Original article: http://verenoflood.nu/een-rode-pil-een-bittere-pil/
Populism wins some parliamentary seats, but the Netherlands continues onwards on the same old course. I had expected more seat to be won. Is it the Trump-tactic, prioritizing social media over traditional media, in Geert Wilders’ campaign that is responsible?
Could the PVV-campaign have worked, in a small nation like the Netherlands, without the Fortuyn-effect? The media has to be seen responding fearfully, their demonizing relentless and desperate. They should be unable to ignore Wilders. It should have been seen flailing and raving. It should have been allowed to display its hollow arrogance. In the traditional media, Geert Wilders’ PVV seemed oddly silent in the run-up to the elections. This lack of visibility has been considered to be co-responsible for the smaller than anticipated growth (the part has still won an extra 5 parliamentary seat. 20 in total, opposed to its 15 seats in the previous election, making it the second political part in the Netherlands, despite the stigma and silence).
Yet even taking the silence into account, the Dutch have forgotten a great deal about the past few years, about the preceding summer, with tangible explanation but some election-campaigns to cloud their memories. Whatever the reason, the Dutch have decided – with a four year leap – to remain on the same course. More effort will have to be put into looking away, into getting accustomed to crime, anti-white racism, harassment, and the establishment kowtowing to the main source of it all. Another four years, time borrowed from their children, with a frightful interest rate…
To those staring reality in the face, the results are inexplicable. “How can anyone possibly want to continue on like this?”. But the left simply has a morality that isn’t suitable for the needs of our time. Hence, denial becomes its priority. It’s not so much a case of seeing the misery and choosing more of it, but choosing to not see the misery at all. Despite all the suffering they inflict on all of us, some of these people, especially the young, are only a red pill removed from defending Europe. But for us, these election results are a bitter pill.
The VVD lost eight parliamentary seats, but with 31 seats, it is still the major victor. “Better the VVD than the left”, is your first thought? Ask a Dutch friend or acquaintance whether VVD-voters are typically migration-effect denialists. Whether VVD-voters lean towards the opinion that we must become even more politically correct, to avoid causing offense. The VVD lured populists away from Wilders with hollow promises and sounds before; this has only cost them 8 seats.
The VVD’s victory indicates that a large portion of the Dutch, even those who are no longer in denial about mass migration, still wish for a VVD-led Netherlands, no matter what has already happened. When weighing their priorities, something urged them to stay on course. Perhaps it’s a cultural phenomenon. The philistinic urge to be “normal”. Populists are pariahs; the media machine has made sure of that. Thus they are rejected by the norm and conformity. Made into a caricature, the PVV-voter is looked down upon. It is not an identity the philistine or narcissist can possibly endure. “We need the VVD for the economy”, is stated with faux-pragmatism; I am happy to concede this point in the short term, but I expect a pragmatist to consider an economy with a large influx of low-IQ African and Middle-Eastern fortune seekers and the crime and chaos they repay the host with. Pragmatism as an ego-boost might venture far beyond sanitized thought simply for the sense of daring, but it’s not so easy to feed an ego with a ridiculed position; it becomes the opposite of what it purports to be. Besides, the Dutch prime minister is famous for putting on a fabricated laugh to forgo discourse altogether. Emoting the opposition is ludicrous without explanation; this is how you manipulate a population with an excess of conformity and little beyond vocational education. I would admire the purity of his approach if it didn’t rob the Dutch of what little dignity they have left.
This would indicate that self-image, according to the media image, is prioritized over averting the downfall of civilization we can already observe in Paris. Not a pleasant insight of the voting inhabitants. But it might indicate something worse. Short-term self-interest: people who acknowledge what is happening, but don’t expect it to affect them personally any time soon. Loss of culture means nothing to the philistine, and it’s easy to look away from the violence if you can afford yet another home-theater, or some new gadgets; a new car to flee the country you’ve sold for it. Either way, it seems to be the case that the problems aren’t considered real until they hit the own environment. A type of societal-solipsism.
This is what makes this pill so bitter. Imagine a community of solipsists. How could it ever be a community? There could be no sense of common purpose, common goals; no social contract, no sense of common law. Now imagine a society of solipsistic circles of friends; no bond but those you know. What relationship is there between government and the people? Is that still a nation? And now imagine introducing a third party, one with a swift growth and strong cohesion. These are the circumstances in which the Netherland casually strolls towards conflict.
 There’s a phrase in Dutch: “Links lullen, rechts vullen” (talk like a leftie, fill your pockets like a right-winger). In these globalist times, the VVD has managed to do the reverse; for all the right-wing noises it makes, it bows to the centralized EU.