Europe’s political caste causes populism

by Louswies Van Der Laan, D66 Dutch M.P.

Only seven months ago, we Dutch politicians were preparing for what we thought would be the most boring general elections ever. How wrong we were.

With the political murder of Pim Fortuyn, the Dutch elections in June have been the most dramatic in Europe in a long time. Yet, the murder aside, they were not that unique. The list of countries where massive numbers of voters suddenly support conservative, often populist and anti-immigrant right-wingers seems endless. What is going on?

Some analysts say at least 30% of ordinary voters are xenophobic bigots, wherever you look in Europe and probably beyond. Therefore true democracy must be protected from the unrestrained will of the people – and the foul populists that unleash it – by raising all kinds of electoral and political thresholds.

I do not agree. After all, how likely is it that bigots and confirmed racists vote for a flamboyant gay like Mr Fortuyn? Something else must be the matter.

It is true that what the populist movements in Europe seem to share is both an anti-establishment attitude and a resistance to change, translating into an inward-looking agenda opposing both immigration and European integration. In my view however, these are just two sides of the same coin: what people resist most of all is the political establishment making change without them.

The figure of Fortuyn himself may illustrate my point. The reason he got away with things a normal politician cannot do was that he was a TV star, not a politician. Whoever watched him exposing the half truths and pretensions in a debate with his opponents saw a satirical comedian at work. A great show, and the audience loved it. But they voted for him as well and that, considering he remained very unclear about his solutions, is odd – unless they assumed it did not matter anyway. It shows to what extent people experience politics as TV fiction instead of as something that affects their personal lives and which they can influence themselves.

This is a worrying development. We must realise that people are trying to tell us something, and that they will continue raising their voice until we listen. They want us to speak the truth. Yet, when established politicians discuss viewpoints on immigration, or enlarging the European Union, they pretend no disadvantages exist. How then do we expect voters to take us seriously, or to feel taken seriously by us?

It is often said we should better emphasise the advantages of Europe, or the good sides of immigration. Not so. If we want people to believe our reasons to choose for Europe, and for immigrants, we should also emphasise the problems and risks. By one-sidedly singing praises, the political caste create the possibility for populists with their pseudo-solutions to score. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.