gregjohn wrote:
> Okay, so what advocacy groups have arisen in the Netherlands on the issue of
> immigration on the side of the spectrum which includes "conservative"
> "traditionalist" "homeland-loving" to "anti-immigrant" to fascist?  
Strangely: none. There are two persons in parliament that have some sort 
of Chronic Lack of Attention Syndrome. The best way to get attention is 
to shout things that are just on the wrong side of what is generally 
acceptable. So that is what they do. Because they get votes they can 
fill in some seats in parliament with people whose only job is to vote 
as they do. There is no real group that supports them or a consistent 
view for that matter.

> And what are they saying?
Oh, the usual. That all Muslims are either terrorists or at least 
sympathize and support those who are. That there are too many immigrants 
and asylum seekers and that they drain the economy. (Asylum seekers are 
forbidden by law to work).

> 
> Knowing what's out there affects my reaction to the legislation. 
The legislation would be European, in Europe as a whole the sutuation 
differs from country to country.
> Is it targetted at a convent affiliated with Mother Teresa who's buying immigrants
> plane tickets and free PhD education in their country of origin?  Or are there
> physical attacks on the rise?
Well, there is always a danger of physical attacks. There are the usual 
attacks on asylum seekers by right wing fundamentalists, but few and far 
between and not organized. There are also the usual attacks of young 
urban scum on gay people and these youngsters are predominantly from 
countries associated with the Islam. These attacks get more media 
attention (or are more common, there is no way for me to find that out).
> 
> I have some folks who are dear to me in the States who've had a brick thrown
> through their window with anti-immigrant sentiments on it.  (It started out
> with a disfigured doll with a note which looked like something from a retarded
> 6 year old girl.)
> 
> Could we see some citation for the 60%?

What 60%? I have been thinking on that, and I think it might be a 
reference to Pim as PM. If so: the Netherlands have a system with many 
parties. You need 76 to form a government and the party in the 
government that has the most seats traditionally gets the PM position. 
The current PM has 41 out of 150 seats. That has been even less in the 
past. There are normally three mayor parties here liberal/conservative, 
christian and labour plus a few smaller ones in various sizes. Though in 
recent years the situation become much more complex. In 2002 about 30-35 
might have been enough, provided that there was no other coalition 
possible along more conventional lines. It would still represent 20% or 
more of votes, but the situation in 2002 with Pim* was completely 
abnormal (you had to be here to believe it, and many still can't believe 
what happened), and that does not say much about the popular support of 
right wing fundamentalists. My estimate is that it may be about 10-15%.


*some background on Pim of course on wikipedia 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pim_Fortuyn) but I don't think that 
captures the mood swings in the country very well.

Post a reply to this message