Racism, authoritarianism, and enemy thinking: Dutch scientists call FVD a far-right party

Dutch political scientists are increasingly labeling the Forum for Democracy (FVD) as a far-right party, citing its rhetoric and ideological leanings. While the distinction between "radical right" and "far-right" can be debated, a consensus is emerging among experts that FVD crosses the line into the latter category.

“

The Netherlands is for the Dutch.

Four out of five specialists in the far-right interviewed by NRC concluded that FVD, despite participating in parliamentary democracy, fundamentally rejects its principles. They point to the party's embrace of political violence, its connections to international far-right networks, and ideological elements like antisemitism and classic racism as reasons for this classification.

One scholar, Maurits Meijers, a professor of political science at the University of Antwerp, prefers to describe FVD as "increasingly shifting towards the far-right" rather than applying a definitive label. He believes that focusing on specific words and actions that undermine democracy is more productive than engaging in semantic debates about party categorization.

“

maximum violence must be used against Palestinian refugees.

However, others, like Léonie de Jonge, a professor specializing in far-right extremism at the University of Tübingen, Germany, see no ambiguity. She states that FVD's rejection of democratic principles, its association with extremist groups, and its ideology firmly place it in the far-right camp. Similarly, Sarah de Lange, a professor of Dutch politics at Leiden University, finds it "unavoidable" to categorize FVD as far-right due to its stance on political violence and its ideological underpinnings.

“

Weren't there no more medals?

Matthijs Rooduijn, a professor at the University of Amsterdam, acknowledges the need for caution when labeling parties as anti-democratic or sympathetic to violence. However, he argues that FVD's actions and ideology warrant such a designation, particularly given its rhetoric and connections.

“

it would not be so bad if there were no more elections