Wild, Rude or Civil?

March 16, 2017 - Netherlands, Holland, Dutch, election, Gert Wilders, Mark Rutte

Yesterday, elections were held in Holland. Some looked to this election as a bellwether, Others dismissed it as inconsequential. The Dutch 2017 elections turned out pretty much as predicted. Gert Wilders’ Freedom Party and other alternative parties gained seats, the ruling party lost seats but retained its majority. Yet Wilders influence on the election cannot be denied and it appears his party gained seats to tie second with two other parties. Holland is considered to be the most socially progressive Civil Society in Europe.

In April the French will hold their election. It appears likely that Marine Le Pen will win the first round of voting. The second round of voting is up in the air, with most pundits feeling that the second round will go to her opponent. However, the EU parliament may have handed victory to La Pen when they censured her for tweets which a large number of French voters feel impinges her Human Rights. This, along with broadcasts by RT contending that Freedom of Opinion should be constrained for the sake of political correctness appears to be playing to Marine La Pen’s advantage. In September, Germans will go to the polls. 2017 German elections appear to largely be a referendum on Merkelism. The rape of children in Austria and Germany by migrants without proper documentation appears to be pushing the advance of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. The question is not whether the AfD will enter the German Parliament, but how many members it will have. Predictions of results for AfD range from 11.5 % to 27%.

While Merkelism may remain the guiding philosophy in the German Bundestag, support for Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats has fallen to a four year low. In September 2015, Merkel suffered a home ground defeat falling to third place in her own state. Unless Germany's centrist parties address the needs and concerns of the average citizens and repudiate Merkelism then the political landscape will continue to shift in favor of alternate parties such as the AfD. The challenge for these parties lies within the perception of citizens that some leaders are merely paying lip-service to their concerns while failing to take action to address their needs.

How did Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte do so well against the challenge from Gert Wilders? Does Rutte provide the key for Merkel to do a subtle shift in word and deed to shore up her parties losses to the AfD?

Here is a translation of Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s letter to the Dutch people:

All Dutch,

There is something out of hand in our country. We are a prosperous nation, so how is it that some people are behaving so miserably? Such people appear to be intent on controlling the mood in our nation, wanting to destroy everything we have worked so hard to create. Can we allow this?

By far the majority retains good will. The silent majority. We want the best for our country. We work hard, help each other and find Netherlands to be quite a cool country. Yet we are concerned about how we treat each other. Sometimes it seems as if no one acts healthy.

Probably you recognize the signs. Anti-social behavior in traffic, on public transport and on the street. Those who feel they can take precedence. Relieving themselves on the street. Spitting on our conductors. Hanging around in groups harassing, threatening and abusing people. This is not normal.

We feel a growing discomfort when such folks abuse the very freedom they come to our nation to enjoy. People who refuse to adapt and adopt. Failing to adopt our customs, rejecting our values, harassing gay men, women in short skirts and calling fellow citizens racists. I understand those people who think that if you reject the principles of our nation, you should leave. I have felt the same. Act healthy, behave or leave.

Such behavior should not be found in our nation. The solution will not emerge through tribalism, insults or the expulsion of entire groups. Didn’t we build this society together? The foremost solution is an attitude. We must continue to make clear what is healthy and what is not healthy in this country. We must actively defend our values.

In the Netherlands it considered healthy that you shake hands equally with all. The norm is to respect workers, respect teachers and it is normal that people do art with vlogs. It is the norm to work to earn and create a great life. We help each other when things are difficult, we embrace each other when times are tough. It is our norm to be committed and not run away from problems. Listen properly to each other, instead of shouting when you do not agree.

The coming months will determine the course of our country. There is only one question: what do we want for our nation?

Let us contend so that we continue to feel at home in our beautiful country. Let us continue to make clear what is normal here and what is not. I'm sure we're going to do this. Together we have achieved, because we are united. You, me, all of us. Let's work together to make our nation even better. Because really, we are a really cool country. Living here, who would want to live anywhere else? Would you?

Mark Rutte

original brief (letter) in Dutch

The rise of political parties and leaders emphasizing the tenets of Civil Society, local values and resistance to multi-culturalism was fueled by Merkel’s grabbing the reigns of European foreign policy issuing a broad invitation to people around the globe. In an age of climate chaos and consequent mass migration, Merkel's speech was taken as a blanket invitation to any and all people seeking better circumstances. Consequently, people from around the world are seeking to resettle in Europe where advanced Civil Societies offer medical care and education as human rights and welfare systems supporting recent arrivals.

Merkel's European foreign policy has led to civil unrest throughout Europe along with new national policies in countries like Hungary which has built border fences to inhibit illegal crossings by unregistered migrants as well as changes in national laws with regard to visas, residency and work permits. The political impact has been global with the result largely felt by moderate right wing Liberal parties experiencing set backs. The most impactful election was the 2016 US election of Donald Trump.

Informed readers are aware that US political parties are both right wing parties. The US Democrats are a centre right liberal party; the Republicans are a far right elite party with the novel addition of nativists. Yet, the bulk of Americans are largely confused regarding politics, many believing that US media is the product of leftists and that the US has moved far to the left. The reasons for these delusions largely rest with the transformation of journalism to infotainment, coupled with years of anti-soviet propaganda.

The creation of the EU has presented a bureaucratic labyrinth difficult for the average citizen in Europe to navigate, resulting in rising fears that the local needs of citizens are being ignored in favor of idealistic goals. Europe is still largely comprised of Civil Societies with unique cultures that are thousands of years old. The Renaissance gave birth to the freedom of thought necessary for essential truth of human rights to reemerge. The key question on the minds of many is whether Europe can maintain its place in the world as the leading advocate for Civil Society with a strong foundation of human rights. Merkelism has created challenges across Europe as EU bureaucrats appear to impose rules and regulations without regard to the respective electorates of member states.

European Millennials demonstrate an understanding that Europeans from other nations within the EU are their partners in progress. While older Europeans tend to view citizens from other European nations as competitors. With regard to what some view as an "incursion" by non-European people who do not share the essential values of Civil Society, there is split within a substantial part of the European electorate. Some citizens are aware that acculturation of asylum seekers can only be accomplished if the numbers are kept low. Those millennials buying into the Merkelist philosophy that Europe can solve the problems of the world through mass immigration are opposed by those who feel that excess immigration can destabilize progress. This split is internal within individual European states with Western European Millennials being more likely to be pro-Merkelist while Eastern European Millennials are more likely to oppose Merkelism. Migrants prefer Western Europe to Eastern Europe largely due to welfare provisions in countries like Sweden and Germany.

Rutte’s speech is powerful and meaningful in the face of these challenges. While Holland is the nation that spawned the corporation, since World War 2 the Dutch have worked hard to strengthen their civil society. Rutte’s letter is bold because he defied the basic tenets of political correctness and spoke out about the improper and unhealthy behavior of people seeking asylum in Netherlands while at the same time drawing attention to the incongruity of calls for the mass expulsion of certain groups from Holland.

Angela Merkel spawned the philosophy now known as Merkelismus / Merkelism in August 2015, one month after her apparent heartless statement that ‘not all applicants could be granted asylum,’ appeared to have emotionally shattered an eleven year old Palestinian girl during a German television broadcast in July, 2016 on the NDR channel.

Turkish Leader Erdogan has stimulated the outrage of average voters throughout Europe through repeated attempts to directly influence elections throughout Europe by sending Turkish ministers to make speeches in Austria, German and Holland. Currently European governments are not allowing such speeches by foreign ministers. Yet this proper exercise of political sovereignty has prompted riots by groups of Turks in more than one location in Europe.

With the UK Brexit and gains by the Dutch Freedom Party, European leaders must begin to deal with the real needs of the European electorate if they wish to stave off the growing strength of populism. Robotic technology largely precludes uneducated entrants into the union from gainful employment. Psycho-social issues pertaining to the reeducation of males who have been indoctrinated within patriarchal social systems indicate that in contrast to their female counterparts, male loss of privilege may prevent easy assimilation into Civil Society. Freedom of Thought, including Freedom from Religion must be defended. The means to combat such threats is found through Freedom of Speech. This is not a time to assail the rights of European Citizens. The challenge from new entrants must be met with simple re-education programs aimed at supporting those desiring the privilege of residence in Europe to transform their consciousness. While all entrants must be provided with political and religious education, particular attention must be paid to males. It must also be understood that males of fighting age unable to adjust to life in lands offering asylum must be given humane resettlement to countries where the cultural values are congruent with those values they cannot relinquish. Morocco, Libya, Egypt and Saudi Arabia are appropriate nations for the assimilation of these refugees because said nations have societies in accordance with the principles of the Islamist form of Abrahamism. Too often center right wing liberals force these men to remain in countries where they can never be happy. Positive diplomacy is essential to paving the way for these people to resettle in nations that have rejected the tenets of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which form the basis of Global Society, in order to build societies based on religious doctrines. Refugees from nations recognizing a particular religion must be granted asylum in nations having the same social basis. This assures that they continue to enjoy the values and privileges to which they are accustomed.

It is obvious that while many refugees were inspired to call Angela Merkel: “mama,” maternalistic manipulation does not serve their interests. If such migrants are finding a difficult time adjusting to the new norms and values of the nations in which they sought asylum, then they need support to move to nations in alignment with their chosen philosophies.

© 2017 A.d.S / Stringer 8, SocialDemocrat.org, et al.

Return / Home