Dutch Election Discourse Marked by Intensifying, Not Novel, Polarization
THE HAGUE - As the Netherlands heads toward parliamentary elections, political rhetoric is increasingly charged, but the phenomenon of polarization itself is not new, experts say. Rather, the current climate is characterized by a heightened emotional intensity in existing divisions, with parties across the political spectrum engaging in tactics that contribute to the fray.
Recent examples include the far-right PVV‘s use of AI-generated content depicting threats to “blonde innocent girls” by “light-skinned young people,” as detailed in research by de Groene Amsterdammer. Simultaneously, left-leaning GL-PvdA leader Timmermans has become a frequent target in negative online posts. However, reciprocal accusations of divisive language are also emerging from the left, with GL-PvdA MP Klaver recently labeling BBB minister keijzer’s rhetoric as “eel populism,” a term that gained unintended traction.
While many parties acknowledge the issue in their election manifestos – the CDA pointing to polarizing leaders, the SGP voicing concerns about societal shifts, Volt advocating for art and culture, and the VVD championing open debate – the underlying tensions reflect long-standing ideological clashes. NSC proposes combating polarization through youth social work and disinformation education in schools, while the Christian union, like the VVD, seeks to regulate polarizing algorithms on social media. Notably, the terms “polarization” are absent from the platforms of GL-PvdA, D66, and the SP, though they emphasize “solidarity” and “connection” as antidotes to “fear” and “division.” This suggests a broader recognition of the problem, even if approaches to addressing it differ substantially.
