Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: Rutte III era

[Zinneke]

Where the FvD rise came from vs 2017 Second Chamber election.

I am quite surprised how low the SP --> FvD score is. In Limburg for example where the FvD did well the PVV still held up decently and all the scores seem to suggest the big losers are SP. I wonder thus where all the SP voters have gone.

[Zinneke]

I know this is the Netherlands, but yikes is that parliament divided!

And unlike in Belgium (also very divided, but on linguistic lines) there doesn't seem to be any way to easily consolidate the parties.

People overestimate the differences, especially in terms of personal relationships and foreign policy, between the "Kunduz" club (sitting government + GL and PvdA) a lot. In this sense Baudet is absolutely correct. Belgium is much more structurally "provincialised" in its politics.

[Zinneke]

LPF 2.0 in more ways than one then...

I do wonder if Baudet is more concerned about selling books than actually governing at some point though.

[Zinneke]

Popular talking point in the left-wing media, but bad analysis as usual. This disagreement is more comparable to the umpteenth PvdA disagreement fought out in the media. The correct comparison is not the LPF scenario, but the PVV scenario, which Otten thinks is a risk that needs to be avoided.

If you can't see how it seems endemic in the Dutch far right for them to be unable to hold several egos in one party, let alone cabinet, then its time for you to take the lavender-tinted goggles off. It pretty much proves Wilders right on his management of his own party (i.e making it only about himself). The FVD is destined to split at some stage (even if its not now), between its alt-right arsonist types with ridiculous proposals that really serve as a way for the voter to say eff off to the political class and the ones who just wanted a more conservative VVD that doesn't ally with the left.
 

And the idea that Baudet would not aim to change the way the country is being run is just nonsense. This is what his whole mission is about. The same goes for Otten. The disagreement is about the right way to do it.

Well thats the thing isnt it. Baudet might have more lofty ambitions given how highly he rates himself intellectually. Becoming a leading figure of 21st century pop-conservatism vs vegetating the Hague bubble the way Wilders did? Unlike Wilders he doesn't seem the type to actually enjoy the parliamentary activities (poor attendance rates and sloppy minor debate performances). He much prefers the broad ideological debate. A bit like you and American culture wars David!

Also, I never said anything about not changing the country. I think Wilders and Baudet are pretty textbook examples of testimonial politics actually working to frame single issues the electorates care about. Whether they are actually of taking up government responsibility is another matter.

[Zinneke]

Wilders' inability to allow other people next to him directly led to the tunnel vision disaster that caused the PVV to become a useless testimonial party. FVD was founded (and is needed) because the PVV didn't do its job. I really don't see how you can say that a) Wilders was right in terms of organizational structure and b) his party is a useless testimonial party. If you agree with b), it means a) has to be wrong.

I should clarify : Wilders had the right strategy to maintain a monopoly over the Dutch far right, that is to not allow space for other political  entrepreneurs to develop on that spectrum. He only failed because as you rightly put it, he failed to adapt to modern political methods and began sounding like a broken record on Islam, losing the novelty effect, especially with the media who love (to hate) Baudet. I don't think Wilders was wrong in not contesting locals, or not allowing heavy hitters on his national list, because the history of his spectrum is that it attracts people who engage in entryism or backstabbing with the threat of a new party breakaway - he himself is case in point! If he wanted a legacy, or to become a party of government, it was the wrong strategy though.

But building a grassroots party out of Baudet's personal image and political stunts was never going to work IMO. He and Hiddema got them on the map, but now that their ranks are swelling they are facing an identity crisis. Once Fortuyn got killed his party turned into a flash in the pan. If Baudet is forcefully deposed - which might even have happened to Fortuyn had he survived - I expect the FvD to crumble in similar fashion.

b) his party is a useless testimonial party.

And again, a testimonial party is not necessarily useless, as Wilders proved. He spent the good part of 15 years shifting the Dutch political discourse to the Right, keeping the Fortuynist momentum and framing the migration issue as a civilizational struggle. I think he is more responsible for this shift than Baudet, Rutte and Buma put together (although the main factor will remain the migration crisis in the mid 2010s). Their modern political discourses are products of Wilders if anything.

I agree that disagreements between the "pragmatic" and the "ideological" wing may remain an issue. (Then again, is disagreement within a party necessarily bad? Only disagreements on the right are immediately framed as "muh LPF".) However, the point of agreement between the pragmatic and ideological viewpoints is also obvious.

The muh LPF reaction is because we kind of know already what happens if the FvD were to enter government and compromise on issues such as migration and Europe : disarray, cabinet resignations and lack of propper whipping in the Chambers, causing splinters at that level and then potentially  at party level. I think Foreign and European Policy decisions especially are extremely sensitive to this. Whereas the parties from the VVD leftward can now be counted to deliver on important Dutch FP matters*, I'm not sure the FvD has the maturity  or homogeneity to actually vote on pretty important issues. cfr. The Greek Bailout, which had it been rejected could have caused potentially grave consequences for Dutch living standards. So while parties like CDA were in principle against it, they still took their responsibilities. Can some of the political  arsonists in FvD be expected to do likewise ?

*And Baudet isn't necessarily  wrong in his analysis of a lack of proper opposition to such a consensus. After all he also emerged because Rutte was caught out by a popular referendum  on Ukraine, and in the end the "Kunduz"-style consensus triumphed over a legally legitimate  referendum. But the idea of conducting FP or even fiscal, migration and taxation policy via referendum is unsustainable for a NATO and EU member that has to compromise on these levels. So then you go back to the "whether NL should be in these institutions in the first place" debate. Which would also split FvD.

[Zinneke]

I should clarify : Wilders had the right strategy to maintain a monopoly over the Dutch far right, that is to not allow space for other political  entrepreneurs to develop on that spectrum. He only failed because as you rightly put it, he failed to adapt to modern political methods and began sounding like a broken record on Islam, losing the novelty effect, especially with the media who love (to hate) Baudet. I don't think Wilders was wrong in not contesting locals, or allowing heavy hitters on his national list, because the history of his spectrum is that it attracts people who engage in entryism or backstabbing with the threat of a new party breakaway - he himself is case in point! If he wanted a legacy, or to become a party of government, it was the wrong strategy though.

His lack of relevance in changing policy turned out to be Wilders' downfall, just like VB in Belgium lost momentum and votes (while keeping its core vote) when the N-VA came around and suddenly gained momentum - not just because they were "something new", but also because they could potentially enter a government.

Right the N-VA analogy is fair, but there's two factors that we are forgetting here : one is that the N-VA is a broad Right movement, which may actually mean more dissent than in the hard right FVD (certainly on the left of the N-VA), but its internal party structure and vetting process is far smarter than the FVD's that allowed some pretty  arsonist alt-right types to join the party early doors, which they may not be able to get rid of so easily (De Wever had gotten rid of Schild & Vrienden within a day, I don't think Baudet can do the same, without looking like a hypocrite).

  and two that the biggest VB --> N-VA swing in 2014 almost immediately went back to VB once N-VA entered government. And now they are losing to VB because of internal strife between conservative De Wever and more radical elements like Francken.

The muh LPF reaction is because we kind of know already what happens if the FvD were to enter government and compromise on issues such as migration and Europe : disarray, cabinet resignations and lack of propper whipping in the Chambers, causing splinters at that level and then potentially  at party level. I think Foreign and European Policy decisions especially are extremely sensitive to this. Whereas the parties from the VVD leftward can now be counted to deliver on important Dutch FP matters*, I'm not sure the FvD has the maturity  or homogeneity to actually vote on pretty important issues. cfr. The Greek Bailout, which had it been rejected could have caused potentially grave consequences for Dutch living standards. So while parties like CDA were in principle against it, they still took their responsibilities. Can some of the political  arsonists in FvD be expected to do likewise ?

*And Baudet isn't necessarily  wrong in his analysis of a lack of proper opposition to such a consensus. After all he also emerged because Rutte was caught out by a popular referendum  on Ukraine, and in the end the "Kunduz"-style consensus triumphed over a legally legitimate  referendum. But the idea of conducting FP or even fiscal, migration and taxation policy via referendum is unsustainable for a NATO and EU member that has to compromise on these levels. So then you go back to the "whether NL should be in these institutions in the first place" debate. Which would also split FvD.

Here's our main disagreement. I think there are plenty of parties in other European countries with similar profiles in terms of policy who manage to successfully strike a balance between ideology and influence on policy. Thinking about, for example, FPÖ and the DPP here. On foreign policy and international organizations, the ÖVP-FPÖ arrangement would work as a model here too. The only question is whether Baudet is willing to make such compromises.

These parties have been in the political arena for years though, and some of them have experience of government.

Also worth keeping in mind that the FVD elected officials have been vetted by Otten and are mostly very much on the pragmatic side of the party. Baudet moving right would be a bigger risk for mass resignations than the party compromising. For some voters, this may of course be different. Should Forum end up in the government and make compromises, you'll see some voters move back to the PVV (or perhaps split off and form something new), just like what's happening to the N-VA after four years in the Belgian government. But Forum would prove itself a mature party and, because of it, appeal more to voters on the center-right. However, all this does necessitate that Baudet is willing to make painful concessions to enter a government. And you are right that we cannot necessarily be sure about this. I think this would be the litmus test for whether Forum can truly be a force for change or will be just another testimonial party.

You undoubtedly know more about the FvD internal dynamics than I do to be confident that the FvD are willing to compromise. I just think the sudden internal strife put on display is going to be a more structural problem in the Dutch hard right (as proven with LPF, and even before them the Centrum Partij (lol)/Centrum Democraten split) that seems destined to repeat itself time and time again. Its very similar to "Peoples Front of Judea/Judean People's Front" image of the Hard Left in countries like France, only rather than crackpot ideological tendencies its often driven by individual ambition, knowing that the mediatic and electoral system benefits individuals who break away from the "mainstream" or governing Hard Right with political stunts (e.g. Fortuyn, Wilders and Baudet himself). Its not disimilar to the Israeli Right although the religious/secular divide makes that more complex.

The problem is when they get into government this becomes more common place, and they could collapse it over important foreign policy issues.

[Zinneke]

PvdA 12 (+3)

What a comeback.

Probs due to Timmermans.

[Zinneke]

Old news now but as predicted Otten has been ousted by Baudet and is pressing charges against the latter for defamation (as far as I understand?!) and will predictably be setting up his own party soon.

[Zinneke]

Wilders was at least open about his Ponzi scheme you see. And he didn't get people to sign up for it and try to sell them

Anyway strange that both VVD and CDA have actually held their opening season conferences talking about left-wing economic policies (for their standards). 

[Zinneke]

Wilders was at least open about his Ponzi scheme you see. And he didn't get people to sign up for it and try to sell them

Anyway strange that both VVD and CDA have actually held their opening season conferences talking about left-wing economic policies (for their standards).  

What are they selling?

(Assuming you mean Wilders and Baudet), they are selling their image, both domestically but of course with an eye abroad. Wilders has always wanted to make inroads with the neo-conservative Republican establishment in the US - and his endgame was likely building a contact book in the Belt Road to land him a nice position somewhere there. I'm not sure what it is now - he talks of his succession more now but he's also still locked up in his armed bunker, which is never an easy life to have, and paradoxically to leave.

Baudet, as a public intellectual, wants to sell books and conference talks more than anything - and they became national bestsellers at least with his fame. I'm skeptical a political arsonist such as him was ever serious about making FvD into a more government friendly force to swing VVD/CDA rightwards, whereas Otten, who he disposed of, was. Baudet really pushed the mass membership party idea, getting to VVD-size in members, but if you actually look into the institutional mechanisms behind it, it was anything but democratic, with the executive boards, under Baudet's control, being the key decision makers in the inner workings of the party. His stalinist-like purge of Otten confirmed that.

Until the Dutch far right, one of the more "respectable" ones in Europe given its lack of, er, WW2 revisionism and foundation in Fortuynism, gets away from personalism its doomed to just be an electorate that props up a guy wanting to make a career somewhere bigger and better than the Second Chamber.

[Zinneke]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/19/netherlands-narco-state-dutch-lawyer-murder-fear-fury

big debate around this in the NL. TItle is a bit sensationalist but its an aspect of Dutch drug policy often overlooked.

[Zinneke]

Marianne Thieme is going to step down from her mandate and as leader of the Partij van de Dieren. She has been at the top of the party 17 years. It comes as PvdD have to decide whether to become "the biggest of the small parties" or the "smallest of the bigger parties"...a very Dutch problem

RIP God Empress FF

[Zinneke]

Shame to see this great thread go on the second page so its worth bringing up the farmer protests that have hit the Netherlands, claiming that the government's measures on fuel taxation and particularly the EU's nitrogen limit laws threaten their livelihood. Rutte met with some of them yesterday but it was pretty formulaic "our problems are never heard" stuff with him reassuring them in manager-speak.

This is a rather biased account of protests but it shows you the scale, and how it has slowly built up and not gone away :

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/10/20/thread-about-the-recent-farmer-protests-in-the-nl/

You can see the hanging of effigies and the coffin's with Jesse writen on them tell you what type of people these protesters are.

[Zinneke]

We have new polls showing the VVD actually tumbling...

https://imgur.com/Ls7R0Oa

https://www.ad.nl/politiek/vvd-zakt-fors-weg-in-peilingen-door-verlaging-maximumsnelheid~a2f43317/?referrer=https://www.reddit.com/r/thenetherlands/comments/e1ycy9/vvd_zakt_fors_weg_in_peilingen_door_verlaging/


Likely reasons are climate issues (they introduced unpopular measures like max 100km/h speed limit) and the handling of the farmer protests not pleasing their more cynical hard right voters

[Zinneke]

D66 are losing it a bit. Their youth wing forced the parliamentary group to put forward a debate on legalising all drugs. Needless to say every single party rejected it. It did however somewhat tone down PVV and FvD's consistent attacks on "Nanny state Netherlands" after a ban on some fireworks was pushed through (RIP Pyro in the away sectors at football games). FvD's Thierry Baudet came out with a reasonable response saying it was a daft thing to think but worth debating over in a democracy. Wilders was less compromising :

https://twitter.com/geertwilderspvv/status/1219238014020456448

PvdA looking increasingly like a better alternative for your average D66 voter in the mean time...

[Zinneke]

First polls of 2020 :



Source : https://app.nos.nl/data/datavisualisatie/peilingen/

(Yep, I hate boomers too)

Baudet got into a bit of trouble after falsely reporting that two of his friends were harrassed by Morrocans in a train. They turned out to be police in plainclothes...
Baudet, in typical fashion, refused to deny or apologise.

[Zinneke]

Maybe I am being dumb, but the numbers exceed 100%?

Its number of seats projected.

[Zinneke]

Netherlands has always had a reputation as a fairly progressive country yet looking at vote totals, polls and past elections, it looks like more vote for right wing parties than left wing pretty much every election.  Any reason for that?

Woah big question, you may have to read not one but two threads of political discussion on this forum about the past few years , plus a whole bunch of literature about the decay of pillarisation, of traditional party politics. I would not generalise about the Netherlands as a progressive society, even if it has socially progressive legislation on euthanasia or drugs for example. Its more traditional in some parts than almost any place in Western Europe (it has a Bible Belt with theocratic tendencies), and more progressive in other affairs. On the economic political spectrum a party like D66 would be outright rejected in most countries south of the NL due to its its vehement pro-market stances as too right-wing. I think the words you are looking for is a tolerant society that now has a contradictory "nativist" political tendency.

Keep in mind that a lot of the right-wing populist parties in the Netherlands are voted for as a backlash to perceived overdose of the social liberal 70s-80s-90s: drug policy, somewhat exaggerated tropes about city centres going to sh**t ( a dog whistle for brown people at times, but somewhat due to other factors like housing, tourism, etc.), obsession with multilateralism (even though I would argue the Netherlands is the classic example of a country that hits above its weight because of multilateralism) and last but definitely not least, the very idea that their progressive values are threatened by specifically non-EU immigration.

I think the main explanation is that the issues since the 70s and 80s and especially early 90s when Dutch "progressivism" was at its zenith have changed thanks to a re-framing of the debate particularly by the emergence of Pim Fortuyn. These are accentuated by the fact that being a gay ex-Marxist who called himself a social democrat of sorts sometimes, he was seen as a clear break from the unfrequented collaborationist predecessors of the far right, the Centrum Partij. He was also brutally and disgustingly martyred, alongside the likes of Theo Van Gogh, by lunatics, presenting the far right-wing as the real anti-establishment victims they have craved to be since the Second World War.

Let's get one thing clear though, and that is  that the 31 seats out of 120 that the far right are projected to win are only seen as a "surge" like every election cycle* because the rest of the 90 seats are so deeply fragmented, such is the atomisation of Dutch politics, where political entrepreneur can start a political movement, get invited on to a talk show or create an internet buzz, and the electoral system can allow them to make impressive inroads by simply creating a new cleavage and attracting subsequently a section of the electorate that previously either did not vote or did not have their niche. An entire political class is now dedicated to being as edgy (or in the case of 50PLUS, as cynical) as possible about certain issues - exemplified by D66's drug pledge - to make headlines and ultimately make a career.

After the experience of 2010-2012 though, and the Lijst Pim Fortuyn before it, the traditional parties (what Baudet calls the "party cartel") are not keen on working with the far right, which means any right-wing government inevitably has at least one progressive force of some sort. The far right are not unfrequentable in the Netherlands because they are not the successor parties to Nazi collaboration like in Belgium with Vlaams Belang. They are just not trusted since the last two governments they supported were collapsed prematurely and were in general a circus. FvD's "moderate" wing tried to change this but Baudet took control of the party and their mini-collapse is symptomatic.

* the Sunday Times thought that Baudet was a kingmaker with two seats last election...you see my point.

[Zinneke]

Dutch Healthcare Sector Minister Bruno Bruins (VVD) has resigned. He collapsed at a parliamentary debate due to tiredness levels, likely burnout, and is thus replaced. Fourth Minister to resign from cabinet. Sport and General Health of Population Minister Hugo De Jonge takes over, most famous for his choice of shoes

[Zinneke]

Another wonderful demonstration of far right patriotism :

https://euobserver.com/foreign/148099

[Zinneke]

Another wonderful demonstration of far right patriotism :

https://euobserver.com/foreign/148099

I don't see anything bad here. Kornilov is just another journalist/pro-government russian expert. He also writes a lot about Netherlands/EU, so...

Yep, all just a series of coincidences. Definitely no need for Ockam's Razor here at all. Move along.

WeIrd how the Dutch right has always voted against transparency of party funding. It could clear up who are Wilders and Baudet's backers are, as well as DENK's.

[Zinneke]

Another wonderful demonstration of far right patriotism :

https://euobserver.com/foreign/148099

I don't see anything bad here. Kornilov is just another journalist/pro-government russian expert. He also writes a lot about Netherlands/EU, so...

Yep, all just a series of coincidences. Definitely no need for Ockam's Razor here at all. Move along.

WeIrd how the Dutch right has always voted against transparency of party funding. It could clear up who are Wilders and Baudet's backers are, as well as DENK's.

What exactly do you mean? Yes, he was friendly to Russia, so nothing strange in talking with russian joutnalist. Do you seriously implying that a) Kornilov is intelligence agent b) Baudet is working with him for Russian government? You need to prove that.

No, I just don't think it is a coincidence that

- Baudet suddenly popped up out of nowhere following a referendum on Ukraine that was hyped up by a very similar group of people on social media who campaigned exclusively on this topic for no reason whatsover other than weird pro-Russian conspiracy theories that led to it in the first place...

-  that his initially tiny think tank has never struggled for funds or publicity

- that there was ever a "space" for his party in Dutch politics given Wilders has, with the exception of position on the geopolitical status quo (Wilders backers are Bible Belt evangelicals and neo-cons as well as the Israeli far right, making him a strong advocate for Atlantacist foreign policy), a fairly similar program to Baudet.

- that Baudet has never once been critical of Russia despite them, you know, illegally providing weapons to amateur militia who ended up shooting down a civilian airliner full of Dutch people. If you read his texts its borderine on sycophantic defence of Russia whilst his own party members question it.

- And again if you read the messages, he brags about how your Russian historian "knows the right people" and whatnot. So hardly just a friendly get together of like minded individuals.


We're talking FvD here, some of them are conspiracy nuts, so given their standards with the truth and conspiracy theories, I would say they are knee deep in dung. You can stick your head in the sand and play plausible deniability...its the Russian nationalist way after all as they murder their way across Europe. But Dutch people won't be fooled.

[Zinneke]

I think the key debate here is the difference between an asset and an agent. I don't believe he is a signed up FSB NOC either...that doesn't mean he has no close ties to them.

Anyway,two more parties are making the headlines : DENK and 50PLUS. Both are in the midst of internal struggles. Denk has always had an internal conflict between the two figures that initially broke off from sp.a, Tunahan Kuzu and Selcuk Ozturk. Kuzu stepped down a month ago as president of the parliamentary group citing personal reasons, because he was screwing around with some employee of DENK's who didn't actually live in the Netherlands (hmmm...). Ozturk wanted to take over while Farid Azarkan has the Presidency of the parliamentary faction  but now the party wants Ozturk to resign along with the board as they investigate the leaks that "took Kuzu down" and he is refusing to do so.

50PLUS have their own internal struggle partly caused by the return of Henk Krol. And the inevitable "ego-off" between 4 rich middle aged boomers, including Krol, was inevitably going to end in tears, with one of them accidently leaking "unsent press releases" and details of meetings where they divided jobs for each other in a clientelistic fashion, one of these meetings being the four category C risk boomers meeting up during confinement while inevitably salivating at the thought of profiting from the "OUR GOVERNMENT WANTS TO CULL OLD PEOPLE" rhetoric at the start of this.

Both parties look set to collapse but it remains to be seen if new ones re-emerge. I can't see Denk reforming if there are breakaway parties, but there is definitely a market for 50PLUS given how pensions are going to be a hot topic when trying to balance the budget under these circumstances.

[Zinneke]

Before Corona it had to do with VVD taking some quite unpopular measures relating to pensions, and I think in a way 50PLUS is a key outlet to a significant part of the VVD electorate who would want to express dissatisfaction with VVD's economics - rich boomers in the West who want less taxes on salary and especially sitting capital (NL has tax breaks for capital fluidity, but its more lucrative to sit on capital in Belgium) but better pensions. After Corona, well, they have remained stable I think for obvious reasons - they play on the whole idea that there was a certain carelessness in handling the elderly with herd immunity. Worth posting those polls :

https://twitter.com/EenVandaag/status/1244943138684313600?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7C...


The internal turmoil is pretty recent, and quite frankly its a typical drama that is more of the concern of the politico types like us and the "Haagse Kaasstolp",the Circuit. In the end 50PLUS have a simple message : no touching our pensions. and it creates a cleavage that works. Its the best single issue Krol could have picked (and make no mistake Henk Krol is there to serve Henk Krol's interests, no one elses). They can test the political mood on the latest issue and use it to their advantage. So when the idea of eurobonds or EU transfer union is up, they can bring it back to the pension issue somehow "well you see those pesky Southern Europeans retire earlier than us, and we work hard for our pensions, so No". its populist without being outright offensive/cranky. Had they not shat the bed internally I would have seen them benefit from FvD's troubles too.   

[Zinneke]

Not the first time 50PLUS has split tbf but this time it looks terminal.