The fact that Wilders again crossed a moral line doesn’t mean politicians should cross a democratic line, says D66 leader Alexander Pechtold.

Ever since the disgusting events at the PVV election night meeting last week, reactions revolve around one question: how to handle Wilders. Suggestions vary. Ignore him, say some. Don’t table any motions with him, say others. Isolate him.

The political conscience of the nation has finally been prodded into action. The collective indignation and the worry about Wilders’ comments are justified. But these answers to Wilders divisive politics are not the solution.

Geert Wilders and other PVV members have been making abject comments about Muslims and Moroccans for over seven years now. The tsunami of islamisation, the call to kneecap young Moroccan tearaways, the headrag tax, the deportation of millions of troublesome Muslims from Europe. Parliament even held a debate on the ‘Moroccan problem’, at the request of the PVV. Speaker for the PVV was Joram van Klaveren.

Search

I have invariably taken Wilders up on his comments. People tell me: ‘Don’t, it will only make him look more important than he is.’ I admit that it’s a continuing search for the right tone, the right arguments, the right message. But I have to confront him with the fact that he is sidelining people, that he has no solutions and that he is working with European parties, such as the Front National and Vlaams Belang, which preach anti-semitism and homophobia.

I have always rejected the idea of a coalition between D66 and PVV, both on a national and a local level, because of the fundamental differences in outlook on people and the world, essential values and policies. But sometimes we support motions tabled by the PVV in parliament. For instance, on limiting the use of chauffeur-driven cars by tax officials or on maintaining pertinent courses in vocational education. We will continue to do this, if only to avoid having to vote against what we stand for. That would be impossible to explain.

So why not isolate Wilders?

Wilders’ comments are a logical follow-up to what he has been saying for the past seven years. His divisive policy has been based on disqualifying certain population groups for years. It is the policy of fear. The deliberate rousing of the audience brought in a new element, however. It led to a disgusting scene and, yes, another line had been crossed. But the fact that Wilders is again crossing a moral line doesn’t mean other politicians should do the same.

If we were to reject any and every motion tabled by the PVV we would take away the party’s democratic rights. No matter how repugnant their ideas, PVV MPs are chosen representatives of the people. A vote for the PVV is worth as much as one for Labour, the CDA or D66.

Lazy power politics

Treating PVV parliamentarians as political outcasts is not a solution. Vicitimisation is exactly what Wilders is after. It would be lazy power politics to isolate him, and unseemly in a democracy in which minorities also have a voice. A democracy shows itself to be strong by identifying and opposing actions which cross the line of democracy and the state of law within the democratic framework. As one of 150 representatives I have the privilege to oppose Wilders in a democratic debate. The question of whether or not Wilders has crossed a legal line is for the judge to answer.

There’s another reason why I wouldn’t want to isolate Wilders. Isolating Wilders means isolating his voters. And I want to have a dialogue with these people, many of whom are genuinely engaged in society. I don’t want to lower myself to Wilders’ level and use his language or idiotic comparisons but to exchange convictions and show them, using facts, that Wilders’ rabble-rousing is not the answer to the problems they are experiencing.

‘Thanks to my vote you are now engaging in a discussion with me. That is democracy,’ PVV voter Derk Boswijk once told me. Boswijk was one of the PVV voters I spoke to for my book ‘Henk, Ingrid and Alexander’. He was right.

We must keep the dialogue going. We have to even out the differences in society, do away with polarisation. That is the task of politicians and my answer to Wilders’ policy of divisiveness.

Alexander Pechtold is leader of the D66 parliamentary party. This column was first published in the Volkskrant.