191
Dutch election: anti-Islam, far-right Geert Wilders set for big win
(www.euronews.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
191 points (97.5% liked)
Europe
8324 readers
1 users here now
News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures
Rules
(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)
- Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
- No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
- No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.
Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Calm down. While he got the biggest share, it is "just" 35 seats in a 150 seats parliament. He would need another 41 seats in coalition to get anywhere, which means (as his share is the largest) he would not only need one, but at least two partners willing to form a coalition with and a government under him.
While those 35 seats are still 35 seats too many, I doubt he will run the country.
I really, really hate this kind of thinking.
Election in 2008: "Calm down, the far right only got 3%" Election in 2012: "Calm down, the far right only got 7%" Election in 2016: "Calm down, the far right only got 13%" Election in 2020: "Calm down, the far right only got 18%" And so on...
Can you people really not see a problem with this?
It's the intolerance paradox in full view. Wilders should have been convicted and jailed years ago. A tolerant society must be fiercly intolerant towards intolerance.
Not sure if jailing him is the right solution, but after his Moroccan speech, he should at the very least have been barred from public office, as well as participating in any political parties.
At least that way, there is a strong deterrent to preventing politicians from spewing this kind of hate.
What does the parent comment have anything to do with the intolerance paradox. The population is increasingly voting far-right, it's terrible and has nothing to do with the paradox.
A shift of the public opinion at that scale doesn't occur in a vacuum. It can only happen if society as a whole tolerates increasingly intolerant messages and behaviour. Those far right rat catchers wouldn't have much of a platform, if they weren't tolerated, and their supporters wouldn't be nearly as brazen if they were told off wherever they dare to publicly state their support.
What exactly would you jail him for though? While he is mostly spewing bullshit without coming with any real solutions, he isn't actually doing anything 'legally' wrong.
He was tried around 2008/2009 for hate speech and discrimination. He should have been convicted then.
The Holocaust was legal and not legally wrong.
There is quite a bit of a difference between genocide and some mean words about the Islam.
Yes, words can be harmful but the holocaust is quite a bit outside that scope.
Something that you probably understand, seeing as you came with this absolute shit strawman take.
It's not a strawman if it's fact. The point is that "legality" is not the only basis for action or lack thereof. Shit like that is what got us in this fucking mess.
Ok, you jail him and maybe even his closest allies. What do you achieve with that?
Imo, at best you got a bunch of people protesting out in the streets, calling it political persecution. And at worst the party's popularity might even increase, handing them an even larger victory.
If he had been convicted years ago, we wouldn't be in this situation today.
At the same time, people are bound to compare it to e.g. Trump, who actually got a majority. It's good to know that our electoral system works differently, if you're unfamiliar with it.
Just FYI, Trump never won a majority of votes either, although he was a lot closer than Wilders.
Haha yeah fair enough, he got a majority of electors (I think that's the right term?), but not of the popular vote, which is what counts in the Netherlands - another sign of how different the electoral systems are. But yeah, the larger point is that the level of popular support is way lower.
Or compare him to Trump whose trials are frankly far too little and far too late for their next election.
It really depends on your take home message.
If it’s “shit is dire, but it could be worse and we still have a chance to fight back”, it’s one thing.
If it’s “everything is under control go back to sleep”, it’s quite another.
To be fair, the vibe I got from GP was more towards the latter though.
I see the problem with it, but it also means they have not won (yet), and you can work towards the next election to fix it.
If anyone knew how to work to fix it, that would be somewhat calming. Instead this just gives reason for increasing panic and feeling helpless.
Well, the best way to fix political issues that concern you is getting active in politics.
That doesn't help if you have no idea what works. Describe getting active, please, and how it can fix the rise of rightwing politics.
How about finding the political party you find best, and join?
And then what? No party has a working concept. I don't have one either, so how should joining a party help in any way? Then I'll be helpless in a party.
Well, then stop blaming politicians.
I'm starting to blame you for deliberately not understanding me. I ask you what to do and you just repeat that I should do. But what?? How could I be any clearer? I'm not blaming politicians either in this thread.
Sorry, but I cannot help you decide what you want. Maybe it is time to think about that first.
What are your personal goals in life? How could you achieve them, what would be the path or paths to your goal?
Then you might find some political group that matches those paths or even goals. But finding clarity is something you need first and foremost. Anything else is "just" a consequence.
What do my personal goals have to do with anything? I want a society based on solidarity, justice, human rights, democracy and without discrimination. More and more people vote and voice support for nationalism, social darwinism, fascism and suppression of diversity. I know perfectly well what I want. I take offense that others don't want my goals and actively want to criminalize me, suppress my rights and more and more openly kill me.
So tell me how do I get my neighbors and fellow citizen to choose peace and love instead of hate and cruelty?
If I knew the path, I'd go it. That's the point you stubbornly refuse to engage with.
I don't "subbornly refuse to engage with" it. I cannot help you to find your personal path to your goals.
You can stop insisting that this is my personal problem for a start. Are you fine with the rise of fascism? What are you doing against it and how do you believe is it going to work when it hasn't all those past years?
What you do is inherently your personal problem.
I am definitely not fine with that.
What I can do, I do, and what makes you believe it has no impact? You don't know what I do, and, for a number of reasons, I'm not going to make public what I do.
So you think what you do is good, but you don't want others to help you do good by saying what you do and inviting others to do the same? Is it only good if you do it secretly?
What the heck is your problem? Are you unable to do something by yourself? Can't you be bothered to think on your own? EOD.
I'm doing a lot myself. I just want you to admit that you have no idea yourself and are giving unsolicited and totally useless advice. Because you have not said anything of value in this whole thread and you are entirely incapable of understanding your own cluelessness.
Ah, so you are just an asshole, not an idiot. OK, I get it.
I'll still do my things, do whatever you think helps best, like pissing off people with the same goals.
Oh yea? I don't see the US deal with their blatant fashism problem. One of the biggest American fashism problems actually wants to get back into the White House.
The far right got plenty more votes in those elections, just for other parties. I think in total this election the far right received something like 3 more votes than last time? The difference is that it's now mostly concentrated in a single party.