Dutch aren’t happy in Muslim majority neighborhoods—so what?
(Note: Be sure to see the below comment from a Dutch blogger about the good news from the Netherlands, and my reply to his question whether opposition to liberalism must be on the basis of conservatism or nationalism.)
Fjordman writes from Norway:
Here’s an article from Expatica. It seems as if native Dutch are unhappy with being a minority in their own country. Who would have guessed?
“Native Dutch residents in neighbourhoods where the majority of the population is from non-western background are less pleased about the population composition than their neighbours of immigrant background.”
LA replies:
There is nothing new or significant here. Of course white Westerners will not like living in a non-Western majority neighborhood, and eventually many of them will leave. But they don’t do anything to oppose the gradual takeover of their society by non-Westerners. And that’s the key point.
Grumbling about the consequences of liberalism (let alone merely replying in the negative to a question in a telephone survey) is routine and does not constitute opposition to liberalism. And only opposition to liberalism can save us.
- end of initial entry -
Gintas J. writes:
Will these Dutch liberals ever change? Will they just transplant their liberalism elsewhere—to here in America, for example? Do we need defeated white Dutch liberals moving here?? Yes, they’ll fit right in, but is there a point where we say, “no more Europeans here”?
The blogger named “Snouck Hurgronje” writes from the Netherlands:
In your post, you pointed out that there is no substance to the negative attitude of Dutchmen towards the population mix in their neighbourhoods.
That is correct of course. But there is a growing anti-immigrant presence in Dutch politics. Geert Wilder’s party is bluntly anti Islamic. And they are not the “usual suspects.” The Freedom Party platform says they want to stop ALL Non-Western immigration (for five years).
In the recent national elections, the Freedom Party won nine seats in the 150 seat Parliament. It was the first election the Freedom Party took part in. Yesterday polls indicated that support for Wilders is growing strongly, with 11 percent of polled voters indicating they wanted to vote for the Freedom Party.
I blogged about it here, here, and here.
Other than Fortuyn’s platform, Freedom Party is a Conservative Party.
A question: what do you think is the best basis from which to attack liberalism politically: Conservatism or Nationalism?
LA replies:
These are great developments and I need to write more about Wilders and his party.
As for your question, I reject a conservatism that doesn’t include nationalism (e.g. neoconservatism), and a nationalism that is not conservative (e.g. fascism). Conservatism in the true sense means the appreciation, defense, and restoration of the fundamental dimensions of our cultural and political being. Obviously the nation is one of those dimensions. A nationalism that is not conservative would just be an assertion of power. A conservatism without nationalism would be a conservatism without a local habitation and a name. So conservatism and nationalism must be joined.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at March 12, 2007 03:15 PM | Send