV) won a huge victory in the Dutch elections. With 23% of the vote, the PVV went from 17 to 37 seats in the 150-seat House of Representatives. The conservative British commentator Paul Joseph Watson called it “the biggest political earthquake in Europe since Brexit.” The lefties who’d shown up to follow the returns at the headquarters of other parties exhibited the same shock and grief that we saw in the faces of Hillary Clinton voters at the Javits Center on Election Night 2016.

Even as the final results were being tabulated, a group of “experts” on the Netherlands met at the Washington, D.C., headquarters of the American Enterprise Institute for a 90-minute discussion of the exit polls. There were five people on stage, but very little range in views. All five were unsettled by Wilders’s success. Erik Voeten, who teaches Geopolitics and Justice in World Affairs at Georgetown University, accused Wilders of “Islamophobia” and “xenophobia” and claimed that he “wants to do things that are contrary to current Dutch law, European law, and international law.” Stan Veuger of AEI called the PVV “extremely radical.”

How radical? Wilders, charged Veuger, “wants to ban the Koran, ban mosques, ban Islamic schools.” Echoing word-for-word Voeten’s observation that such moves would violate “Dutch law, European law, and international law,” Veuger pronounced that the very idea of Wilders as head of government was an “inconceivable option.” He even suggested that the “stringent security measures” that Wilders has to live with 24 hours a day might make it “difficult for him to function as prime minister.” And why exactly does Wilders live with “stringent security measures”? Because Muslims have repeatedly threatened him with assassination. Of course Veuger was far too discreet to mention that delicate detail.

Matthias Mattijs, a Belgian who teaches International Political Economy at Johns Hopkins, maintained that the likes of Wilders could not possibly become prime minister. And Arthur van Benthem, who teaches Business Economics and Public Policy at the Wharton School, worried that the election results would stall important action on “climate change” and “energy transition.” The Dutch government, you see, has set itself the goal of eliminating all non-electric cars by 2030 and of cutting “cattle farming in half” to satisfy EU rules on nitrogen emissions. How, asked van Benthem, could the Netherlands attain these manifestly worthy objectives now that Wilders, that deplorable figure, has pulled such numbers?