NATIONALISM: PARTY POLITICS OR METAPOLITICS?

Metapolitics 

by Hagebard

Last month we saw a typical story unfold in the Netherlands: the right-wing populist Forum for Democracy (FvD) fell apart squabbling.

For the observant spectator this is unfortunately nothing new, rather it is a pattern. A party with positions leaning towards nationalism appears on the scene, grows rapidly in both supporters and members, and eventually collapses. There are many such cases in the history of nationalism. With love for our homeland, I will try to explain why party politics is currently not a realistic option for the people of the Netherlands.

Although I myself did not have much faith in the possibilities that the FvD offered for nationalism in the long run, many like-minded people saw the benefit of this party. It was a new breath of fresh air blowing through the entrenched party system. A wind with nationalistic characteristics (limiting migration, views on modern art and architecture, and an interest in serious conservative thinkers). But unfortunately it also had a liberal core. Precisely because of that core, which became dominant as the party grew, things went wrong.

The FvD is not against the multicultural society. The party only believes that 'Dutch values' (by which nowadays they mean, among other things, gay marriage and feminism) should be dominant. The FvD is not against migration, it just believes that the current version has no economic benefits. Furthermore, party leader Baudet indicated in an interview with Omroep ON that he explicitly renounced “ethnonationalism” (popular nationalism). In short: Forum for Democracy is not a nationalist party.

It is not surprising, however, that the party has a liberal core. However much one wants to fantasize about a wide spectrum of different political directions, in party politics (outside the SGP (an orthodox Calvinist political party)) there is actually nothing more than different flavors of liberalism. 

In the current system there is simply not much room for a party that is conservative, let alone one that is also consistently nationalist. This is the case because nationalism simply finds too little resonance in a society that has been bombarded from all sides with (left-) liberal views and propaganda for decades. 

Good optics, weak metapolitics

The founding of a nationalist political party in the Netherlands is a pointless task at the moment. Such a party will hardly achieve electoral success. The best case scenario is that a nationalist mini-party can set up a broad party structure; the worst is that it falls apart after about five years and leaves a lot of people defeated.

What we need are not party political movements, but metapolitical movements. Research institutes, youth movements, training institutes.

All other initiatives, in fact, are much more realistic and more promising than any party political adventure whatsoever. The Flemish Movement, as it is now known, with a party like the Vlaams Belang, does not just come out of the blue. For decades, an ideological basis has been built in Belgium through magazines such as Dietsland-Europe and other structures. Without all this, this movement would not have gotten much further than a desire for independence.

That is why nationalists in the Netherlands must understand that without an ideological basis, without broad structures of like-minded people, and without metapolitical movements, there will never be consistent party political success for nationalists. Rather than embarking on party-political adventures and being defeated because of the lack of the right kind of party, try to put one's own talents and resources into metapolitics. Everyone can contribute in their own way to the growth of nationalism.

Published in Dutch at Speerpunt

Translated by Affirmative Right