Far-right FvD takes blows from almost all parties in debate on violent anti-asylum riots
The far-right FvD and party leader Lidewij de Vos faced attacks from almost all other parties in a Tweede Kamer debate on the violence used at recent anti-asylum protests. This is a turnaround to parliament’s usual stance of largely ignoring the FvD in an attempt not to feed the party’s far-right ideologies. De Vos still refused to distance herself from these racist ideas, NU.nl reported.
Tuesday’s debate focused largely on indications that far-right groups were involved in recent anti-asylum riots in Loosdrecht and other municipalities. In the run-up to the municipal elections, it became clear that several FvD candidates had current or former ties with several right-wing extremist groups.
For over an hour on Tuesday evening, De Vos faced an increasingly enraged parliamentarians from the left and right of the political spectrum, demanding in vain that she distance herself from the violence used at anti-asylum protests and from far-right ideologies. But De Vos maintained that the FvD has nothing to do with extremist ideologies and rejected all “insinuations” that party members belonged to far-right groups.
Various parties had major issues with the FvD’s use of terms like “repatriation” and “population replacement.” The National Coordinator for Counterterrorism and Security (NCTV) has warned that such terms help normalize far-right ideology.
In an attempt to get De Vos to distance herself from these ideas, D66 MP Jan Paternotte asked her whether “the Netherlands is only for white people.” De Vos replied that “the Netherlands is for the Dutch,” referring to people whose ancestors were born here.
Other party leaders followed Paternotte’s example in trying to get De Vos to admit her racism or distance herself from it. These included right-wing MP Mona Keijzer, who participated in an anti-asylum protest in Loosdrecht. According to NU.nl, it culminated in a bizarre debate in which the FvD leader repeatedly failed to answer questions and refused to distance herself from far-right ideologies.
“It was ugly, intensely ugly, but it had to happen,” Paternotte later reflected on the debate. “I think it is good that the Netherlands has seen this. If you are not willing to ask follow-up questions and think ‘just let a party babble,’ then people won’t know what they are voting for when elections come up.”
According to PRO leader Jesse Klaver, De Vos revealed “the true nature” of the FvD during the debate. He accused her of normalizing far-right ideology with her party’s “right-wing extremist undertone.”
De Vos did eventually condemn violence at the protests, but she blamed the coalition and Cabinet for it. According to her, the government’s policies contributed to people being this angry.
“It is all about what comes after the comma,” Prime Minister Rob Jetten said later in the evening about De Vos’s condemnations and justifications, without actually mentioning her by name.
The racist terms frequently used in Tuesday’s debate, even by parties openly distancing themselves from them, “can influence the societal debate in the wrong way,” Jetten said. “The term ‘population replacement’ is not ordinary language. It does not belong in our political debate.”
The Prime Minister added that he had hoped for a Kamer-wide condemnation of the violence, but had to accept that this would not happen.
The turnaround from the Kamer’s usual strategy of largely ignoring the FvD is likely due to the far-right party’s success in the municipal elections. The party currently holds seven seats in the Tweede Kamer and is doing well in the polls.
