How to conquer populism
by
Marcel van Silfhout |
It’s about 2,600 years ago when the famous Chinese warrior-philosopher Sun Tzu wrote his one liner in The Art of War: Know your enemy. The book should be read by leftist and centric politicians in Europe as they face the rising power of right-wing and anti-Muslim populism — not to provoke more polarisation, but to avoid further anger, misery and distrust and to find an answer to how to conquer populism. Sun Tzu’s credo is important too: To win without fight is always the best.
Last year I watched a splendid musical on the life of Nelson Mandela. The young Mandela was taught by his old and wise uncle to try to think and feel like his opponent so deeply that he almost became his opponent. At last, Mandela was able to understand the white men and their apartheid policy in South Africa. Finally he succeeded in his political mission to free his country, without using any violence. So, the lessons of Sun Tzu can be sublimated. To understand one’s enemy, rational thinking is not enough; a great deal of fantasy and empathy are more important.
In Belgium, the Netherlands and Sweden, populists caused a splintered political landscape. In the Netherlands, rightwing provocateur Geert Wilders and his Freedom Party won over 1.5 million voters out of 10 million. There’s one question that, since then, puzzles the other 85 per cent of the political spectrum: How come Wilders is so successful?
Perhaps those who understand Wilders the best are, ironically, his opponents on the far left in Holland: The Socialist Party, an anti-neoliberal party, which is more radical in its socialism than the bigger Labour Party. In fact, Wilders applied some of the leftist economic policies from the Socialist Party to his own programme. By doing so, Wilders, perhaps a reader of Sun Tzu too, confused his opponents. “He is speaking our lines,” they must have thought.
Now Wilders is part of the formation of a Dutch minority coalition cabinet, it’s clear that he has misled his opponents and his own voters. By supporting a neoliberal cabinet, Wilders has left behind his presumed leftist economics in order to push his rightwing anti-immigration and anti-Muslim proposals.
When leftist parties would apply Sun Tzu’s wisdom, they should stop fighting Wilders. That doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t resist his ideas anymore. On the contrary, conquering Wilders is absolutely necessary to create a future of hope instead of darkness. Losing that battle means the Netherlands will face a country full of chagrin, anger, fear and distrust. But fighting Wilders means fighting 1.5 million voters too. Leftist and central parties should try to understand why all those people voted for Wilders. To win back their hearts and minds the old leftist vocabulary doesn’t work anymore. To conquer Wilders a new semantic vocabulary is needed.
In her last speech from the throne, Dutch Queen Beatrix did an attempt: “Social cohesion is often used to be taken for granted in the Netherlands; but in recent years we have realised that it is not a given one. In the past, efforts were made to keep conflicts and differences of opinion under control. Such a thing is even more necessary today. Providing a counter-voice is the task not only of the government, but also of individuals and civil society organisations in our country. A harmonious society is built on respect, tolerance and common courtesy. It requires give and take, mutual understanding, and also the ability to adapt. This is a responsibility we all share.”
A definition of populism is difficult to find, though it’s clear that many leftist, rightwing and even centric forms of populism exist or have existed. Some say it’s not an ideology but a type of discourse in which ’the people’ are set up against presumed ‘elites’.
Here the baseline of understanding ‘the other’ might be found: How come Wilders’ voters think they are ‘the people’ and how come they think others are ‘the elite?’ And, how come anti-Muslim sentiments have grown this big?
For Holland this anti-elite and anti-Muslim sentiments can be partially explained by 2002 and 2004 murders that shocked the country. In fact, those murders, after the 9/11 attacks in the US, changed the Netherlands from an open, tolerant multicultural society into an angry, insecure and repressive one.
These events were followed by conflicts on the issue of freedom of speech — a conflict that since then is taken hostage by right-wing populists like Wilders. So, the bottom line the leftist and central politicians should understand is: How to find trust again, how to conquer fear, anger and chagrin. These emotions have to be understood and taken seriously, followed by answers on how to build a society that binds people instead of dividing it. Again: know your enemy, live your enemy, be your enemy. Only then he will think you are his friend, without having a fight.
(Marcel van Silfhout is an investigative reporter working for public Dutch Television) |
Other comment for Marcel van Silfhout
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| NEWS UPDATES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
