Greadius
:yeah:
That is what I tried to explain to Hitro a couple a weeks ago...
Fortuyn sounded like another 'extreme right-wing' candidate who had legitimate but wrong ideas and needed a good arguement instead of hate mongering and fear frenzy.
Pim Fortuyn has been shot!
- Thread starter Matrix
- Start date
Fortuyn sounded like another 'extreme right-wing' candidate who had legitimate but wrong ideas and needed a good arguement instead of hate mongering and fear frenzy.
Zwelgje
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2001
- Messages
- 3,953
Fortuyn was shot by a guy who worked at an environment protecting organization at the law-department. He tried to stop animal abuse by going to court and let the judge stop the abuse. So not really the kind of guy you expect to use violence. On top of that he became a father only 3 months ago. So it's just another case of someone who lost his mind probably....
He wanted to treat the immigrants who are here already better than they are treated now. He wanted to give them opportunities to create a better future for themselves. This instead of the government who wants to give them welfare and wants to control the problems a part of the immigrants are causing by getting more police on the street. He wanted to spend more money on relief efforts abroad, he wanted refugees to be helped in the region they are from because in his opinion refugees from (for example) Africa are better off in the region they are coming from provided they are safe there. Why take them away from their homeland and bring them here if you can let them build up a new future in the area where they grew up and belong.
He also wanted to spend more money on education and on healthcare. In general he listened to what the people in the street were demanding and promised to take care of their problems. He also knew how to bring his ideas to the normal people, something the ordinary politicians simply forget to do. That's why he was so well-liked among the Dutch people.
Don't talk about something you know nothing about. Fortuyn was not another extreme right wing candidate. When you are called right wing in the Netherlands it means that you are more left wing than the Democrats in the USA.
He wanted to treat the immigrants who are here already better than they are treated now. He wanted to give them opportunities to create a better future for themselves. This instead of the government who wants to give them welfare and wants to control the problems a part of the immigrants are causing by getting more police on the street. He wanted to spend more money on relief efforts abroad, he wanted refugees to be helped in the region they are from because in his opinion refugees from (for example) Africa are better off in the region they are coming from provided they are safe there. Why take them away from their homeland and bring them here if you can let them build up a new future in the area where they grew up and belong.
He also wanted to spend more money on education and on healthcare. In general he listened to what the people in the street were demanding and promised to take care of their problems. He also knew how to bring his ideas to the normal people, something the ordinary politicians simply forget to do. That's why he was so well-liked among the Dutch people.
SauronMaiar
Patrician
For starters, the guy who was arrested is still only a suspect, not condemned yet...He worked in the small university-city of Wageningen, my home town. Explains a lot, it's an agricultural university. Lot's of radical Trotskians (?) and all that
Anyway, why is his murder more important than some Etheopian dying of hunger ? So he was shot, maybe it was an ex-boyfriend. Maybe it was a conspiracy by his own party. Let's not specualte on this. I didn't like his ideas whatsoever, but I do fear some sort of 'Van der Lubbe' effect (the man who set fire to the German Reichstag in...well, just before WWII), and a turn for the worse.
But, people are shot every day and frankly, I think this is mostly mass-hysteria.
Anyway, why is his murder more important than some Etheopian dying of hunger ? So he was shot, maybe it was an ex-boyfriend. Maybe it was a conspiracy by his own party. Let's not specualte on this. I didn't like his ideas whatsoever, but I do fear some sort of 'Van der Lubbe' effect (the man who set fire to the German Reichstag in...well, just before WWII), and a turn for the worse.
But, people are shot every day and frankly, I think this is mostly mass-hysteria.
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
And you obviously didn't get my point.
Sure extremists have to be treated with equal caution. But our discussion was (or should have been) about who actually is a dangerous extremist (dangerous to democracy). And in that sense there is a difference between the left and right. The right-wing extremists in Europe have killed many people only for their race or religion all over the continent in the last years. On the other hand there are no gangs of left-wingers hunting for ethnic (or other) minorities.
If it turns out that there has been an INDIVIDUAL involved in a political murder he has put himself outside the democratic community. There it doesn't matter if he dropped out on the left or the right, in that way you are correct. But while violence and repression against certain people is a general tactic and goal on the extreme right, most left-wingers are rather involved in the peace movement (not all of course).
Whoever commited this crime is a murderer, but it does not mean everyone who shares his views is also guilty. That is nothing but stupid.
Most of the serious (murderous) domestic terroism in Europe that I have seen in my lifetime has been by leftist and communist groups. Red Brigades in Italy, Bader Meihof gang in Germany, November 17 in Greece.
Zwelgje
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2001
- Messages
- 3,953
This holds true for The Netherlands as well, right wingers are just losers who will attack single foreigners with a group. Left wingers tend to be violent in a more organized manner. Rote Armee Fraction in Germany was a good example (or is that the same as Bader Meihof? I was quite young back in those days).
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
Well, first this is not today, the peace movement really grew within the 80s, while these groups had their 'big time' in the 70s.
Still you're right. But that is actually exactly what I mean. On the left you have (or had) small groups of very few individuals who carried out attacks usually on representatives of the states they considered to be their enemies. Sure that is undemocratic and wrong but they are and were pretty much isolated even within the extreme left.
You and civ1-addict are right that they are more organized (or were pictured as that by the media). But look at how many people they killed. The numbers are far (really far) less than those killed and wounded by right-wing thugs. The difference is that the leftist terrorist victims were important figures in their states who are obviously worth more than some asylum seeker who gets kicked to death in some park...
Of course every single one of that murders was a crime and therefore equally wrong, but my point is that the majority of the left is far less violent and extreme than the majority of the right.
The thing is that race murders etc. aren't considered terrorism, therefore you don't hear much of right-wing terrorism but isn't a murder a murder, no matter who gets killed?
Greadius
:yeah:
I didn't think he was extreme right, that is why I put it in quotation marks. I think I mentioned in another post how I find it annoying that anyone who doesn't advocate a 51% tax rate and gigantic welfare state in Europe is 'extreme right wing'.
Sorry for the confusion.
And don't argue if the extreme left or right is more violent. There are countless examples on both sides. Squabbling obscures the point: the democratic political process needs to be devoid of violence.
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
I do that because this "all extremists are equal" talk is what governments and other politicians usually say instead of combatting right-wing violence. The left-wing violence is directed against them, so there you can be sure they care.
Anyway, that's not the topic here.
That's it. And I couldn't agree more.
the tag "extreme right wing" is usually given only to anti-immigration-guys. so in issues like tax or wellfare you could have almoust socialist stances but be anti-immigration and you would be called "extreme right-wing".
and yes, the democratic political process SHOULD be devoid of violence, i have to agree with that, but some people (left and right-wing alike don't seem to get this.
Supernaut
Prince
OK, two more recent examples: The ANC espoused communist ideas as well as violence against apartheid. Sinn Fein, the political wing of the IRA, are a left wing party, and the IRA have killed hundreds of people, including civilians, most of whom were not 'important figures in their states'. Neither of these groups is particularly small in either numbers or influence.
But why are we talking about terrorists? You just have to look at what happens when extreme left people get into power to see they are as bad as the right - Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, any number of tin pot dictators in Africa. Millions of ordinary people killed, tortured, starved, robbed and generally oppressed
Basically, all extremists think they can use violence to achieve their ends - that is the main reason they are so dangerous. It's not just a left-right thing - look at the extreme animal rights people, or, of course, extreme religious groups.
willemvanoranje
Curitibano
We had to take one minute of silence at school, for Pim Fortuyn, and on top of that they want us to lay flowers in a corner of the school yard. Have they gona mad? We have to be silent because he got shot for what he believed in; at least that is a reason; sometimes people get killed for nothing. And flowers??? Pleassseee! Did we do that for September 11th? Did we do that for Enschede? Did we do that for Volendam? Did we do that for Meinder Tjoelke and Joes Kloppenburg (victims of violence)? No! So why would we do it for this guy? Crazy people.....The damn principal had a speach....pro-Fortuyn!!! He shouldn't have an opinion about politics towards students, he should be neutral....(all above is about school, remember that)
Ah, that's nasty, willem. I believe a lot of people can't deal with this situation. There are also a lot of people who want to vote for Pim Fortuyn because of sympathy! That's just plain bad. Elections are about ruling the country. There's no place for sympathy there...
Greadius
:yeah:
Annoying Pim Fortuyn story. Actually this is just me venting... I started my new classes today, and one of them is taught by an adjunct proffessor from the Netherlands. I don't remember the exact words, but when he commented on Pim Fortuyn he said their political process was being 'Americanized' :finger: :finger:
What the heck does he get off saying that? Its bad enough that he is a Euro-weenie one-world socialist, but he actually insults America in America on the first day!
:finger: :finger:What the heck does he get off saying that? Its bad enough that he is a Euro-weenie one-world socialist, but he actually insults America in America on the first day!
philippe
FYI, I chase trains.
that proffesor is wright
Don't wind up about that Greadius. It's just his opinion. Besides, would you find it bad if someone were to Americanize the Netherlands? 
I disagree with that proffessor though.
Edit: typo
I disagree with that proffessor though.Edit: typo
Who could you know his name?
andycapp
Grumpy Old Griper
I've been interested to observe the media descriptions of Pim Fortuyn as a "radical right wing extremist" and yet from my limited reading about him that doesn't appear to be an accurate description of the man.
I'd appreciate if any Dutch (or others) who know a bit about Pim Fortuyn could comment on what sort of person he was and what sort of policies he was proposing.
This is what I know already:
- he was a gay former Sociology Professor who entered politics fairly recently
- he gained notoriety for his stance opposing any further immigration and his comments about Islam being a "backward culture"
- that he rejected any comparison between himself and Le Pen
From what little I know of him he appears to have been saying out loud what a significant segment of the population were concerned about but found no expression through the established political parties.
Were all his parties policies typical of the extreme right or just his stance on immigration? I get the impression that he was not your typical rightwing extremist and in fact some of his policies were quite liberal.
And Greadius, take it easy, you'll pop an artery if you keep getting steamed up like that.
I'd appreciate if any Dutch (or others) who know a bit about Pim Fortuyn could comment on what sort of person he was and what sort of policies he was proposing.
This is what I know already:
- he was a gay former Sociology Professor who entered politics fairly recently
- he gained notoriety for his stance opposing any further immigration and his comments about Islam being a "backward culture"
- that he rejected any comparison between himself and Le Pen
From what little I know of him he appears to have been saying out loud what a significant segment of the population were concerned about but found no expression through the established political parties.
Were all his parties policies typical of the extreme right or just his stance on immigration? I get the impression that he was not your typical rightwing extremist and in fact some of his policies were quite liberal.
And Greadius, take it easy, you'll pop an artery if you keep getting steamed up like that.
AVN
Deity
Andycapp,
You have given a correct and almost complete description of the ideas of im Fortuyn. He had a lot of comments on the current government, but IMO almost no solutions.
The only problem he had solutions for was the immigration issue.
Therefore I guess he was positioned at the extreme right wing by opposing politicians and the press.
He was a great debater but as said before he had no structured program.
This is all information I can give you about Pim Fortuyn.
You have given a correct and almost complete description of the ideas of im Fortuyn. He had a lot of comments on the current government, but IMO almost no solutions.
The only problem he had solutions for was the immigration issue.
Therefore I guess he was positioned at the extreme right wing by opposing politicians and the press.
He was a great debater but as said before he had no structured program.
This is all information I can give you about Pim Fortuyn.
Similar threads
