Nederlanders! It's your country! Come out to hear Geert Wilders at Didam, Wednesday evening, June 17th

Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV), who wrote "When Our Cities Resemble Warzones, We Have to Reclaim Our Streets",  reposted on WWW earlier today,  is coming to Didam on Wednesday evening, June 17th for a large gathering to protest the planned opening of an asylum- seekers' centre. 

According to the organizers, it will be the largest protest to date against the project in the municipality of Montferland. The municipality intends to accommodate a maximum of 250 asylum seekers. The action group "No asylum-seekers' centre in Montferland" has been campaigning for weeks against the arrival of the reception facility.

The protest will take place on Wednesday evening, June 17th, in Didam. According to initiator Ton van den Aarssen, the new gathering will be larger than previous actions. "[This is] the sixth," he says "but this time it will be bigger, with Geert Wilders."In addition to Mr Wilders, several local speakers are on the programme. 

After the speeches, the organizers plan to hold a protest march through the village. According to Mr van den Aarssen, "It is difficult to predict how many people will be present. I can't look into a crystal ball, but we are going to invite local action groups from the Achterhoek. However, many villagers are hesitant."

He said the decision to invite Mr Wilders was made deliberately due to his outspoken stance on asylum reception. "Who else in the Netherlands is so outspoken against an asylum-seekers' centre?"

PVV's publicity for the event shouts. "We won't bow. To anyone. This is the Netherlands, our country!"

"Hard right" close to taking power in Netherlands (and Europe)

After a decade of swelling anger over mass immigration, housing, and the brutal cost of living, nationalist parties are poised to take power across Europe.

In 2021, countries like Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Belgium were governed by politicians who had led western Europe in the familiar, moderate style that had predominated there since the end of WWII. Upstart nationalists were gaining ground, but were largely excluded from governing coalitions, and seen as troublemakers rather than serious players. It has taken them just four years to go from the margins to the cusp of leading the continent's largest economies. 

Now it is the establishment that is floundering on the brink of irrelevance as populists and nationalists evolve into the first choice for conservatives, angry youth, and those who feel like the traditional parties do not work for them. What started as protest votes have evolved into a permanent political force.

The Dutch will vote this month in a snap election, and the nationalist right will likely once again emerge as the largest force in the country's politics. It has been just two years since the last election in the Netherlands, in which the Party for Freedom (PVV) led by Geert Wilders won the most seats in the Dutch parliament.

The PVV is staunchly nationalist, and defined by opposition to mass immigration and multiculturalism. Following the 2023 election, the PVV formed a rickety government with the other parties on the condition that Mr Wilders would not become prime minister, only for the agreement to collapse earlier this year. 

According to current polls, the once-dominant People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), a moderate centre-right party, is poised for its weakest showing since the 1970s. Electorally, it is hardly a threat to the PVV anymore, whose greatest competition on the right is coming from JA21, another right-wing nationalist party. 

Combined, the PVV and JA21 are projected to win nearly half the seats in the Dutch parliament. In Europe’s proportional electoral systems, where parties must negotiate alliances to have a working majority, attempting to keep those parties out of power in 2025 is a stalling tactic that is delaying the inevitable.

The top issues for voters in the Netherlands are housing, immigration, and health care, with climate change plummeting as a top priority from around 30 per cent of the electorate in 2023, to just about 19 per cent today. Frustrations over migration have burst out of the realm of regular politics, with anti-immigration riots breaking out in The Hague, causing tens of thousands of euros worth of damage to the parliamentary complex there.

In February, Mr Wilders wrote on social media, "The biggest threat is that for decades we have welcomed people from other parts of the world where violence, inequality and lack of freedom dominate, with open borders and mass immigration in Europe, that we have accepted, facilitated and praised the refusal to integrate and adapt to the rules of our own society."

The inability or unwillingness of the EU’s political establishment to meaningfully tackle mass immigration or the cost of living has cost them their legitimacy, as well as the trust of ordinary citizens. Furthermore, the sheer influx of new people via immigration has strained the housing supply of most Dutch cities. Rent hikes and shrinking disposable incomes have been the result, making the Netherlands into one of the most unaffordable countries in Europe. 

A similar set of issues in France has resulted in the mass rejection of the established parties of the left and right. The traditional Gaullist conservatives are edging towards irrelevance, after dominating French politics for much of the 20th century. Disaffected blue-collar workers, young people, and frustrated conservatives have shifted en masse to the National Rally (RN), a right wing nationalist party that has gained in every election since 2007. 

European economies are largely stagnant or declining. A shrinking share of the shrinking pie is being eaten up by more and more people from outside the EU, and voters who feel crowded out on housing, wages, and basic services want politicians who prioritize their interests. 

In Germany, the populist Alternativ für Deutschland (AfD) became the second largest party in elections earlier this year, and is now polling first in political surveys. In Britain, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK is on-track to sweep aside both the Labour and Conservative parties, with his party winning city by-elections in previous Labour strongholds like Cardiff.

Wherever populist nationalism rises in Europe, the story is the same. Parties that voters could once trust to manage their economies and societies have not satisfied concerns over immigration and rising expenses of merely living in Europe, and they are paying the price. These are not the gentle, consensus-based politics that defined Europe for so long, but the results of people feeling unheard and neglected. More “consensus” is simply a shield for further decline, and millions of Europeans are not going to reward failure any longer.

This article has been adapted from "Geert Wilders' coming triumph and the end of Europe's mushy centrists", by Geoff Russ, in the National Post (Canada), 2/10/25.

Footnote: "Grenzen dicht!" means "Borders closed!"

UPDATED: Congrats to Geert Wilders on stunning election victory

The usual gang of One-Worlders, ComSymps and other loonie leftists are crying in their Heineken, Amstel and Oranjeboom (look it up) tonight as the final count in yesterday's parliamentary elections in the Netherlands confirms a hyuge victory for the "far-right", "anti-Islam", "neoNazi", yada yada yada Geert Wilders and his PPV (Party for Freedom).

In one of the biggest political upsets in Dutch politics since World War II, Dhr Wilders' Freedom Party beat all expectations, winning 37 seats out of 150. That's more than double the number the PVV in the last election. A joint Labour/Green (read: leftist) ticket got 25 seats, just one more than the conservative People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) of outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte. 

Dhr Wilders will now have to form a coalition, which is normal in Dutch politics with its multiplicity of competing parties. Talks on who will be included are expected to take months, since the sore losers on the left declared well in advance of the election that they would never co-operate in any way with the man they call "the Dutch Trump".

Dhr Wilders' win came as a shock warning to mainstream parties across Europe ahead of European Parliament elections due next June. The issues in at least the western part of Europe are the same as those which were fought out in the Dutch election: immigration, the high cost of living, the so-called "climate crisis" - "Kill all the cows to save the Earth from global warming" -- and did we mention immigration and what to do with all the Muslims.

The Dutch election result is another sign of the resurgence of the Right across the continent. Most recently there was the election of Giorgia Meloni as prime minister of Italy. Now Dhr Wilders is set to become the first-ever rightist prime minister of the Netherlands. Then we await 2027 and the inevitable election of Marine Le Pen as the first female président of France. Lifetime pct .980.

Further reading (posted 25/11/23): "Did Israel-Palestine protests propel Geert Wilders to victory?" by Freddy Gray, Deputy Editor of The Spectator, 24/11/23. Key takeaway: "...anti-immigration politics is the most potent force in twenty-first century western democracies."

Quote of the week: "The average person doesn’t want to close all doors to refugees and immigrants, but they also don’t want to divert large quantities of public resources to newcomers who disproportionately erode the safety and security of everyone else while soaking up undeserved social benefits." (Jamie Sarkonak, in "Fed up with climate zealotry and immigration, the Dutch lurch to the right", National Post, 26/11/23.)

Less than 10% of "migrants" in Netherlands work; most live on benefits

Just passing along some interesting statistics published today by the Voice of Europe, relaying data recently released by the government of the Netherlands. The Dutch, keen not to be losers in the contest to see who can be nicest to the Muslim invaders, are dismayed to find that two-and-a-half years after receiving residence permits, almost 90% of the Syrian "refugees" are still unemployed. 95% of them have to get by on welfare benefits provided by generous Dutch taxpayers.

The situation is even worse for migrants from Eritrea, a shithole in the horn of Africa, hard by the Red Sea. According to CBS, the Dutch statistical office, 96.9% of Eritreans are getting handouts from the state. Eritreans have the worst track record, too, in terms of finding gainful employment. Only 1.9% of them have jobs, compared with the "successful" Afghans, 8.3% of whom are in work.

Even with the generous assistance of a benevolent liberal state, non-western migrants (i.e. Muslims from the Middle East and North Africa) are "at risk for poverty", says the CBS. 79% of them live below the poverty threshold. Around 80% of Eritreans, 54.9% per cent of Somalis and 36.2% are thus official poor.

Geert Wilders, leader of the PVV (Partij voor de Vrijheid = Party for Freedom) can rightly say "I told you so." Since founding the party in 2006 he has campaigned to stop the Islamization of the Netherlands. He advocates ending immigration from Muslim countries. The CBS statistics make his argument seem pretty compelling.

Footnote: I've asked Ed. to see if he can find comparable statistics on the situation of non-European Muslim "refugees" in the AABC countries -- America, Australia, Britain and Canada. He reports that official government figures are difficult to find, since to admit what is apparent to anyone who looks within our food banks and homeless shelters would, it seems, be politically incorrect!

"The genie is out of the bottle!" - results of the Dutch election

The lamestream media and "forces of progressivism" are positively rapturous over the results of yesterday's parliamentary elections in the Netherlands -- a country in which the outside world took little interest until Geert Wilders, leader of the Free Party (PVV), unveiled his party's anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim platform. The liberals hollered "Islamophobia" long and loud, demonizing Mr Wilders as the "Dutch Trump" and even as the "New Hitler". If he wins, they said (looking nervously over their shoulders), predicting the outbreak of racial and religious war in Europe (as if that hasn't happened already) and the breakup of the European Union.

Well, Mr Wilders and the PVV did not win. With 97% of votes counted, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and his VVD party were re-elected, winning 33 out of 150 seats, a loss of eight seats from the previous parliament. Mr Wilders' Freedom party was in second place on 20 seats, a gain of five. The centrist Christian Democrats (CDA) and the liberal D66 party followed with 19 seats each, and the Green Party gained ten for a total of 14 seats.

Prime Minister Rutte exulted that the Dutch people rejected what he called "the wrong kind of populism". "The Netherlands said 'Whoa!'", he declared. Absent from his self-congratulation was any reference to the fact that, for much of the campaign, he appeared to be racing to keep pace with Mr Wilders, and moved his party's position on immigration and the integration of "newcomers" considerably to the right to meet Mr Wilder's challenge.

Nor did Mr Rutte say anything about the fact that the leftish Labour Party (PvdA), the junior party in the previous governing coalition, suffered a historic defeat, winning only nine seats, a loss of 29, in spite of a record turnout of 80.2% of eligible voters, the highest in 30 years, which analysts say may have benefited pro-EU and liberal parties.

Here's the way I look at it. Twenty-eight (count 'em, 28) parties contested the Dutch election. Mr Wilders' Freedom Party finished second -- not bad out of 28. Even if they had won, they wouldn't have been able to form a government, as the other parties -- all of them -- had declared in advance that they wouldn't partner with the "racist, Islamophobic" PVV, no matter what!

For his part, Mr Wilders said, "The genie is out of the bottle!", meaning that he had succeeded in bring the issues of immigration and the Islamization of Europe to the top of the minds of the Dutch people. He has a strong position in the new parliament, warned that Mr Rutte had "not seen the last" of him. "It's not the 30 seats I hoped for," he said, "but we have gained seats. This patriotic spring will happen."

What does the result mean for Europe and the EU? In April, the people of France go to the polls to elect a new president, with Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, expected to win at least the first round of voting. In Germany, the populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) may win seats in parliament for the first time ever in the general election to be held in September.

CBC News quotes (((Mabel Berezin))), professor of sociology at Cornell University, as saying that the defeat of Mr Wilders [Funny they call it a Wilders defeat rather than a Rutte victory. Ed.], who has been in parliament for nearly two decades, should not be considered a sign that European populism is waning. "He does not represent a populist wave. Rather, he is part of the political landscape and how his party fares does not tell us much about European populism," she said. "The real bellwether election will be Marine Le Pen's quest for the French presidency. That is where the populist action is and that is what we should be focusing upon."

COMMENT added 18/3/17: from Tony Burman, foreign affairs columnist for the Toronto Star: Result aside, there were aspects of the campaign itself that may surface elsewhere. Rutte, ostensibly a “liberal,” did little to challenge the anti-Muslim rhetoric of Wilders. In fact, Rutte incorporated some of Wilders’ themes into his own campaign. This included a full-page letter in Dutch newspapers that criticized Muslim immigrants for not integrating into Dutch society: “Behave normally, or leave,” the letter warned. This meant that Rutte fought Wilders on his own terms, instead of providing Dutch voters with a positive, high-minded vision of a Netherlands strengthened by its multicultural character.

"Dutch Trump" reveals REALLY tough policy on migrants

So you think President Trump is coming down hard on bogus "refugees" and other illegal immigrants? Meet Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch populist Freedom Party (PVV). Netherlanders go to the polls on March 18th, and current opinion polls show PVV on track to win about 30 seats, which would make them the largest party in the new parliament.

What is it that makes Meneer Wilders and the PVV so popular? Glad you asked! It's the Dutch pushback against the invasion of their country by hordes of "refugees", asylum-seekers and other, mostly Muslim, third-world "migrants". Encouraged by Brexit and the election of President Trump [Are you SJWs getting used to it yet? LOL. Ed.] to believe they can turn things around, Dutch voters will be heading to the polls to vote for the PVV's frankly anti-immigrant platform, which includes "zero asylum", the de-Islamization of the Netherlands, the revoking of all "asylum" grants, the banning of all immigration from Muslim nations, and withdrawal from the European Union.

If you can read Dutch, click here to see the PVV election platform. They promise to:

• close Holland's borders
• revoke all existing "asylum" residence permits
• close all "refugee welcome centres"
• ban Islamic headgear
• denaturalize all criminal immigrants with dual nationality
• keep ISIS supporters who fought in Syria from re-entering the country
• close all mosques and Islamic schools
• leave the European Union
• institute a system of binding citizens' referenda
• cancel all public funding for “foreign aid,” and
• lower taxation as state expenditure drops.

Wow! Wouldn't you, dear AABC [American, Australian, British, Canadian] reader, love to see that programme implemented in your country? I want to believe it is possible to take our countries back from the third world invaders. There are precedents! Click here to read the story of Santiago Matamoros (Saint James the Slayer of Moors), who drove the Muslims out of Spain (WWW 24/7/14).

The PVV's hard-line policy has provoked a storm of protest from all the other parties in the Netherlands, who have called for a "cordon sanitaire" around the PVV to try and prevent it from taking part in a coalition government. During a recent television interview, Mr Wilders predicted PVV would be included in the next government, in spite of other parties' vowing not to work with him. "They'll have to [abandon their pledges]," he said. "You can' just shove two and a half million people aside after democratic elections. That would be very ill-advised."

Mr Wilders tweeted that there would be a non-violent revolt if the PVV was sidelined, and pointed out that an alternative left-right coalition would have to encompass five or more parties. "This will prove unworkable, and that kind of coalition would be so unstable that not only will it not serve the country, but it will be lying on its ass within a year, to put it crudely," he said. "The [immigration] sluices are wide open. We have to close our borders. Before the end of this century, Africa's population is going to increase from one to four billion people, and many of them want to come here. Only if you go to the polling booth and vote, can the Netherlands be ours once again."

Dutch Freedom Party leader speaks out on Brussels attacks

The Dutch -- or their government, at least -- are known for their liberal views on everything that matters: drugs, sex, religion and race. To prove their political correctness and love of all mankind, they keep prosecuting Geert Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV), for saying what the majority of his countrymen think, namely that it would be good if there were fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands.

Five years ago, Mr Wilders was acquitted of charges of making Islamophobic remarks. Last month he was put on trial again for allegedly inciting hatred against the Netherlands' Moroccan minority. His case came up as calls for a ban on Muslim immigration have been voiced in other countries, such as France (by Marine Le Pen) and even the USA (by Donald Trump).

What did Mr Wilders say this time to bring the wrath of the PC police down on his head? Dutch prosecutors say that in March 2014 he asked a crowd of supporters whether they wanted more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. No prizes for guessing that they replied by chanting "Fewer! Fewer! Fewer!", to which Mr Wilders responded, "We'll take care of that."

In addition to the "fewer" comment, Mr Wilders referred to Moroccans as "scum" in a television broadcast. The result? One charge of "discrimination" and a second of inciting hatred of Moroccans, who make up about 2% of the Netherlands 17 million population. If convicted he could go to jail for as long as a year and could be fined a maximum of 7400 euros ($8400 in real money). Walt is pleased to present an artist's concept of what the sentencing hearing could be like.

As noted, the "demonization" of "Moroccans" -- read "Muslims" -- of which Mr Wilders stands accused happened two years ago. More recently (i.e. in March 2016), some terrorists who happen to be (or have been) Muslims of, errr, North African descent, killed some three dozen Belgians in suicide bombings in Brussels. The attackers are believed to have lived in that city's Molenbeek neighbourhood. Belgian police said at least 90 returned ISIS fighters were living there.

The morning after the bombings, Geert Wilders took part in a panel discussion on Breitbart Radio (London), warning that the attack is just the beginning of growing Islamist violence. European Commission insider Hermann Kelly told Breitbart Radio he was concerned that so many Islamic extremists live just miles from the political capital of the European Union. "This is amazing to me," he said, "that these people can kill people abroad, come here, and then walk free in the centre of Brussels."

Mr Wilders then said, “Returned Syria fighters are a huge threat. They are dangerous predators roaming our streets. It is absolutely unbelievable that our governments allow them to return. And it is incredible that, once returned, they are not imprisoned. In the Netherlands, we have dozens of these returned jihadists. Our
government allows most of them to freely walk our streets and refuses to lock them up. I demand that they be detained at once. Every government in the West, which refuses to do so, is a moral accessory if one of these monsters commits an atrocity."

Whether any further prosecutions will ensue is uncertain.