Growing tensions between those who are ethnically Dutch and ‘Muslim immigrants’ are dictating the terms of a polarized political agenda. Marietje Schaake thinks that the Netherlands shows why a debate beyond political correctness urgently needs to come up with a new, pluriform type of national identity.
A State of BeWilderment: Dutch fear of fear itself
In the light of 9/11 and the murders of politician Pim Fortuyn and movie director Theo van Gogh, fear has become a common sentiment among the Dutch. Yet this fear, and hatred of ‘the other’, is expressed openly only by a few Muslim extremists and those on the far right. Research finds that 40% of the Dutch population does not feel free to express its opinion on issues related to the integration of minorities and Islam.
Although the next Dutch generation of politicians and youngsters are actively participating in public debates, these are to a large extent stifled by political correctness. The anonymous Internet is the favourite resort of those amongst the masses who wish to honestly vent their hatred. The result is that a pro-active and inclusive content-based debate to formulate a balanced future for the Netherlands is sitting astride a reactionary undertow that threatens to undermine it. Frustrations build up below the radar.
In this landscape, the right wing parliamentarian Geert Wilders has announced that he is about to air a controversial movie on Islam and the Koran. We stand poised, therefore, on the eve of an escalation in the conflict between freedom of expression and freedom of religion. Anxiously, we wonder whether political leadership, mainstream society and the younger generation are able to channel such fears and frustrations safely while guaranteeing these two critical freedoms.
With such intense sentiments boiling away on a domestic level, the mood in the Netherlands has become increasingly inward looking at the expense of European and Transatlantic perspectives. The Dutch situation is unique yet in many respects it is exemplary for other Western European countries.
Pre-emption
The aftermath of 9/11 and the two political murders set the tone for a new era in the Netherlands. Pim Fortuyn’s claim to fame was his criticism of the multi-cultural society until the politician was murdered on May 6 2002, only days before his likely victory in the national elections. Film director, Theo Van Gogh’s provocative rhetoric cost him his life when orthodox Muslim Mohamed Bouyeri murdered him on November 2, 2004, prompting a backlash that included the torching of several mosques. These successive traumas contributed to a new preoccupation with questions about the position of ethnic and religious minorities in Dutch society. The resulting uncertainty and fear have raised fundamental questions about Dutch identity, values and our future. Growing tensions between those who are ethnically Dutch and ‘Muslim immigrants’ are dictating the terms of a polarized political agenda. They have added to the hollowing out of the political middle ground. Attempts are being made to redefine Dutch core values.
For such a redefinition to be successful, a proactive, meaningful public debate is vital. But this has proved very difficult. Populism and one-liners on how to deal with ‘Islam and the integration of Muslims’ dominate the headlines. Particularly now, the tension created as we await the next imminent event in what has been quite a roll call of devastation is unfurling in the form of a ‘preemptive strike’ by the reactionary forces.
Right wing parliamentarian Geert Wilders has announced a movie on Islam while describing the Koran as ‘an inspiration for intolerance, murder and terror’. The movie is expected to be provocative and the Danish cartoon crisis serves as a daunting precedent. A variety of violence- and death threats made, indicate the fate the Dutch may soon face. It has provoked crisis meetings of the Dutch cabinet and lobbying for understanding and support abroad. Imams and minority groups in the Netherlands are strategizing on how to channel responses by Muslims. Meanwhile, a group of social elites initiated a petition to stop the ‘Wildering’ of society, and to replace this downward spiral with respect. As no-one yet knows the content of this movie, a debate should address substantial matters pro-actively, such as how to balance freedom of expression and religion.
The young generation has its own debating platforms, apart from speaking out through hip-hop music and art. The Dutch next generation, roughly between 15 and 25 years old today, is divided and increasingly diverse. This diversity is simultaneously met with hopes and fears, prompting the question whether enough cohesion will be secured in time to deal with crises between population groups. Recent research shows that while the diverse Dutch youth is generally happy with life and society, on all sides they have noticed that the tensions between majority and minority populations have grown, and they predict increases in such sentiments in the future. How do young Dutch Muslims plan to respond to Wilders’ movie?
Headlines
In a youth centre in downtown Amsterdam the doors are barricaded by security guards and by herds of journalists setting up their cameras. One might imagine one is attending the concert of a famous rock star, or a press briefing of news of national importance. The latter is what the press hopes for as it anxiously awaits noisy altercations, threatening language and any other clue as to what will happen when Wilders’ movie actually comes out.
Disappointment sets in as nothing takes place apart from politically and religiously correct talk. A ‘former radical’ on the panel explains that the Koran teaches Muslims to meet threats as a challenge; that those ‘unknowing’ cannot be blamed for their ignorant expressions. Others caution against strong reactions, as these will only confirm Wilders’ allegations of the innate aggression of Muslims. A representative picture of what may happen when the movie comes out? Probably not, but then again, we don’t know its content yet. The meeting does not even make next morning’s headlines...
Wilders’ constituency, representing 9 seats in parliament, has been largely invisible, or at least entirely overshadowed by a leader that has seized half the available limelight for such a small country. Debates on the level of citizenship including both (mainstream) Muslims and Wilders-voters have not so far been organized. Beyond headlines, political leadership is yet to initiate deep-structural debates about values such as this shared citizenship and freedom of speech and religion. Now, the vast majority is silent. Essentially, their real sentiments remain largely undercover and unidentifiable. Meanwhile frustration builds up just below the surface, some expressions of which can be found posted anonymously on the Internet. There, they provide all too stark a contrast with the politically correct picture painted by those who contribute to the façade of an inclusive mainstream debate.
Numerous violent opinions vented online confirm we are not living in a dream world. For a few hours before it was removed, YouTube aired a clip showing bullets being fired through a poster of Wilders’ face, giving us advance warning of how some people with their own agendas are already taking advantage of his unseen film as an excuse to use violence. Similarly, clips on the ‘Tsunami of Muslims ready to establish a caliphate in the West’ are rampant.
What’s next?
Whether riots break out or whether paranoia will remain the most dramatic effect of the movie to date, there is an urgent need for moral leadership and debate in which, in the best tradition of freedom of expression, even the extreme voices can seek expression, as long as they do not advocate violence. These debates should take place on both the national and local levels. The next generation, which includes both Muslims and Wilders-voters, in particular needs to play an active part in this process. They should be encouraged to use culture and creativity in expressing themselves and to move beyond aggression.
New forms of identity and identification with the Netherlands must make its pluriform nature an explicit value. Unless we want to become a navel-gazing country, it is time to move beyond the one-liners and headlines to proactively start focusing on the challenging and painful content of the issues that cause fear and uncertainty. Only when freedom of expression and freedom of religion in times of diversifying populations are addressed concretely and openly, and when political leaders provide solid moral leadership herein, will we be able to deal with the matters at hand. Only then, can we focus our perspectives outward again and regain the typically Dutch trait of open-mindedness that in the past allowed so many positive elements from all over the world to contribute to the shaping of Dutch identity. Time is running out to move beyond this state of bewilderment!
The United Kingdom’s international organisation for cultural relations and educational opportunities.
A registered charity: 209131 (England and Wales) SC037733 (Scotland)
Our privacy and copyright statements.
Our commitment to freedom of information. Double-click for pop-up dictionary.
Open the original version of this page.
Usablenet Assistive is a UsableNet product. Usablenet Assistive Main Page.