PVV Blog 10 ~ The Ideology Of The PVV (Party for Freedom) In Practice
With the arrival of the new Dutch cabinet under prime minister Schoof, we will witness the ideology of the PVV put into practice. How will the ideas of the PVV be realized in daily policy?
We previously started this series under the name “The PVV in Power and Muslims” and in this ‘new’ series, the focus will again be on the Muslim community in the Netherlands and the effects of PVV policy on them. However, it doesn’t really matter what the series is called, as every decision and action by PVV powerholders always has negative effects on Muslims, migrants, and anyone who is not Dutch.
Today, the kickoff: about the government statement and the subsequent debate.
The ‘Rule of Law Paper’
The Debate
Political enthusiasts likely followed the debate that ensued after the government statement of the Schoof cabinet on Thursday, July 4, with cringing toes, raised eyebrows, clenched buttocks, pricked ears, and weary eyes. The opposition rose up against PVV ministers
Marjolein Faber and Reinette Klever due to their statements about “replacement” and the wearing of headscarves. The opposition parties were outraged, arguing that the two mentioned PVV ministers, with their statements, had already violated the unity of cabinet policy on day one. Prime Minister Schoof responded by asserting that his cabinet was there for all Dutch citizens, and, to emphasize his point, he looked at Labour – Green Left Party MP Lahlah, who wears a headscarf, and declared that he saw a person who is one of us.
On Paper, Everything is Correct
What is the issue here? Well, columnist Sita Sitalising articulated it strongly in the Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant on Saturday, July 6. Everyone is lulled into complacency by the fact that the entire team of ministers, including the PVV officials, as well as the leaders of PVV and its coalition partners VVD, NSC, and BBB, have signed a document declaring their adherence to the principles of the rule of law and democracy. This paper reality is something the prime minister never fails to emphasize: “My team is there for everyone, and we all adhere to democratic rules.” As everyone knows, paper is patient, but the law, also written on paper, exists precisely to indicate how to act when someone breaks the rules. The document signed by the cabinet and coalition parties is a kind of law: it comes into effect because we can assume that the rules will be broken. After all, if there are no violations, there is no need for a law.
Reduce it ‘a bit’
In the debate, the following discussion took place. DENK (Islamic party) MP Stefan van Baarle told Wilders, “Those people in djellabas, that Islamic butcher, that is the Netherlands. That belongs to the Netherlands. Get used to it, I say to Mr. Wilders.” Wilders, however, responded, “We have gone too far. People are rightly worried about it (i.e. foreigners living in the cities; he said earlier). And I say: guys, we can’t handle it anymore. We need to reduce it a bit. That is finally going to happen now. That’s really good.” The attentive listener hears Wilders use the word ‘reduce’, albeit ‘a bit’, but still reducing, and in this fragment, he means to say that he looks forward to ‘people who feel strange in their own neighborhood and city’ feeling at home again because ‘reducing that is going to happen now’ and ‘that’s really good.’
The House paid little attention to these words, especially not the leaders of the other coalition parties, nor the prime minister. This, despite these words being a violation of the solemnly signed rule of law document. After all, does ‘reducing’; not mean an ethnic cleansing of the neighborhood and city?
Football match Turkey-Netherlands
And there were more violations of the document of the rule of law by the leader of the largest party. On Saturday, July 6, the European Championship football match between Turkey and the
Netherlands took place, with the Netherlands winning. Wilders posted this tweet online, and this was the text: ‘They curse us and hate us. Leave for Turkey, no one is forcing you to stay here!
This is why the PVV is the largest party in the Netherlands." Legally, this statement is undoubtedly allowed in light of freedom of speech, but morally it stands in stark contrast to the rule of law document also signed by Wilders, which has already been degraded to a rag.
Patriots for Europe
Another action Wilders took was aligning his party with the new group in the European Parliament, ‘Patriots for Europe,’ an initiative of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. This
group consists of similar parties to the PVV, with Orbán's Fidesz party being the most prominent. Orbán has reduced his country to the democratic pariah of Europe, and one of his first actions,
now that Hungary holds the EU presidency for this half-year, was to visit Russian President Vladimir Putin: My goal was to open the channels of direct communication and start a dialogue
on the shortest road to #peace ,said Orbán, whom I consider a useful idiot who has likely never signed a ‘rule of law document’. Meanwhile, Dutch Defense Minister Brekelmans (VVD) and Foreign Minister Veldkamp (NSC) visited Kyiv around the same time to support Ukraine: the new Dutch cabinet continues to back the country. But how credible is that when the now most powerful man in the Netherlands aligns himself even more closely with Putin’s friend Orbán?
What does the rule of law document say about this?
Use the ‘Rule of Law Paper’ Against the Cabinet
The opposition would do well to challenge this cabinet primarily on ideological grounds: address the ideological principles underpinning its actions; do not attack the individual PVV ministers
personally, as that is ineffective. Confront the government with the ‘rule of law paper’ knowing that it functions like a law and also knowing that laws exist because they are broken. The prime minister still believes in the paper, but we now know better (and perhaps he does too), and the more often the paper is violated, the greater the pressure on the other coalition parties, aside from the PVV, to ideologically expose the PVV faction. For my part, I will continue to do this in this series, and I fear there will be many more parts to come.
The debate about the government statement (it only takes 11 h and 54 min)