Dutch elections: have the liberals ended the Wilders era?

Last week’s Dutch elections ended in a neck-and-neck race between Rob Jetten’s liberal party D66, and the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders. In the end, by just a few thousand votes, D66 became the biggest party. Liberal newspapers and politicians around Europe have hailed these results as the return of the ‘centre-ground’ and a defeat for ‘populism’. But is this really the case?

The early parliamentary elections of 29 October were the result of Geert Wilders pulling the plug on the coalition government under Prime Minister Dick Schoof, in which his party participated. It was a gamble, with the aim of maintaining his own popularity, by abandoning an unpopular government plagued by infighting. In the end, it didn’t pay out as well as he expected, as his party decreased its representation in parliament from 37 to 26 seats – about 17 percent of the 150 seats in parliament.

The liberal party Democrats ‘66 (D66) managed to become the joint biggest party, with 26 seats (17 percent) as well. It is the first time ever that this party has become the biggest in parliament, having only gained momentum in the polls in the last few weeks. Liberal media commentators in the Netherlands, and in other European countries especially, are cheerful about their victory. In their eyes, this shows that the populist right can be defeated by ‘a campaign of positive energy’ and ‘a fresh young face leading the party’. There even has been talk of the ‘end of the Wilders era’.

As communists, we should see this electoral result in its proper context, which shows that it is far from the ‘end of the Wilders era’.

D66 managed to win the elections with 26 seats (17 percent). This is the first time that the biggest party in parliament has ever won less than 20 percent of the vote. There are five parties in total that have between 10 and 17 percent of the vote, and a further 10 parties with less than 10 percent of the vote. This shows the extreme fragmentation of the vote.

In September, only 29 percent of Dutch citizens stated that they trust Dutch political institutions and politicians. This is lower than before the Schoof government came to power. Two weeks before the elections, around 40 percent of voters stated that they didn’t yet know what party they’d vote for. This shows that the vote was simply a snapshot of a period of great fluctuations.

In total, the parties that were part of the last government coalition under Dick Schoof lost 36 seats (about 24 percent of the vote). But although Wilders’ PVV lost, two other right-wing reactionary parties won seats: JA21 (racist demagogues that are more ‘pragmatic’ and reliable for the bourgeoisie) and Forum for Democracy (far-right reactionaries who promote conspiracy theories).

The three reactionary parties together did not lose any seats, but actually won one seat. They are a bloc of 28 percent of the parliamentary seats and are there to stay, as long as there is no militant working-class alternative that can win over part of their working class base.

Gains for the ‘centre’ and the failure of the ‘left’

In recent months, the capitalist ‘experts’ and the media have been supporting ‘sensible’ parties after the fiasco of the Schoof government. While Geert Wilders has no difficulties in pushing through attacks on the working class, he tries to hide this as much as possible, or presents it as necessary evil in exchange for stricter immigration policies. He is an unreliable figure for the ruling class, as he puts his own interests before theirs.

Party leader Rob Jetten could present himself as the positive ‘anti-populist’ in a culture war against the right-wing demagogues / Image: Rob Jetten, Twitter

D66 was promoted as a ‘progressive’ liberal option. They are a bourgeois party with a base in the urban middle class and professionals, with ‘progressive’ values. Party leader Rob Jetten could present himself as the positive ‘anti-populist’ in a culture war against the right-wing demagogues. While in the past the party would advocate counter-reforms, like making it easier to dismiss workers, now the party came with ambitious plans such as building 10 new cities. These have certainly connected with a layer of young urban voters in a situation of extreme housing crisis.

The success of D66, however, does not represent a revival of the centre parties and a return to stability. Rather, it is a result of the abysmal election results of the parties of the so-called ‘left’, who consistently pandered to big business, and either supported the remilitarisation policies of NATO (as in the case of Green Left/Labour) or fudged the question (as with the Socialist Party).

There was no lack of opportunities for the left. The enormous housing crisis calls for the expropriation of the 200,000 empty dwellings in the Netherlands, and for an emergency building plan based on demand, rather than the profit of the project developers. 

The recent 250,000 strong demo for Gaza – the biggest demonstration in 20 years – means that the issue of breaking ties with the Israeli war machine should have been on the agenda of the left, but it was a secondary theme during the elections. The whole question of military spending was at best barely touched. And while there has been a recent wave of protests against the murder of a 17-year-old girl and the questions of femicide and violence against women, this was absent from the electoral campaigns.

This meant that right-wing issues, such as immigration, could dominate. The reactionary right links the housing crisis to refugees, and tries to present violence against women as the result of ‘importing men from backward cultures’. In response, the left was unable to put forward a militant programme, and instead concerned themselves with culture war issues.

More instability ahead

The victory of D66 may be a moral victory for the liberals, but it is no more than that. The fragmented vote means that there are at least four parties needed to set up a coalition. The bourgeoisie wants a broad coalition of D66 and the other ‘sensible’ parties, including the right reformists of Green Left/Labour and the VVD (the right-liberal party of former Prime Minister Mark Rutte).

However, VVD has put its own interests before the class interests of the bourgeoisie and doesn’t want to participate, as it would be in contrast with their hysterical anti-left electoral campaign. The option of a centre-right government would only be possible with five parties, and failing that, there would have to be a minority government. In any case, there is no prospect of stability.

The Netherlands fared relatively well in comparison with other European countries in the last few years. Unemployment was around three percent and there was a big labour shortage in many sectors, causing immigrants from other EU countries to move to the Netherlands. Economic growth this year is slightly above one percent.

The problem is not the lack of militancy, but of the leadership of the working class / Image: Diloba, Wikimedia Commons

However, this is changing. The Netherlands has an export-dependent economy. Most Dutch exports go to Germany, which is economically stagnating. Its exports to the USA (mostly medical goods and machines) are also uncertain, with the constant threat of tariffs. Meanwhile, Chinese competition is threatening Dutch industrial sectors like steel and the chemical industry. Unemployment reached four percent in October, the highest in four years.

There have been big price increases since 2022, which saw the highest inflation (10 percent) since 1975. Life has become expensive for many. There is a shortage of 400,000 houses, and the housing that is available is extremely expensive. There are also the unsolved environmental crises, such as the prevalence of harmful nitrogen compounds in Dutch soil, and the especially poor quality of the surface water.

An unstable bourgeois coalition cannot even begin to tackle these problems. Especially as it is clear that the next government, whatever its exact composition, will increase military expenditure, while implementing cuts on healthcare, social security, and other public spending. A political alternative for the working class is needed. The only way to solve these problems is through a rational plan of production – a communist alternative.

There is no lack of militancy. In the last few years there have been a series of militant strikes. In the port of Rotterdam there was a militant strike of the lashers in October, which was ended by a court order. On 9 December there will be a new strike of higher education staff against budget cuts. The problem is not the lack of militancy, but of the leadership of the working class.

As long as this leadership does not exist and the so-called ‘left’ is only about the ‘progressive’ side of the culture war, right-wing demagogues will be able to regain their popularity on the basis of a right-wing backlash to the culture war and the failure of the centre ground to do anything to improve the conditions of working people. We saw that with the re-election of Trump in the USA, and now as well with the popularity of Reform in the UK, after the landslide for Labour just a year ago. The Wilders era will not be over until there is an alternative for the working class.

The task of communists is to start building an alternative – the nucleus for a communist party that can form an alternative to both the D66 liberals and the Wilders reactionaries. This is what the Revolutionary Communists – RCI Netherlands are building. Join us!