Comments by "Lynott Parris" (@DenUitvreter) on "Dutch Politics: What Geert Wilder's New Coalition Means for Europe || Peter Zeihan" video.

Not really. The Brits might feel similar but what do they know? They are much too self centered and entitled and feel estranged by Germans and the French. For the Dutch they all three are a bit weird and backward. Economically the Dutch are far closer to the Rhineland model than to the Anglo-Saxon model of the winner takes it all and the let the lumpenproletariat stuff it. In finance and state budget there is a divide with France and Southern Europe between the careful and the savers up North and the Wein, Weib und gesang spenders in the South. So euro wise, it's allegience is with Scandinavia, Germany, Finland. Military wise, the huge military power of the USA makes the military superiority of France, Germany and the UK far less important in international politics, so that's nice for the Netherlands.
3
@vanCaldenborgh Bull shit. It was about religious tolerance, they just didn't like to see their business partners and neighbours burnded at the stake by some foreigners who acted like they had some divine power over the land that they made out of the North Sea themselves. The Dutch Republic only gave up on it's objection to the slave trade in 1637 and expanding it's dominance of the European trade to Asia and the America's was because of the independence war.
2
No, he lacks depth of knowledge. He confuses how the system worked for the past decade(s) with the system. The system is very open and can made to work in different ways depending on how the majority wants it to work. - The PM is primus inter pares legally, he only has as smuch power and influence as the house and the other cabinet ministers hand him. - The PM does not have to do foreign affairs. We have a minister for that, and in the past we've had a real heavy weight there who had as much international influence and respect as Rutte has now. - The working of the establishment parties in past decade is not the working of the system, and that includes the formation of a cabinet. 9 months was not normal, and abuse of power by extremely disciplined party members, an authoritorian goverment. It does not need to be like that. In earlier videos he already showed his lack of knowledge of European history. The Dutch have been a military superpower for centuries. They invented 'modern' land warfare with their military revolution and invented the marines, they brought the Spanish Empire to it's knees, defended successfully against a combined French, English and German states attack, they successfully invaded and conquered Britain to give it it's current parliamentary monarch and bill of rights for the sake of becoming an ally against France, and they managed to stay out WWI and keep neutrality. This was because of the navy and the flatness of the land. Until bomber planes, the flat lands made them almost impossible to conquer because they'd simply flood the lands and protect the harbours. So the Dutch military weakness or strength depends on the future of warfare rather than their current and actually young military vulnerability is an eternal given. The difference is that the Dutch were never imperialistic ("empire is too expensive"). They were the first modern capitalists, they didn't care about ruling as much land as possible, water was more profitable and it was something kings wanted, not the Dutch Republic. So they have always been in the heart of European business and trade and right between the three superpowers after Spain. They want peace so they can make money, if it's war they try to profit too, but they find all this territorial agression rather silly and play the geopolitical game to stay out of it as much as they can. So the foundation of the ECSC was exactly what the Dutch wanted. The past decade in particular, the Dutch leading politicians have gotten carried away with their leading/broker role in European and world politics and sacrificed Dutch interests to gain more influence. If you are more respected by foreigners than your own people, you're not sticking to your job usually.
2
It's too shallow an analysis. We don't vote for parties, we vote for candidates, candidates are on a list with other candidates usually, and political parties make lists. It's a very open system that also allows for regional representation like in a district system, that just isn't used anymore by candidates and voters. This amounts in practice to vote for parties which a corresponding parliamentary group, but it's important because there are more options and Omtzigt of the 4th biggest party newcomer NSC was voted into parliament against the will of his party. Also members of parlement can split off from their parliamentary group, often leading to suspension as party member, so the parliamentary groups are based on consensus rather than party orders too. The trend has been towards more hierarchical obedient relation through party politics, but there is a new situaton now. We now have not only 37 seats for Wilders anti establishment party, we also have newcomers NSC and BBB with 28 seats together, and there are a few anti establisment seats with smaller parties too. So the establishment of the classic parties that felt free to just govern an go ahead with it's (hidden) plans while forming a coalition for 9 months doesn't have the majority anymore. 3 months used to be a reasonable formation time for decades, for the establisment in fact, but there is no reason it can't be done faster with these new parties. There might be a minority supported cabinet, a cabinet of not very political experts with the house leading politically, there doesn't need to be a dominant PM. The constitunial task of the PM is to preside over cabinet meetings and run the tiny department of 'General Affairs', the PM has just one vote in the cabinet.
2
We just look down on them, but they are big so we have to play nice.
1
@JUAN_OLIVIER Nonsense, when it turned out the Dutch didn't think Germanic in the first year of the occupation, the velvet glove came off. It was a terrible totalitarian cruel and murderous dictatorship that killed almost 4% of the population.
1
Part of Rutte's influence came through selling out Dutch interests all the time. Also Wilders doesn't need to be Rutte's successor. Foreign affairs might be done by the minister of Foreign affairs like in the past. The new prime minister might be a primus inter pares again. The next PM might not be one of a majority cabinet. This election was a really big change, not just Wilders, but with new parties BBB and NSC this big a huge blow to the establishment. So the new government doesn't have to follow establishment rules, those weren't Dutch rules.
1
You have been swallowing far too much propaganda. Parties are not part of our democracy, they are just associations that can produce a list of candidates too. They have shown to be a threat to our democracy actually, by protecting the governmnet against parliament through party leader instructions, ignoring their oath to the constitution. His plans being unconstitutional is also just something that is taken for a fact through endless repition of the statement. It deserves a closer view on which plans to which extend and a plan that includes changing the constitution is not unconstitutional by any means, it just takes time and a large majority.
1
Person. Candidates tend to go on a list with other candidates, the surplus votes trickle down the list, lists are usually made by parties from party member candidates, but any candidate that gets the number of votes that are required for a seat (that varies with the turn out) gets the seat no matter the position on the list. Usually the list header, often party leader too, takes the bulk of the votes which then get spread in the sequence of the list. Districts exist and a regional candidat representing his region is a possibilty of the system, it's just not used anymore. Votes are added up nationally and all candidates had registered in all districts. Parties are not a relevant entity in the law, and who becomes PM is a matter of a House majority to support him or her.
1
@michielvandersijs6257 BS. Don't project your racism onto others. We just don't want religious killings in the streets, freedom to say and print what you want without fear. Religious peace like we had for 400 years until the muslims arrived in small numbers in the 1970's. No more people forcing themselves into our country getting scarce housing and making welfare unaffordable. Not selling out to 'expats', not being colonized basically because that's what it amounts to.
1
It's not that bad of analysis but Zeihan confuses the way the establishment had the system work with the parliamentary system itself. The establishment didn't just get a huge smack from Wilders but also from NSC and BBB, so all options within the system are open. This includes a PM being just a primus inter pares, it's not a minister sacking PM like in the UK, he's a leader, not a boss legally and he doesn't need to be from the biggest part or handle foreign affairs himself. Zeihan also ignores the Netherlands traditional and historical role in Europe. The Dutch are in the game and they play it, but from a very different attitude, they are not just a smaller player than UK, FR, GER, but they never played for the same prizes, they have their own.
1
Whatever, it's your language, not mine, if you want that reflect the English ignorance about the place over centuries, fine. In Nederland living Nederlanders simply speak Nederlands.
1