What should the (Dutch) PvdA do in order to scribble on top of it again?

The main mission of the PvdA and its predecessor the SDAP was to elevate the working class.They have successfully fulfilled this mission to a large extent. The children and grandchildren of the former workers are now often among the middle classes and they also vote on middle class parties such as VVD, CDA, GL and D66.

Now that the differences are rising again, the PvdA could bet on class warfare again.On affordable living space, good education, less income differences and good health care. They should then release the identity policy.

Nowadays, almost every party has one important point to which the image is hung.Green Left, 50 plus, party for the animals, THINK, Christianunie, PVV etc. The PvdA misses that. It used to be a lot for the people sitting in the corner where the blows fall, but now the SP is that.

They have to magnify one issue and make it a guiding principle.I would say that living is a good one. Because of the policy of the cabinets Rutte, the housing market has totally helped to destroy it. There must be 700,000 homes quickly. The current situation is a social drama, whereby people stagnate and the economy is harmed. There is little view of a solution.

With such a theme you can profile much better than with abstract themes such as emancipation and inequality.It should keep you underlying, but I would like to make it the PvhW, the party of living. You can expand it and make it a party that fights the breakdown of the public sector, but living is a pretty concrete theme.

I don’t know if it should be the goal of people who want to do what in the way we set up our society to get a party to scribble.

One of the other suggestions is to have the PvdA with GL and evt.SP to merge. I have been in favour of this for a long time. But that is not so appealing to all three clubs. GL, like the PvdA incidentally, has been very close to neo-liberalism under Halsema and they cherish this urban/highly educated look. Understandable. After the departure of Jan Marijnisse, the SP did not come to the top. But the SP appeals to the traditional supporters, including trade unionists, of the PvdA. I find a daughter in politics not disqualification, but I would not vote on it myself.

I myself vote this time at the state elections PvdA.I know the people on the list that come from my own town. Moreover, the outgoing PvdA-deputy, who is now listduwer in Gelderland, has done well. And more importantly, above all, I attach importance to honest drivers. And to be able to judge that, you really need to know people personally. People who have known themselves as on-integer, yes, you can avoid them. But it is much harder to distinguish among the others the generously present chaff of the corn.

That was one of the reasons Aristotle felt that the maximum size of a democracy should be around 30,000.This corresponds to a city like Nijmegen or Arnhem. For he did not know the women, children and slaves of course.

Modern sociologists and politicologists have also mentioned such a size.

In fact, you can see it everywhere in politics: under the influence of the TV and social media, man is more and more in the short term and quick results to focus.We want everything right away. This is also the cause of the crisis that we have been in since 2008 and which we have now overcome nicely, but of which we can slide into a valley again, or collapse. Because fundamentally nothing has changed. It continues to think short-term from ideologies instead of analysis and long-term planning. And coincidentally, neoliberalism has been the dominant ideology for decades, with the pros and cons of it. If an ideology prevails long, then the disadvantages will naturally prevail. We saw this with Communism and Soviet practice, and we now see this with capitalism and the current neoliberal interpretation of it.

People should look a little better.It is no coincidence that all the countries where people are happiest have a strong socio-democratic tradition. Socialism is not a guarantee of good policy. Socialists are equally sensitive to the corrupting influence of power. You can see this in Wallonia and in the very same place where socialists have the sole rule for a long time. But social democracy, tempered and interspersed with liberal and other Democratic influences, just proves to work best in practice.

In North America, Canada is doing better than the US, in Europe the Scandinavian countries, but also the Netherlands and other countries with a strong socio-democratic tradition.For Australia and New Zealand the same applies.

Back to the PvdA in the Netherlands.When I look at the national politicians, I see in Lodewijk Asscher a decent group chairman, whom I would vote without hesitation, but that is not enough. To draw voices is in this time Iemans needed which inspires a good future (Mandela), or someone who calls loud what people want to hear (Trump).

There are very few Mandela’s and Obama’s and many Trump’s and Berlusconi in this world.

Some hope is to draw from people like Merkel, who has been able to sail a decent course for a long time.She is not even a social democrat, but also in the Netherlands we had decent Christian Democrats (Bert de Vries) and liberals (Hans Dijkstal One country, one society-Wikipedia).Not coincidentally politicians who were looking for cooperation with social Democrats.

But also these three have it difficult or would have difficulty in this time of fast and inexpensive gain and TV-smoks.

PvdA suffers from the fact that the current cabinet no longer takes the workers ‘ organisations seriously.They were connected with it for years.

The VVD has sidelined them.I think that PvdA has a good chance of having a more tougher line against the forthcoming developments in the next 4 years in Automation and Robotisation (1 in 5 jobs disappears) but also for migrant workers. Finally, the Labour Party, but are they still there?

They forget in the opposition just to make their point when it comes down to it.Wonder if they can break this.

Zals Peter says, The PvdA does not have an important point which characterizes their image.They have become a sort of buffer between the left-wing youth party Green Left and the left-populist SP. As a result, they have no real reason to exist. They would be best able to dissolve themselves, or a merger with Green Links (and possibly SP, but it seems to me that the mild eurosceptic and populist working image of that party are really a reason not to go along, ondans that the ideas Largely correspond to the PvdA and Green Left).

If I knew that I would keep it for me.Let us be glad that the voters have seen it.

In politics for each other boxing what voters expect from them.If that can then.

Leave a Reply