The reaction to the Dutch election result and the failure of One Nation to make inroads may lead to a premature belief that the threat of populism has fizzled out.
Both Wilders and Hanson have a tendency to advance simplistic and unworkable solutions to real problems. An electoral defeat does not mean that the problems have gone away. A close look at the Dutch result shows that Wilders enjoyed support among those people who are doing it tough. Although the Dutch economy like Australia's is doing well the reality is that many folk are left behind. Likewise if we look at Trump's result you can see that the places where he was strongest were those areas that had missed out on prosperity. Similarly here in Australia - One Nation's main support comes from those areas of Australia that have missed out on our prosperity.
The real danger of the Dutch result is that mainstream politicians will assume that it is business as usual.
This is also evident in the Dutch result - there are a number of small parties which won seats which have picked up on some of Wilders concerns for example Denk a predominantly Muslim party won 3 seats on a platform of addressing problems of social inequality, similarly the Forum for Democratie won 2 seats on a platform of demanding that politicians are responsive to the needs of all.
What the Dutch election highlights is that there is a deep seated disillusionment with the capacity of governments to create a fair and equitable society.

Can't agree with you there BAYGON, both Wilders and Hanson made good steady gains, Hansom out polling the Greens for example, which is much better than any meteoric rise, with the attendant poor candidate selection that tends to bring.

Their success, before & after these elections have forced changes in policy of the majors, that wouldn't have happened otherwise.

In fact I think we are only at the beginning of a major swing away from the so called progressive bunch. It has taken a while for the majority to even start to see the all the dirt behind the gloss with these near communists socialists, but people are waking up to the danger now, & more will do so over time.

Yes it is generally acknowledged that Wilders has moved the two main conservative parties to the right. My central thesis is that the solutions that people like Wilders, Trump and Hanson advance are by and large unrealistic but that does not mean that the problems can be ignored.
My real concern is that both here and elsewhere people are too quick to dismiss the concerns that prompts people to vote for Hanson et al - creating an environment which only serves to destabilize.

At least they're advancing solutions.
Not skipping obliviously down the Utopian Fantasy path that caused this disillusionment in the first place.

No more utopias!

Each attack will increase their support.
There has not yet been a major attack killing dozens in Holland.
The Turk political ralleys even tipped the Dutch government over.
That was a demonstration of what moslem immigration is really about.

Here's an interesting insight:

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/13/world/europe/netherlands-election-muslims.html?_r=0

Taken from the link:

"When you tell people their problem is their identity,
it's who they are, there's no room to talk about real
issues like forced marriage, radicalisation, domestic
violence..."

Dear Hasbeen,

Better go read the results mate.

GroenLinks or the Green Left party increased their vote by twice that of Geert Wilders' Freedom Party and their seats gained was 10 compared to Wilders mob at only 5.

That is true Foxy, but no one asks the question, why it is so
different for moslems than others ?
It is not a matter of degree it is a matter of kind.

If I were to publish a book that urged the killing of Jews and people
who were not Christians, or offer them their life if they paid a tax
or decided to become Christians, the book would be banned for hate text
and I would be abused and prosecuted.

Why then is it permitted to sell the Koran in Australia ?

BTW, Wilders wants the Koran banned because it contravenes Dutch law.

Warning, reading this msg probably makes me liable to 18c
Gauwd this country has gone mad, but Victoria is itself a definition of insanity !

Dear Bazz,

There are so many varieties of Muslims. They come from
different countries, have different cultures, speak
different languages. To assume that they all practice their
religion in exactly the same way is simply wrong. They are
not one group doing exactly the same thing. And that
applies to all religions. Tarring everyone with the same
brush is wrong. As I cited in the previous post:

"When you tell people their problem is their identity, it's
who they are, there is no room to talk about real issues
like forced marriage, radicalisation, domestic violence
and so on..."

However, sadly I am beginning to realise that for some people
there could clearly never be a Muslim who was acceptable
no matter how moral, peaceful and productive.

Foxy, sweetie, reading the New York Times is simply ideological confirmation for lefties. You will find no truth there, ever.

Whenever the stuff has hit the fan, all & I mean all Muslims revert to conforming to their base religion. Whether they do this in religious belief, or simply in fear of what their jihadists would do to them if they didn't is a mute point, but ultimately has no effect in the result.

We now have so many no go zones it is getting ridiculous.

Dear Hassie,

We live in a Melbourne suburb not far from a mosque.
There has never been any problems in our area - either
with traffic or anything else. We have parklands
nearby where families picnic, kids play, and generally
get on with each other. My doctors and specialists are
Muslim. It's thanks to them that I am still alive today.
The nursing home where mum's being looked after has
many Muslims on the staff - and a more caring, compassionate,
and professional staff would be hard to find.
I can only judge people from my own experiences. I take
them as I find them - and so far my experiences appear to
be very different from what you describe. To me it sounds
like you live in a totally different world to me.

Posted by BAYGON, Friday, 17 March 2017 9:28:50 AM

What the Dutch election highlights is that there is a deep seated disillusionment with the capacity of governments to create a fair and equitable society.

The rest of the world including Europe is following the US where its every man for themselves, dog eat dog, the best man wins, winner take all.

The rest are mere human crap

Ahhh, Foxy, you keep telling yourself that story.
I agree everything you said is true.
It is true in France, well in some places anyway.
Unfortunately when you look a bit closer the picture changes.
In the Ghettoes in Paris, I am sure there are families being your ideal
but all around them there are tribal groups ready to attack the police
ambulance drivers and firemen if they dare enter sharia areas.

Ambulance drivers in body armour ?

And those nice moslem families look out through their curtains, while
their teenage son is out throwing stones at firemen or perhaps molitov cocktails at the police.

A busload of Korean tourists were attacked and robbed. Now the Korean
government is giving warnings to their tourists.
There has been a significant fall off in tourism in France.

That is the reality Foxy and it is very little different in Sweden.

Foxy, "They come from different countries, have different cultures, speak different languages"

And that's why Trump wanted to stop immigration from *certain* countries, not ALL Muslim countries.

Some are more problematic than others, and this is also judged by people's actions. These countries were *known* for their fostering of extremists.

@Shockadelic

These countries were *known* for their fostering of extremists.

Really? In that case why isn't Saudi Arabia on the list? If you look at the pedigree of the various terrorist cells around the world they have all been fostered by the conservative muslim sect that has kept the Saudi Family on the throne.

Muslim extremism is being used by the USA as a smokescreen for a far bigger geo-political game it is playing.

The Muslim countries not included in Trump's ban list were the ones he has business ties with.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/donald-trumps-muslim-ban-excludes-countries-in-which-he-has-business-ties-20170128-gu0ptl.html

If extremist Australians were traveling the world bombing embassies, hijacking planes, hacking passers-by to death in the street, would it not be "reasonable" for countries to ban immigration from Australia?

Of course, *all* Australians aren't involved, and *most* would condemn them. But these troublemakers are identifiably "Australian" and this identity is inherent to their agenda (whatever that is).

I'm sure many would want to stop any further Australian migration, at least until the extremism appeared to die off.

The problem with Muslim extremism is that it will not die off, even after all Western powers stop interfering with the Middle East.

The animosity is "holy" versus "unholy" and will remain so *forever*.

Baygon, the reason Saudi is not on the list is probably because they
do not allow plots to be generated there.
They just fund them in other countries.
If they allowed them locally they could not be sure that the plot was
not in fact aimed at Saudi Arabia itself.

Sheesh! You guys will engage in all sorts of waffle and mental gymnastics to avoid acknowledging the fact that your hero, Trump, is insincere enough about his supposed concern for American lives and putting a stop to Islamic terrorism that he’ll let his business interests get in the way of implementing his Muslim ban in any way that could be considered effective.

Occam’s razor, people. Occam’s razor.

Trump doesn't give a stuff about putting an end to Islamic terrorism. Heck, the slime would bloody well fund it himself if he thought there was a buck in it for him and he knew he could get away with it.

Trump is in it for Trump, and no one else. That much should have been obvious a long, long time ago. This is a guy who suffers from a classic case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder and advertises the fact to the world every time he has a Twitter meltdown.

11.75 million barrels per day is not a "personal" interest.

That, it's not, Shockadelic. That, it's not.

<<11.75 million barrels per day is not a "personal" interest.>>

But eight hotel-related companies are.

In fact, the map showing which countries were on the ban list and which were not, does not appear to coincide in any way with the amount of oil purchased by the US from those countries.

http://goo.gl/CYUewR

I think you're making these excuses up as you go.