Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Holland moving towards an authoritarian state?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is Holland moving towards an authoritarian state?

    The political system over here is in disarray ever since the popular (and populist) gay dandy politician Pim Fortuin was murdered during the parliamentary elections in 2002. His haphazardly constructed party won an unprecedented victory that brought them seats in the coalition government. Pim’s heirs successfully sabotaged this government by heavy infighting among their ranks, leading eventually to their complete demise in the next few elections since.

    But the legacy of this popular revolt is still smouldering underneath the Dutch political landscape. Since then our parliament is ‘blessed’ with a party lead by a rouge member of the liberal party, Geert Wilders, whose party currently holds 9 (out of 150) seats. Polls give him up to 20 seats if elections would be held today. An awkward aspect of his party is that he is the sole member and president. Presumably this is because he wants to avoid the mess that ruined Fortuin’s party.

    Recently, another member of the liberal party (Rita Verdonk, (in)famous for retracting the Dutch citizenship of fellow liberal Ayaan Hirsi Ali) was thrown out, and she too has now founded a new political movement. The signs are there that this movement will also result in a political party with a structure along the same lines as Wilders’. Rita is a very popular women, and during the last elections she alone was good for about 10 of the 22 seats her liberal party managed to secure. Her popularity appears to be only rising.

    To be honest, I’m starting to get really scared of these developments. Polls indicate that between Wilders and Verdonk approximately 25% of the vote may be shared. Should I be worried that these politicians, who create essentially authoritarian parties, will rule my country with equally authoritarian measures once they get the chance? Is it time to emigrate while I still can? Should political parties be obliged to have a structure where members have a say in the political program they put forward? Or is that a silly ‘Big government’ kind-of non-solution?


    Damn, this is more confusing then mushrooms.
    "post reported"Winston, on the barricades for freedom of speech
    "I don't like laws all over the world. Doesn't mean I am going to do anything but post about it."Jon Miller

  • #2
    Yeah, pretty much.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes. Soon they might curtail enough personal freedoms that Holland's laws resemble those of a normal state. No more running naked through the streets with three joints in your mouth and profane tattoos on your butt, if you can imagine!
      1011 1100
      Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

      Comment


      • #4
        Why on earth would any candidate stand for election for a party which refuses to allow them to be a "member"? How on earth do they get candidates much less win seats? I'm missing something here....
        "I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
        "I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark Twain

        Comment


        • #5
          Don't worry, Harry Potter will save you with a swish of his wand
          Speaking of Erith:

          "It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda Smith

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Wezil
            Why on earth would any candidate stand for election for a party which refuses to allow them to be a "member"? How on earth do they get candidates much less win seats? I'm missing something here....
            I have no idea.
            "post reported"Winston, on the barricades for freedom of speech
            "I don't like laws all over the world. Doesn't mean I am going to do anything but post about it."Jon Miller

            Comment


            • #7
              Are there yearly dues required to be paid in order to continue being a "non-member" of the party?
              "I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
              "I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark Twain

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Wezil
                Are there yearly dues required to be paid in order to continue being a "non-member" of the party?
                Behind the counter perhaps .

                More likely the candidates are just happy they can cash in on the fees they get for being an MP. To be honest, I've not seen or heard any of the other 8 MP for Wilders' party yet. I'm curious if they even attend parliamentary sessions (apart from showing up when voting is due)

                I'm guessing the voters are of the 'those who know what's best for us must rise and save us from ourselves' variaty.
                "post reported"Winston, on the barricades for freedom of speech
                "I don't like laws all over the world. Doesn't mean I am going to do anything but post about it."Jon Miller

                Comment


                • #9
                  Don't worry about Verdonk. She's no Wilders or some of the other things you describe. You'd better be more worried about Marijnissen

                  No, I'm not going to vote for Verdonk. She's too single minded imho.
                  Formerly known as "CyberShy"
                  Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I assume from the OP that the Netherlands has a proportional representation system that employs some kind of candidate lists and vote totals comparison, like the d'Hondt or the Saint-Laguë system?

                    That means that a party can have only one actual member, but under the name or guise of the party, there is a list of candidates up for election. How many candidates get seats from a list is derived from the total number of votes the list (or the candidates on that list in total) receives. That way an extraordinarily popular candidate like the people mentioned can pull in their wake several other way less popular candidates.

                    That means that the seat of several MPs will be entirely dependent on the popularity of this one charismatic person, so they will be under their thumb if they want to be re-elected. The charismatic person could either kick them off the list or get on another list themselves.

                    I personally would not be concerned unless it's possible these movements will be able to put together enough seats to dominate a government coalition, that is, if the current political elite even considers them coalition-worthy and is willing to admit them into one as things stand right now. And even in a coalition, unless they have a lynchpin position (like 20 MPs in a majority of only 15 MPs) their ambitions will be dampened by having to work with the other parties/party. I think it's fairly difficult to entirely subvert a parliamentary democracy that's working on proportional representation without some incredible upheaval.

                    I'd take the ban on mushrooms as a more reliable indicator of things going south.
                    Last edited by Kassiopeia; October 19, 2007, 16:02.
                    Cake and grief counseling will be available at the conclusion of the test. Thank you for helping us help you help us all!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Kassiopeia
                      That means that the seat of several MPs will be entirely dependent on the popularity of this one charismatic person, so they will be under their thumb if they want to be re-elected. The charismatic person could either kick them off the list or get on another list themselves.
                      Exactly.
                      Up till now it was the party members who elected the people on the list of the party though. Never before had a party leader the power to do so. A strong leaders could offcourse still influence the vote, but the whole process would be a democratic one.


                      As for actual governing influence: so far the role of Wilders has been modest, and what will become of Rita is yet to be seen. But with a potential 25% of the vote, they could become a force to be reckoned with.
                      If not in the actual government itself, then certainly the knowledge of that many 'disgrunteled' voters adrift could have far reaching political concequences.
                      "post reported"Winston, on the barricades for freedom of speech
                      "I don't like laws all over the world. Doesn't mean I am going to do anything but post about it."Jon Miller

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I think that the bigger picture is excellent. The Dutch election system allows for new parties to emerge and take a significant portion of the votes. That is very healthy

                        That some of those parties are led and controlled by charismatic persons is a non-issue really.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I sure hope so, those idiots need a strong leader to tell them who's boss.
                          APOSTOLNIK BEANIE BERET BICORNE BIRETTA BOATER BONNET BOWLER CAP CAPOTAIN CHADOR COIF CORONET CROWN DO-RAG FEDORA FEZ GALERO HAIRNET HAT HEADSCARF HELMET HENNIN HIJAB HOOD KABUTO KERCHIEF KOLPIK KUFI MITRE MORTARBOARD PERUKE PICKELHAUBE SKULLCAP SOMBRERO SHTREIMEL STAHLHELM STETSON TIARA TOQUE TOUPEE TRICORN TRILBY TURBAN VISOR WIG YARMULKE ZUCCHETTO

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            How can you describe an authoritarian party as "liberal"?
                            I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by DanS
                              How can you describe an authoritarian party as "liberal"?
                              To clarify:
                              Both Geert Wilders and Rita Verdonk used to be members of the liberal party. They both were expelled from that party.
                              Although in both cases the reasons for their expulsion had nothing to do with their 'authoritarianism' (?) , there might very well be a subsurface link as to why the liberal party felt uncomfortable with these two members in their midst.

                              Both Wilders and Verdonk now run on an essentially nationalistic program (IMO), even though they claim to uphold a stronger liberal voice then the party they were forced to leave. One has to bear in mind that the liberal party is often seen as a 'right-wing' party in the Dutch political spectrum, and in that sence (falsely) seen as a conservative party. It does indeed appear that both breakaways mistake liberalism for conservatism as well.
                              Last edited by germanos; October 20, 2007, 08:52.
                              "post reported"Winston, on the barricades for freedom of speech
                              "I don't like laws all over the world. Doesn't mean I am going to do anything but post about it."Jon Miller

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X