Mixed result in Netherlands

18 comments on “Mixed result in Netherlands ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Cynical jester 1

   17 March 2017 at 10:18 am

   Well the torys still won but id rather a tory than a fascist.

   Can’t help but think that the dutch labor party is dead and too right, they went into coalition with the torys and deserve to become a non factor, much like in Germany.

   I can see our Labour party doing the same purple coalition to be honest.
   • Johan 1.1

     17 March 2017 at 10:53 am

     Mark Rutte’s party the VVD is hardly a Tory party, being slightly right of center.
     The huge loss of seats would be by the PvdA party. GroenLinks and PVV cashing in on the unsafe, anti-Islam feeling in the Netherlands.
     • Johan 1.1.1

       17 March 2017 at 11:06 am

       The PvdA a traditional Dutch Labour Party, dropped from 38 to 9 seats, this huge drop will be placed under the microscope for deep analysis.
       • dukeofurl 1.1.1.1

         17 March 2017 at 12:25 pm

         Thats what happens when you are in co-coalition with the Tories. Same happened to Liberal- democrats in UK.

         What concerns me , is not that a traditional liberal country like netherlands didnt swing right, but you have a far more concerning results in Hungary, Poland, even Austria.
         Germany will be interesting, but again the SPD will be affected by its Coalition with the CDU.
         • D'Esterre 1.1.1.1.1

           19 March 2017 at 12:46 am

           Dukeofurl:”you have a far more concerning results in Hungary, Poland, even Austria.”
           We here are in no position to sit in judgement on Europeans’ views on Islam. We have no land borders, and no history of large-scale invasions by other polities – including the Ottoman Empire. We don’t have “the Turk under the Roof”, for instance, with all of its implications.
           We have been fortunate to have been spared the flood of immigrants and refugees in recent times. Note, too, that the countries you adduce here are bearing the burden of a refugee problem that they had no part in causing. The blame lies entirely with the US
         • D'Esterre 1.1.1.1.2

           19 March 2017 at 12:58 am

           Dukeofurl: the blame for the refugee imbroglio belongs with the US. It’s both a proximate and distal consequence of its insane neoconservative foreign policy in both the middle East and North Africa over the past three decades, more or less. In my view, not only are the citizens of these European countries justified in taking a harder line on Islam and uncontrolled immigration from Muslim countries, for their long-term safety they’d be well-advised to do it.
2. Psycho Milt 2

   17 March 2017 at 11:50 am

   Wilders will only be around until a Muslim succeeds in killing him, at which point his party would most likely collapse. It’s nice that he’s pushed the centre-right parties to take Islam more seriously, though – now just need the left parties to stop pretending there’s nothing to see here folks.
   • Johan 2.1

     17 March 2017 at 1:26 pm

     Geert Wilder’s PVV party obtaining 20 seats in the recent election is hardly significant in a 150 seat lower house.
     • Psycho Milt 2.1.1

       17 March 2017 at 3:33 pm

       20 seats still makes them the second-biggest. However, the significance is in how the VVD felt obliged to take a more anti-Islam stance to keep from hemorrhaging voters to PVV. A political party can have a positive effect without necessarily being in government – as demonstrated by the Green Party in NZ.
       • Johan 2.1.1.1

         17 March 2017 at 4:40 pm

         Psycho you are a bit short on specifics. One of the major reasons for the PVV’s anti-Islam vote increase was the hysterics Turkey displayed just a week ago against the Netherlands. This backlash helped Wilders’ election changes tremendously.
         • Psycho Milt 2.1.1.1.1

           17 March 2017 at 5:01 pm

           I’m thinking of this kind of thing: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/23/netherlands-pm-mark-rutte-dutch-citizens-open-letter-pvv.

           Re Turkey’s hysterics, pundits thought Rutte’s response to it would boost his support (eg, http://nltimes.nl/2017/03/15/row-turkey-will-boost-support-pm-rutte-dutch-election-analysts) – looks like they were right.
   • D'Esterre 2.2

     19 March 2017 at 12:36 am

     Psycho Milt: “It’s nice that he’s pushed the centre-right parties to take Islam more seriously, though…”
     Indeed. And not before time. The fact that Theo van Gogh and Pim Fortuyn were both assassinated for their views about Islam, and Wilders has had to take security precautions, indicates that Dutch society isn’t anything like as tolerant as many people – no doubt including the Dutch themselves – believe.
     People need to take Wilders’ views seriously. Rutte has, even if he’s been motivated by electoral self-interest. And it’s clearly paid off for him and his party.
     He’ll need to follow through, though, if he wants to keep the electorate on side.
3. Tui 3

   17 March 2017 at 2:54 pm

   good. at least holland is still one place where a woman can wear a hijab and not be attacked!

   (i’m thinking of getting a hijab myself and wearing it in solidarity with our muslem sisters!)

   ~Tui
   • D'Esterre 3.1

     19 March 2017 at 12:19 am

     Tui: “(i’m thinking of getting a hijab myself and wearing it in solidarity with our muslem sisters!)”
     Why on earth would you want to do that? And why not a niqab, if you’re wanting to show solidarity?
     Neither hijab nor niqab is necessary to the expression of faith: millions of Muslim women worldwide wear neither garment. Their adoption by young NZ women is purely political. This is a most unfortunate development: women here had better hope that it doesn’t become normative.
4. james 4

   17 March 2017 at 3:19 pm

   I love it when Merkel says “a good day for democracy”.

   Isn’t any democratically elected government, where the people get to vote and choose their own leader “a good day for democracy”.

   If Geert Wilders had of won – it would have been a good day for democracy.
   • McFlock 4.1

     17 March 2017 at 4:07 pm

     Technically yes, but it would also have meant tomorrow would be a bad day for democracy. Takes the edge off the sunshine, a little bit.

     But then of course the popular candidate winning shouldn’t be regarded as a “good day” for democracy: that’s democracy’s only bloody job.

     Leave it to a fragile tory to assume that competently doing the job you’re supposed to do somehow deserves congratulations.
   • Matthew Whitehead 4.2

     18 March 2017 at 12:22 pm

     Elections do not a democracy make. They’re merely the bare minimum requirement. A win for someone who doesn’t believe in the rest of democratic norms (such as free media, a responsibility to the truth, open government, responsiveness to public feedback, consultation, and devolution of power to local government where possible) is never a “good day for democracy.”

     oh, and grammar protip: there’s no such thing as “had of.” The contraction you’re looking for is “had’ve,” literally “had have,” but it doesn’t belong in that sentence, which only needed “had.” All those “* of”s after verbs are actually “*’ve”s.
5. D'Esterre 5

   19 March 2017 at 12:11 am

   Matthew Whitehead: “…grammar protip”
   Just to be clear: there are only conventions in grammar, no hard and fast rules. What you’re looking at there is likely to be language shift, given that its usage is increasingly common. You may not like it, but there’s bugger-all you can do to stop it. In any event, we understand perfectly well what James means. Which of course is the way with language shift: it doesn’t obscure comprehensibility, it’s just a different way of using the language.
   Almost 20 years ago, somebody who’d spent the summer in France remarked to me that young French people had in ordinary conversation largely abandoned the “nous (we)” construction in favour of “on (one)”. Very interesting: I doubt that l’academie Francaise was too keen on it! But they’d have been no more successful in stopping it than they have been in preventing English words from creeping into common French usage. That’s language shift for you.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS