Tolerating a Time Bomb (The Netherlands)

[Is This Tea]

FOR centuries the Netherlands has been considered the most tolerant and liberal nation in the world. This attitude is a byproduct of a disciplined civic society, confident enough to provide space for those with different ideas. It produced the country in which Descartes found refuge, a center of freedom of thought and of a free press in Europe. That Netherlands no longer exists...
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/16/opinion/16winter.html?pagewanted=1

Very interesting article… I would like to hear what some of the Dutch users on the forum think about the author’s politics.

 

[iyfyoufhl]

FOR centuries the Netherlands has been considered the most tolerant and liberal nation in the world. This attitude is a byproduct of a disciplined civic society, confident enough to provide space for those with different ideas. It produced the country in which Descartes found refuge, a center of freedom of thought and of a free press in Europe. That Netherlands no longer exists...
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/16/opinion/16winter.html?pagewanted=1

Very interesting article… I would like to hear what some of the Dutch users on the forum think about the author’s politics.

copy and past the article, i don't want to sign up

 

[Is This Tea]

copy and past the article, i don't want to sign up

FOR centuries the Netherlands has been considered the most tolerant and liberal nation in the world. This attitude is a byproduct of a disciplined civic society, confident enough to provide space for those with different ideas. It produced the country in which Descartes found refuge, a center of freedom of thought and of a free press in Europe.

That Netherlands no longer exists.

The murder last year of the filmmaker Theo van Gogh, whose killer was convicted this week, and the assassination of the politician Pim Fortuyn in 2002 marked the end of the Holland of Erasmus and Spinoza.

No, the Dutch suddenly did not become intolerant and insular. But these killings showed the cumulative effect of two forces that have shaken the foundations of Dutch civic society over the last 40 years: the cultural and sexual revolution of the 1960's and 70's and the influx of Muslim workers during those years of prosperity.

While most of Europe points to that epochal year of 1968 as a watershed, perhaps no country was affected as profoundly by the radicalism of the times as the Netherlands. In less than 15 years most forms of traditional authority and hierarchy, the counterbalancing forces that made Dutch tolerance possible, were undermined. Among students and the intellectual elites, "civil disobedience" in itself was more admired than the point behind such actions. Provos - students and artists staging absurdist "happenings" - and squatters ruled the streets, and in 1980, the apogee of Holland's cultural revolution, the coronation ceremony of Queen Beatrix in Amsterdam vanished behind a haze of tear gas and anarchistic rioters.

Hence the current image of Dutch tolerance: marijuana served at coffee shops, police officers growing their hair as long as the Grateful Dead, gays and lesbians coming out of the closet without fear or hindrance, public television showing full nudity and, for those who prefer not to work, a government package of benefits that makes a toil-free life entirely feasible.

The second, simultaneous, change in Dutch life was the recruitment of young men from the Rif Mountains of Morocco, most illiterate and many with only a rudimentary grasp of spoken Dutch, to work in Holland's rapidly expanding industries. When they came to the country, often under long-term government work visas, they were faced with a highly educated but apparently decadent society in the grip of a cultural revolution. Many were astonished: was this country some sort of freak show?

No, it certainly wasn't. Under the effusive "anything goes" exterior, the majority of Dutch people held on to their disciplined Calvinist values. To the immigrants, however, this core was all but invisible.

For a while, the immigrants did the dirty work for which no training was needed, and the two factions lived amicably. But during the technology- and service-oriented economic boom of the 1980's and 90's, the demand for unskilled work declined. The "guest workers" were no longer needed in such numbers, but they were also not required to return to Morocco. Instead they were given extensive social benefits and their families were allowed to come from Morocco to join them. It was the birth of the ethnic-religious ghettoes that surround our affluent cities and towns.

And thus the delicate mechanism of Holland's traditional tolerant society gradually lost its balance. The news media, politicians and artists gnawed away at the traditional values of Calvinistic civic society, while in the bleak Muslim suburbs resentment grew among the Moroccans' Dutch-born children, who found the promise of an affluent life unfulfillable.

Meanwhile, the news media and politicians maintained an unofficial ban on any discussion of the problems of immigration: after all, in progressive Holland only socioeconomic problems were admissible. It was simply not acceptable to discuss problems relating to religion and culture.

This mix of cultural confusion, religious misunderstanding and political correctness provided the stage on which Pim Fortuyn performed. In the international press, Mr. Fortuyn was often described as a right-wing radical, a label he loathed. He was a liberal with respect to personal freedom and a conservative with respect to social norms and values - that is, he was a classic tolerant Dutchman.

Proud to be gay, he protested against the religiously based homophobia openly espoused in the Muslim ghettos. Yet he also emphasized the need for integrating Muslims into larger society and tolerance for their faith. His political incorrectness shocked the press and political establishment, but many among the traditional citizenry recognized Mr. Fortuyn as a kindred spirit. This unconventional gay politician spoke up for the conventional middle-class heterosexual. At the time he was killed by an animal-rights advocate in 2002, he was the front-runner to become prime minister.

Theo van Gogh, artiste provocateur nonpareil, never pursued a political career. In the course of his 20 years in the public eye, he grossly insulted at least half of the nation. His films were intended to shock; his newspaper columns (of which I was the target more than once) were exercises in outlandish mudslinging - although never lacking in humor and stylistic talent. In recent years, he had focused increasingly on the problems with immigration and Muslim intolerance.

The radicalized children of disappointed Islamic immigrants were unable to appreciate the humorous side of the Van Gogh phenomenon. Many of these young men have found an expression for their growing sense of frustration, alienation and anger in orthodox Islam. They have no use for Holland's tolerance of alternative lifestyles, or for its professional blasphemers. Last Nov. 2 a young Islamic fundamentalist, born in Amsterdam to Moroccan parents, shot Mr. Van Gogh in the street and then tried to cut off his head. In a final statement at his trial last week, the murderer declared that he had killed Mr. Van Gogh for insulting the Prophet.

The trial lasted only two days, but the fallout will be with us for many years. Much of the electorate no longer feels any loyalty to the existing political parties. Many want to preserve the Dutch welfare state, but it's unclear how to maintain it in an aging nation that is absorbing immigrants. The Dutch "no" vote to the European Union Constitution last month was just one aspect of this frustration.

WITHOUT a radical change in direction, Dutch tolerance may become its own victim. The first step is enacting laws to curb immigration from Islamic countries. We must also consider ways to prevent arranged marriages between Muslims living here and people from the Rif (more than half of Dutch Moroccans marry a traditional partner from their parents' home village).

In the longer term, we must somehow stimulate young Muslims to identify with the Calvinist values of the majority. The radicalization among small groups of young Muslims, a threat that cannot be fought within Holland's borders alone, is a time bomb.

Perhaps what this country needs most of all is another unconventional, outspoken gay politician.

 

[Gray Fox]

Who wrote that?

 

[CptStern]

I'm not dutch but it seems like a "blame the immigrants" opinion piece

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

The blame lies on the socialism. I haven't even read most of the article yet but you can pinpoint it to that, as the last sentence I've read was

"Instead they were given extensive social benefits and their families were allowed to come from Morocco to join them. It was the birth of the ethnic-religious ghettoes that surround our affluent cities and towns."

 

[CptStern]

...lets close our borders to everyone, in fact it'd probably be better if we just slaughtered the lot of them and be done with it

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

...lets close our borders to everyone, in fact it'd probably be better if we just slaughtered the lot of them and be done with it

Let's not.

 

[CptStern]

well that's what you seem to be advocating (except the slaughter part)

 

[Is This Tea]

Who wrote that?

LEON de WINTER

 

[Gray Fox]

The blame lies on the socialism. I haven't even read most of the article yet but you can pinpoint it to that, as the last sentence I've read was

"Instead they were given extensive social benefits and their families were allowed to come from Morocco to join them. It was the birth of the ethnic-religious ghettoes that surround our affluent cities and towns."

I don't see the connection with socialism.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

well that's what you seem to be advocating (except the slaughter part)

I don't see where at all I advocated to stop immigration. At all in any posts

I don't see the connection with socialism.

The society fell into decline due to loss of work ethic. Why work when the government will always be there to baby you?

 

[Razor]

I'm not dutch but it seems like a "blame the immigrants" opinion piece

I think the author is moving more towards the point of "the immigrants who fail to understand or assimilate" themselves into Dutch society being a huge problem and this is definately something i would have to agree with. Fine, they don't need to be Christian to live in a Christian country and they don't need to wear jeans and tshirts or eat Vindaloo every Friday night to call themselves English, but they should at least try to slowly move away from their traditional style to a more open style of living and tolerance.

Why move to a western country if you have no respect for western values or western ideals.

 

[CptStern]

I dont think it has anything to do with respect ...I live in one the most multicultural cities in the world ...you could literally walk down a busy intersection and hear a dozen languages from a dozen different cultures. yet if you ask them what nationality they are, most would say "canadian ...originally from _____" ...it's not about converting a foreigner into your culture but rather assimilating that culture into your own

 

[The Monkey]

FOR centuries the Netherlands has been considered the most tolerant and liberal nation in the world.

I doubt that the people in your colonies felt very free. Your records of tolerance in the colonies are just as black as the rest of Europe's.

 

[Gray Fox]

I doubt that the people in your colonies felt very free. Your records of tolerance in the colonies are just as black as the rest of Europe's.

It depends on who you ask, as a modern dutch or one of the folks in colonies, he will say hwat you say, ask a Dutch or other european in the previouse centuries and he will say we were tolerant, thats mainly because in holland was a lot more tolerant of different religions, especially jewesh. It depends on how tolerant we were compared to other nations, and for centuries we have been more tolerant, even counting the colonies.

 

[kirovman]

I am aware of some people in my town who moved to the UK from the Netherlands because there was too much racism there.

 

[The Monkey]

It depends on who you ask, as a modern dutch or one of the folks in colonies, he will say hwat you say, ask a Dutch or other european in the previouse centuries and he will say we were tolerant, thats mainly because in holland was a lot more tolerant of different religions, especially jewesh. It depends on how tolerant we were compared to other nations, and for centuries we have been more tolerant, even counting the colonies.

Yeah I guess you have to have perspective. By modern standards your 19th century society sure would've looked like a fascist dictatorship, but by 19th century standards I guess it was pretty liberal.

 

[Razor]

I dont think it has anything to do with respect ...I live in one the most multicultural cities in the world ...you could literally walk down a busy intersection and hear a dozen languages from a dozen different cultures. yet if you ask them what nationality they are, most would say "canadian ...originally from _____" ...it's not about converting a foreigner into your culture but rather assimilating that culture into your own

Same with in England, but it just feels weird and very out of place to see these extremely fanatical and highly religious Muslim families forcing their wives/daughters to walk around a market town dressed in one of those big black hooded dresses that cover the entire body, apart from the eye slit.

Too me, it is a two way street, the immigrants need to be able to atleast try to fit in more when they're out in public and everyone else needs to be a bit more understanding that not everyone is the same. When you have someone move into the area that refuses point blank to try to blend in, there will be understandable friction - referring more to arranged/forced marriages, etc. There has been a recent fad amongst some Muslim fathers in England to murder their own daughter because they are found to be having sex.

 

[Gray Fox]

Yeah I guess you have to have perspective. By modern standards your 19th century society sure would've looked like a fascist dictatorship, but by 19th century standards I guess it was pretty liberal.

Imagine how our childern will look at us in a hunderd years, and I'm talking about afrika and the unfair trading, and slavery by our companies. Which our government conveniently doesn't notice. I say have honest free trade so poor countries, muslim ones to, can become wealthy, and the people won't need to come here.

 

[The Monkey]

Well a leader has to look at the good of the country. If we allowed 100% free trade the african farmers sure would gain on it, but the europeans wouldn't, and a politician has to wants the good of his own country, doesn't he? And it's hardly fair for us either, seeing as they have 3-4 harvests, while we only have one.

 

[Is This Tea]

Sure, but wouldn’t you say that your infrastructure and literacy rates etc… give you a huge advantage in high tech and information based industries compared to Africa? It seems like if you are espousing a belief in market fundamentalism you would also maintain that European farmers (American farmers as well) are pulling down your entire economy by hiding behind protectionist legislation instead of letting the Market Self Regulate and let the jobs flow to the sectors in high demand.
That’s how I would assume a Market Fundamentalist would feel.