Is Geert Wilders Popular in the Netherlands? If so, why?

The power of Geert Wilders is that he appoints problems where a substantial proportion of the population is in his stomach.Or more “in his lower abdomen”.

The weakness of Geert Wilders is that he does not provide an appropriate analysis for these problems, and does not offer any working solutions at all.

In Plain Dutch It is called “he calls but what”.And that is exactly what he does. He listens carefully to the gut feelings of a population group that feels marginalised, and then repeats verbatim.

I find the phenomenon Geert Wilders very interesting, although Pim Fortuyn was still much more interesting.Geert Wilders is much more unnuanced than Pim Fortuyn, more provocative.

I remember well that Janmaat was being shatrolled in the 2nd room.His political party (I mean center Democrats) was the pariah of politics, racist. CP86 was even banned.
But in the years 90 a new movement came up, and I believe that Frits Bolkestein (VVD, half years 90) was the first to criticise the Dutch immigration policy.The Netherlands reacted positively, Frits spoke out something that was always kept under the carpet.

Political dissatisfaction was not only on immigration, the emergence of the “livable” parties in the local politics in the early years 2000 was a clear signal: politics fails.Pim Fortuyn profiled himself and eventually started his own political party. The rest is history, Pim also after the attack by Folkert V/d GRAAF.

Geert Wilders is popular for the same reason as Frits Bolkestein and Pim Fortuyn.He appoints problems, or rather: he appointed the perception that many people have. That perception is: politics fails and we have a foreigners problem.

I lived for years in a Volkskijk where the content Pim/Geert voters was extremely high.The reason: Everyone knew someone who had lost his or her job, if this person had not already been affected. And everyone also saw that jobs disappeared to “foreigners”. The mutual solidarity was high, I suspect these people voted very “red” for 2000. In any case, Frits Bolkestein, these people were averse to the VVD, the party of the rich.
Red (especially the PvdA) had a lot of support from the trade union movement, but is politically increasingly drawn to the progressive middle, with which the party is extraneous from the electorate.They also found no representation in the SP (then still associated with the Communist Party), with which only populist parties remained.

Here I am concerned at the heart of the Wilders phenomenon.
People are dissatisfied with politics, we know that there was an immigration problem and that this was first appointed by Bolkestein and Fortuyn, and that the traditional parties do not represent this group of dissatisfied people.
The alternative is someone with a big mouth that tells audiences what people think privately.Geert Wilders.

I think many people who support Wilders are not so happy with Wilders, but see no alternative.
The lack of better makes him popular, not his political science.
For people who marvel at Trump’s winnings in the United States elections: the same problem.

Mr.Wilders did vote a large percentage of the voters on him (his party) and is (was?) the second larger party behind the VVD. From the point of view of the numbers of voices, you can literally say that he is ‘ popular ‘ among the voters.

Where Mr.Wilders is mainly good at naming what is perceived as a problem.

That the problems as he sees and appoints also correspond to his worldview makes him consistent and how you turn it or turns, authentic.I don’t think he lets himself advise by all sorts of spider doctors who have exactly sorted out what his opinion should be and then “Finetune” his message.

This is at present one of the bigger problems in Dutch politics that, apart from the people within the smaller parties, there are actually no more original and principled thinkers.

There are no more ideas, just polls and then the translation of those most shared opinions to politics and the accompanying soundbites.Then a party program is being used around it.

That also means that the selection of politicians is based on appearance (for the camera) and the good conveying of a message (acting talent).In my opinion, Rutte is a textbook example of this. It would adorn him when he occasionally put forward some original ideas but he has never been selected. He is the translation of marketing panels into a manufactured product. Soon even healthier and with crunchy nuts.

Regardless of what you find of Wilders ‘ ideas, he is in any case a fair product.Just Raw. So pulled out of the ground with clotting and already there we can laugh about it but people feel the difference between talk makers and ‘ the real deal ‘.

Love him or hate him

He is authentic.

Photo: Ebru Umar Interviews Geert Wilders for the Libelle.

Wilders is popular in the Netherlands, but Baudet has been more popular until recently and who knows what kind of charlatan we get afterwards.

The reason that this kind of politicians is so popular, you need to search for links.

Until the years 70 of the last century the PvdA came up for the interests of the working class.

Then the elitist intellectuals demolish new links, which had a completely different agenda.

In the years 80, multiculturalism celebrated the heyday, on the basis of the questionable assumption that migrant workers were a disadvantaged group to be emanciped.

In the years 90, the Social Democrats embraced neo-liberalism with market thinking and globalisation.

In the past, workers had labour and income security through the collective Agreements and excellent social legislation.They had a view of a nice pension, preceded by the VUT if this came out.

The working of now is too often a straightforward flexforce or forced ZZP-er, which should work through up to around 70th.The street image in his ward is dominated by people in robes, who are maintained by the welfare state that has been boring him, while the politicians who should represent him complain about the environment, gender equality and Animal rights.

So it’s not that weird that this poor Dreammel is angry and is voting for people who say what he want to hear.

The solution is in a return from the left to the basis of social democracy: The welfare state and the interest of the workers.Interestingly, the Danish Social Democrats have already partly landed on this point and, for example, have a ‘ hard ‘ immigration stance.

No, no more.I can’t wait for IE to leave the Noorderzon, we finally got a lot less in the room again.

What is popular?If you formulate it as ‘ second party of the Netherlands ‘, then that sounds like a lot. If you say that 15-20% of the voters voted on the PVV, it does come along and we are still far from a PVV led cabinet.

Wilders knows like no other to give the voter the feeling that he/she is being listened to.All other parties ignore the voter except in the few months before the elections.

Wilders is also the only one who dares to appoint the gut feeling and to speak out what some Dutch people have about foreigners and especially those from Muslim countries.Where others do not dare to abandon their correctness, Wilders simply says.

These two points make the man and the PVV pretty popular in the Netherlands.

The party program of Wilders party, the PVV, consists of 1 A4tje with the principal point of the de-islamizing of the Netherlands.The PVV has 1 member and that is Geert Wilders. Most if not all the Dutch who voted for Wilders do not know, or hardly, what they voted for. The de-islamizing of the Dutch will not succeed, because it is against the freedom of religion guaranteed in the Constitution. In short, Wilders is living with kretology, and the fact that so many Dutch people have voted on him gives a thought about the quality of education in NL. It also indicates that the PVV now with such populism draws the same percentage of votes as the NSB before the WW2 war. It is clear that the DUTCH education system is urgently improving.

Wilders has grown by his criticism of Islam and his preference for social points I. v. M For example health care.Now the demography certainly does not play in favor of the ethnic Dutch who have usually received the Catholic or Protestant lattice over them. It is only a matter of time until these two groups become increasingly more involved. The education suffers from blame underneath, the communities segregate from each other. The second generation of immigrants (Islamic) are often more radical than the first generation but just that little bit less than the third generation. View. What the Netherlands needs is a Leitkultur. A culture that seduces but does not impose, it must aim to create a common vision that unites both communities. That is called citizenship. What Wilders continually insists on is that Islam is a stumbling block in it. You just have to ask yourself how we will solve this. As you know, the Koran is the literal word of God; and combine that with the humanist, enlightened and the May ‘ 68 Europe of today? Do we want to take back debates on gay rights, the role of women in society, the divorce of boys and girls in the pools?

What Wilders is aware of is that you do not solve the current problems by making the problem bigger, namely mass immigration… Demography IS crucial.

Wilders will always be part of the electorate, with varying peaks of popularity.

Leave a Reply