The Rise of Geert Wilders. Dutch Pendulum Swings to the Right

In the Netherlands the Left’s strategy of importing immigrants to turn them into voters in order to “elect a new people” is backfiring. After the November 2006 general elections the Dutch Labour Party (PvdA) appointed two immigrant ministers to advertise its special concern for Muslim interests. Both ministers, Moroccan-born Admed Aboutaleb and Turkish-born Nebahat Albayrak, hold dual citizenship. Geert Wilders, the leader of the “Islamophobic” Freedom Party (PVV), opposed the appointment of the two ministers because they retained their original Moroccan and Turkish citizenship upon becoming Dutch citizens. Wilders says he doubts the loyalty to the Dutch nation of those who also want to remain loyal to other nations. The political establishment reacted with indignation, but the Dutch people seem to be vindicating Mr. Wilders.

Yesterday, a highly respected Dutch poll showed that Wilders’ PVV has become almost as big as the PvdA in the 150-seat Dutch Parliament. If elections were to be held today the PVV would get 19 seats (compared to only 9 in the last elections), while the governing PvdA would only get 20 (down from 33). The PvdA’s coalition partners would not be able to limit the damage. The centrist Christian-Democrat CDA of Prime Minister Jan-Peter Balkenende, would fall to 38 seats (41 in the current parliament) and the Calvinist CU would grow to 8 seats (up from 6). The present CDA-PvdA-CU coalition would lose its majority.

The November 2006 elections marked a dramatic shift to the Left. Yesterday’s poll indicates that public opinion in the Netherlands has again swung to the Right. As I pointed out in last month’s American Conservative, Dutch politics resembles a pendulum. The Dutch clearly reject Minister Albayrak’s amnesty for illegal aliens. According to the Muslim minister her amnesty proposal, which was approved in Parliament last June, will benefit some 30,000 people. Critics warn that it might lead to up to half a million foreigners flocking to the Netherlands.

Last Saturday Prof. Ruud Peters, who teaches Islamic law at Amsterdam University, told a PvdA meeting that he is “looking forward to the day when the first Muslim woman in a burqa is elected in parliament.” PvdA leader Wouter Bos, the Dutch Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, said, however, that ministers Aboutaleb and Albayrak will not wear a burqa. “We are the only party with prominent Muslim politicians. We stand for a tolerant and liberal Islam,” Bos said. Geert Wilders doubts whether a tolerant and liberal Islam exists. Last month he advocated a ban of the Quran, which he called a “fascist book inciting hatred and killing.” He said he wants the use of the book outlawed, even in Dutch mosques. The Dutch authorities are considering prosecuting Wilders for his remark, which according to some is an incitement to racial hatred.

Meanwhile, Dutch Neo-Nazis are criticizing Wilders for his neo-conservatism. Wilders’ “casino capitalism” will “make the rich richer and the poor poorer and will only exacerbate the problems of the multicultural society,” the website of the far-right Dutch People’s Union (NVU) writes. While the Neo-Nazis expect that Wilders’ PVV will win up to 30 seats in the next elections they call the politician “dangerous,” emphasizing that he is “a friend of Israel.”




Dutch Unilever Director Wants Wilders Stopped, 8 December 2007

Is Geert Wilders on a Suicide Mission? 25 January 2008

Wilders Postpones Movie, Fortuyn’s Lawyer Attacks Wilders, 26 January 2008

Neo-Nazis against Wilders

In the last paragraph Paul Belien writes: 'Meanwhile, Dutch Neo-Nazis are criticizing Wilders [...].

Is it his intention to prove the accuracy of Godwin's Law?

'As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one'.


Yes,dchamil,I got that symbolic message at the first time of reading(But it's always good to know that one isn't "projecting") .And just for the record I wasn't suggesting that either the Koran,Mein Kampf or the deck of cards would be the first likely candidate to be banned or rejected...

Thanks for the clarification.

Deck of Cards

The way Dutch 'justice' is developing, being politically correct in many cases, corrupt in others, and subject to blackmail in yet others (international childporn and -abuse high up in the department), the deck of cards might actually be the best choice... to ban last!

Looking at Belgium's incestuous 'justice', as put on display with the SIOE demo, it's not much better there. But then, links have been suggested between the Dutch child abuse case and the Dutroux case, which was definitely not a lone case and might very well involve high justice officials there as well.

Basically anything that's state controlled gets corrupted sooner or later. As they say: power corrupts.

In reply to R.Hartman

Thanks for the video link re: History of Political Correctness.


Don't know if you've already read it,but here's a link to a Daniel Pipes article which discusses the subject of banning the Koran.




In my opinion a more productive and effective policy for the West might be to pursue something along the lines discussed in another Pipes article available here:


We'll "talk" again.


Unless I am sadly mistaken,Dchamil's comments were made tongue-in-cheek in suggesting that  a deck of cards or even Mein Kampf might be used in future as a substitute for the Bible in Dutch courts,and my observation was also made tongue-in-cheek when I suggesting that I believed that I knew which one would be banned first;the Bible,(the Koran),a deck of playing cards or Mein Kampf.But thanks anyway for the reality check. 

To Atlanticist 911

My tongue-in-cheek comment asked, "Where is it all to end? What standard is to be used to decide what is an acceptable Holy Book?" A racist might prefer Mein Kampf, and a deck of cards might appeal to an atheist who thinks the laws of chance are supreme.

@ Atlanticist911

You're most welcome ;-)

My personal opinion is that books should not be banned, regardless of their contents. I'm sure Wilders feels the same, but he needs to make sure he raises a stink with every statement issued in order to start discussions, as he's subjected to a 'cordon sanitaire' much like the Belgian Vlaams Blok. The main problem of course is the Imams that 'explain' the Koran, and our Dhimmytude coalition just eased the rules for importing 'clerics'.

So he does have to go into extremes to make sure the left get outrageous enough to forget their vow to ignore him. That's not to say I'm a fan of Wilders. He's still a statist man, and I do not agree with a number of his agenda items. However, he's the only one that's not succumbed to Political Correctness, wants smaller governement and lower taxes (they go together almost automatically), he supports free speech (although calling for a book ban might give you different ideas) and that's worthy of my support.

On a side note, I've placed a link to a video on the History of Political Correctness on my blog. You may find it interesting.

Wilders and Bracke

quite funny: our "Flemish Pravda". After the Dutch elections, anchorman Bracke (and by the way also his collegues on Teletekst)" forgot" to mention the steep rise of Geert Wilders party. In fact they assumed he was not worth mentioning at all (I suppose he came from the wrong corner in the political landscape?).
Of course the few seats of a party called "Partij voor de dieren" (party for the animals) was extra highlighted. After all: the Flemish national broadcasting station has signed a charter saying that they are obliged to give us "NEUTRAL" information because they work on taxpayers' money.. is it not?



"In court in the Netherlands,can a witness swear on the Koran instead of the Bible? How about using a deck of cards? How about Mein Kampf?".


Although I can only make an educated guess to the answer to the first part of your question,based upon Paul Belien's article, I'm pretty damned sure which of the four examples you cite is most likely to be the first one to be banned.

One remark re Neo-Nazis

I have to make one remark on the story: Mr. Belien steps into the common trap of denominating Neo-Nazis to be far right. Nothing could be further from the truth. Neo-Nazis belong to the far left, as Nazis were left. Hitler was left, and his propaganda minister Goebbels has stated that openly: “Der Idee der NSDAP entsprechend sind wir deutsche Linke. Nichts ist uns verhaßter als der rechtsstehende deutsche Bürgerblock.” (According to the idea of the NSDAP we are German left. There's nothing we hate more then the German citizen's block that stands to the right). See this German language forum.

Mein Kampf has already been banned in NL for a long time...

Swear on the Koran?

In court in the Netherlands, can a witness swear on the Koran instead of the Bible? How about using a deck of cards? How about Mein Kampf?