/

/

/

/

/

Gates of Vienna: Dutch Politics Explained…….

Netherlands Wilders

Gates of Vienna: Dutch Politics Explained…….

By KGS7 years agoLeave a comment

It’s the exact same cordon sanitaire placed around the SD in Sweden….

Interestingly enough, these same parties insisting that they’ll have nothing to do with a fully democratic political opposition, are the same voices demanding for decades that Israel sit down and negotiate with genocidal/homicidal Islamonazi terrorists.

Dutch Politics Explained

Posted on January 21, 2017 by Baron Bodissey

A few days ago we posted H. Numan’s essay about the push by the Dutch elites to boycott Geert Wilders’ party and keep them from participating in the next government, despite their position as the far-and-away most popular party in the country.

Based on the comments on his essay posted by mystified readers, H. Numan concluded that it was necessary to write a longer account that might helps shine a light on the peculiar political customs of The Netherlands.

Adriaen Kay, portrait of William of Orange, a.k.a. William the Silent or William the Taciturn, 1579 (detail)

Dutch politics explained

by H. Numan

Most readers here are American, and you folks have a two party system. We have a very different system, in which it is next to impossible for one party to gain a majority. It’s totally different, looks incomprehensibly complicated but it sort of works. Both systems have advantages and disadvantages. Our system isn’t better or worse than yours. Just different. Both systems weren’t invented yesterday. A lot of it comes from history. Both can very easily be perverted into something other than a democracy. Trump saved American democracy in the nick of time. I hope Wilders can do the same for us.

Let’s dive into history for a bit. It’s really interesting. I think few people know that the US constitution is directly based on the Union of Utrecht, for example.

The present-day kingdom of the Netherlands is not all that old. It only emerged after the fall of Napoleon. The exact date is difficult to give, even for a history buff like me. 2 December 1813 or 24 August 1815, depending on your viewpoint. Prince William VI didn’t like constitutions one little bit, and he simply refused one. He’d much rather have been an absolute ruling prince than a king under a constitution. It took a lot of effort to change his mind. That’s why there are different dates.

Written by KGS

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

There’s No Common Cultural Legacy For The Alt-Right

Still, is there something to it? Is there a common heritage that will cover El Greco and Hume and Dostoyevsky? Is there one that can include the Jacobites and the Jacobins? There is, but it is not racial, and white supremacists reject it because it rejects them. The unifying heritage of Europe is religious and philosophical. It is Jerusalem and Athens, in one famous formulation. Christian religion and Greek philosophy, filtered through Roman law and culture, are the foundation of European culture. The tensions, agreements, developments and settlements between these have shaped the Western world, and these roots of Western civilization are not congenial to white supremacy.

Christianity is universal in its message and Jewish in its origins. For centuries after its founding, Christianity’s center was the Mediterranean world, including Asia Minor and North Africa. Christianity has never been defined by race, and locally-grown racist heresies are only sustainable among those ignorant of Christianity’s teachings, origins and history.

Greek philosophy is likewise ill-suited to serve as a basis for white identity. It is either too universal (addressing the human condition in general) or too local—none of us live as citizens of an ancient Greek polis. Later philosophical developments in Europe, such as the philosophies of the Enlightenment, likewise tend to be too universal for white supremacists seeking a tribal identity. As for the scientific revolution that developed within Western culture (albeit with much borrowed from outside Europe), math doesn’t care what color someone is.

War is being waged against Western culture from within which is in essence a war against Christianity and its moral origins in the Hebrew Bible. By attacking these Biblical foundations in the name of reason and human rights, the culture warriors of secularism are sawing off the branch on which they sit. The only way to defend Western civilisation is to reaffirm and restore its Biblical foundations. My argument is a development of ideas I first explored in my 2012 book The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle over God, Truth and Power.

We are living in an era which extols reason, science and human rights. These are said to be essential for progress, a civilised society and the betterment of humanity. Religion is said to be their antithesis, the source instead of superstitious mumbo-jumbo, oppression and backward-thinking.

Some of this hostility is being driven by the perceived threat from Islamic terrorism and the Islamisation of Western culture. However, this animus against religion has far deeper roots and can be traced back to what is considered the birthplace of Western reason, the 18th-century Enlightenment.

Actually, it goes back specifically to the French Enlightenment. In England and Scotland, the Enlightenment developed reason and political liberty within the framework of Biblical belief. In France, by contrast, anti-clericalism morphed into fundamental hostility to Christianity and to religion itself.

“Ecrasez l’infame,” said Voltaire (crush infamy) — the infamy to which he referred being not just the Church but Christianity, which he wanted to replace with the religion of reason, virtue and liberty, “drawn from the bosom of nature”.

Perfecting society

But this Enlightenment did not remove religion so much as pervert it. It took millenarian fantasies, the idea that the perfection of the world was at hand, and it secularised them. Instead of God producing heaven on earth, it would be mankind which would bring that about. Reason would create the perfect society and “progress” was the process by which utopia would be attained.

“I think that we should correct the vocabulary that we use, and call a spade a spade. It is all about Jihad, the Islamic effort to spread Islam globally”:

Terrorist attack – should be called Military Jihad.

Incitement – Media Jihad.

Al-Jazeera – Media Jihad Channel.

Imposing Sharia law – Judicial Jihad or Legislative Jihad.

Boycotting Israel (BDS) – Economic Jihad.

Emigration to EU and US – Emigration Jihad / Hijra Jihad.

Building mosques, Islamic education institutions – Cultural Jihad.

Halal food – Dietary Jihad.

Hijab or Niqab – Clothing Jihad.

Activity of MSA – Academic Jihad.

Activity of CAIR – Political Jihad / Public Jihad.

Collecting money for Islamic “charities” – Financial Jihad.

Political correctness – Submission to Jihad.

J Street, Peace Now, JVP and their likes – Jewish Useful Idiots who Serve Jihad.

Iran deal – Western Support for Nuclear Jihad.