More like this
Far-right Wilders on brink of power after Dutch poll
Will anyone form a coalition with Islamophobe Geert Wilders after his election success?
Dutch politics is in limbo today after populist anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders led his far-right Freedom Party (PVV) to third place in the country’s general election.
The PVV won 24 seats in the 150-seat Dutch parliament, giving Wilders considerable leverage in any coalition government negotiations with the right-wing Liberal party (VVD), who won 31 seats, and the Labour party (PvdA), who took 30. The Christian Democrats, the party of the outgoing prime minister Jan Peter Balkenende, came a humiliating fourth.
But politicians have a mountain to climb if a stable coalition government is to be formed.
Wilders is an Islamophobe, who faces trial in October for inciting racial hatred. His short film, Fitna, features the destruction of the World Trade Center on September 11 2001 with a voiceover reading verses from the Koran.
He advocates a ban on the building of mosques, the Koran and immigration from non-Western countries, as well as a tax on headscarves. Job Cohen, the Labour leader, has ruled out working with him in any coalition government on moral grounds. Although 1.5 million people voted for the PVV, many in the Netherlands are concerned about their country’s reputation if a far-right party is included in the government.
There is talk of an anti-Wilders 'purple coalition' of the Liberals, Labour, Greens and D66 (another, more left-wing liberal party). But Liberal leader Mark Rutte has not ruled out a pact with Wilders, who was a member of his party until 2004, when he left in protest at the Liberals’ support for Turkey’s accession to the European Union.
Also, it would be against convention to exclude a significant party from negotiations. That leaves the way open for an alternative, but borderline far-right government of the Liberals, PVV and the Christian Democrats, which would command 76 seats – a slender majority.
Wilders has left his fellow politicians in no doubt he is ready to govern. "We want to be part of the new government," he said. "More security, less crime, less immigration, less Islam - that is what the Netherlands has chosen... I don't think other parties can ignore us."
But recent history does not bode well. In March's local elections, the PVV came second in The Hague and won in Almere. Despite this, the PVV eventually had to give up trying to form a coalition with other parties in Almere, because it failed to secure support for issues such as 'city commandos' who would patrol the streets and keep order, and its anti-Islamic agenda. The party claimed it had been denied its rightful mandate to govern by the machinations of the political elite. ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
Perhaps my second attempt to reply to Holly will not also be disallowed. I think that Holly misses the point. Obviously not every one of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims is dedicated to the extermination of all Jews, nor to the use of every opportunity to use war and murder to compel the all the world's Infidels to submit to Islam.
The problem is that the collected doctrines of Islam are a hodge-podge of mixed and contradictory exhortations - to both peace and war, to both tolerance and intolerance, to cooperation and to the rejection of cooperation.
These are all intermingled in the Koran without any indication of the dates of their origins. Naturally, questions are raised as to which exhortations are the more valid.
The disturbing thing is that Islamic scholars have determined that the exhortations to peace and cooperation originated earlier than the later ones that call for genocide of the Jews and the conquest and subjection of all infidels.
That is what makes Islam so dangerous - it contains the permanent potential - and incitement - for people who are so inclined to commit genocide terrorism and to advance Islam by means of war. Demonstrations that this is so are seen throughout the world, 9/11 being only one of many examples.
This danger is made all the greater because the exhortations to war, genocide and conquest have been deteremined to have originated later than the earlier (and less successful) exhortations to spread Islam by peaceful means: and as I said, many Islamic scholars have concluded that the later exhortations have the greater validity.
It is not, I suggest, a case of my having an "enormous amount of hate and ignorance to be that bigoted", but rather a case of being well-informed, realistic and deeply and justifiably concerned.
Of course, Herbert, you could just be tarring 1.5bn people with the same brush. It must take an enormous amount of hate and ignorance to be that bigoted.
Jason Wyrd is correct - and tolerance of Islam is also irrational.
Geert Wilders and his Party are entirely rational, and the rise in support for them among the Dutch people is welcome news. It is to be devoutly hoped that the rest of Europe and will soon evince similar common sense. Britain in particular needs to do so - because David Cameron, alas, seems to regard Islan as Hindus regard a sacred cow - something that it is his duty to tolerate, protect and encourage.
Phobias are irrational. Objecting to Islam is not.