Defaming The Dead: The Posthumous Mugging of Dutch Activist Pim Fortuyn...

May 11, 2002: Poor Pim Fortuyn, the recently assassinated Dutch activist\politician. Not only did he suffer the misfortune of being cut down in the prime of his life by an environmentalist nutcase's bullets, but now he's also undergoing the posthumous indignity of being demonized in death even more than he was in life.

In the many instant news analyses that have popped up since his political assassination, Mr. Fortuyn has been described variously as a "racist", "far right-wing extremist" and "hard right winger". In most cases, this dynamic young activist has also been characterized as the Dutch equivalent of France's fossilized "far-right" Vichy apologist, Jean-Marie Le Pen.

On the contrary, on pretty well every subject except immigration, Mr. Fortuyn was closer to a progressive libertarian in his politics than a racist reactionary of the likes of Monsieur Le Pen. Not only was Pim Fortuyn a gay activist, but -- rightly or wrongly -- he championed the permissive, open, libertine culture that dominates life in the Netherlands today.

Mr. Fortuyn's real sin was that he dared to question the liberal-left status-quo in Europe. For example, he railed against the ever-increasing restrictions on Dutch life and commerce imposed by the imperious (and unelected) European Union bureaucrats in Brussels. He campaigned for less taxes, more government accountability to voters, and fewer decisions made behind closed doors by an isolated, self-appointed political elite (as is now the accepted way of exercising power in Europe and Canada).

Most important, of course, Pim Fortuyn spoke out against unrestricted and unregulated immigration, and supported more vigorous attempts to assimilate recent immigrants into the prevailing Dutch culture.

However, Mr. Fortuyn opened himself up to the inevitable "racist" and 'extremist" labels, quickly applied to him by the media, when he openly expressed his disgust with the insular, homophobic and misogynist views of the Muslim immigrant community -- recent immigrants who comprise the majority of the Netherlands' landed immigrant population. The ultra-liberal Mr. Fortuyn was anything but a racist (he never made a secret of the multicultural backgrounds of his many male lovers). But he dared break the European establishment's restrictive "speech code" regarding "minorities", and told it like is regarding an emerging social problem that ultimately threatens the very existence of the Dutch democracy (namely the future threat posed by an ever-growing and increasingly more militant Muslim population that has no core identification with Dutch democratic values and prefers instead to hijack those very values in the service of ultimately imposing a restrictive Taliban-style Muslim theocracy on the country).

For his troubles, Pim Fortuyn suffered the usual punishment favored by today's liberal-left oligarchies in Europe and Canada -- the equivalent of a secular excommunication or modern-day shunning. Mr. Fortuyn, in both life and death, was labelled a "racist", an "extremist" and a "hard right-winger" -- labels that, in contemporary liberal society everywhere, prescriptively imply that the stigmatized person is so unfair, irrational, self-serving and cruel as to be beyond the moral pale. Built into such judgmental labels is the ideologically-charged assumption that anyone espousing such views must be so twisted and pathological as to be some kind of subhuman monster -- the global left's ingenious method for Hitlerfying (and thus stigmatizing) any dissent against their prevailing orthodoxies.

Certainly, as Pim Fortuyn found out, the unspoken intention of such prescriptive labels is to de-legitimize selected dissenters in the eyes of their peers, and to strip away any and all credibility from the ideas or opinions expressed by such individuals, by wrongfully identifying them with cataclysmic outpourings of hate and wrongdoing in the past. The Orwellian corruption of language is used to transform authentic dissidents into dangerous social reprobates so morally bankrupt they're not eveb worthy of being given a hearing.

And according to the unspoken strictures of this perjorative status degradation operation, what should happen if a politically-incorrect dissident should find a venue for his or her ideas? Then the individual should be literally shouted down because of the sheer "horribleness" of his or her "extremist" viewpoints.

Unfortunately, as the Dutch political elite discovered to their chagrin, the one safe venue left to such dissidents as Pim Fortuyn is the democatic electoral arena -- a political battleground which the crafty and charismatic Mr. Fortuyn looked capable of sufficiently mastering to win a seat at the tables of power in the Netherlands.

Of course, six bullets quickly put an end to that scenario. And the status quo has at least temporarily been restored.

In the meantime, the international journalistic cabal continues to put the symbolic boot to Pim Fortuyn's memory, attempting to ensure that both his reputation and his dissenting ideas are tainted forever.

Unfortunately for the international media elite, I suspect that they haven't heard the last of his populist rhertoric. Because until the arrogant oligarchs exercising power in Amsterdam, Paris, Brussel, Bonn, Washington and Ottawa find a way to completely eliminate elections, the teeming masses whom they hold in such contempt will still have the last word, at the ballot box. And despite all the manipulative mud-slinging and propagandizing by the international media elites, the majoritarian center that embraced and empowered the likes of Ronald Reagan and Maragaret Thatcher appears ready to rise again.

In spite of all the talk about this being the new century of trans-national world bodies of international justice like the United Nations, the World Court in the Hague and the new International Court of Justice, representative democracy at the local level may yet triumph again in the West. And despite all the prevailing rhetorical gibberish about post-colonial social, economic and environmental justice, the ghosts of Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill may soon be resurrected and take their rightful place atop the echelon of freedom's heroes, as the West's electorates once again exercise their will and toss out their leftist masters.

…he openly expressed his disgust with the insular, homophobic and misogynist views of the Muslim immigrant community .

When you just step back and take a look at WHY Mr. Fortuyn wanted to end immigration, it was because he feared the somewhat conservative social values of the muslime immigrants would erode the very liberal society that he enjoyed.

Once again, the liberal media fails to get an accurate picture of the entire story. Resort to name calling and smearing as the first duty of business…

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

You wanna talk defaming? Look at this piece from Mark Steel, in which Mr Fortuyn is repeatedly likened to Hitler. This is the most offensive thing from the UK press (the Independent) that I've ever read, and it's the only memorial editorial I've ever read the death of a human being used for (attempted) humor. The author is gloating over a death, and ridiculing the murdered man.

When you just step back and take a look at WHY Mr. Fortuyn wanted to end immigration, it was because he feared the somewhat conservative social values of the muslime immigrants would erode the very liberal society that he enjoyed.

I think that is true. However it begs the question of why the liberals defend the Muslim horde when the Muslim's clear aim is to destroy the Liberal West. The liberals have far more to fear from Islam.

Unless they are so disconnected in their thinking that they don't see the threat.

It seems to me that Liberals, most of all, (in a self serving sense)should be doing all they can to thwart the Islamic invasions of the West.

Unless they are so disconnected in their thinking that they don't see the threat.

I think you’ve hit the crux of this conundrum. While you are absolutely right that they stand to loose the most from the muslim invasion, their counter intuitive thought tendencies, disavowal of logic, fact, and rationality make them blind to the threat.

This is just another of the many things that convinces me that liberalism is a form of mental illness.

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

I'm sure that Fortuyn's opposition to muslim immigration was partly based on their insane insistence on killing people they consider immoral, like him and his fellow homosexuals, but that wasn't the whole reason. Apparently, he opposed immigration because of the concurrent loss of national identity it brings when longstanding and comparatively insular societies like those of the small european countries are inundated with third world hordes.

The EU's aim in promoting such widespread immigration into Europe from Asia seems aimed at destroying national identity in longstanding nations of Europe. The communists seem to think that the destabilizig influence of the islamic cultists will acconmplish their purpose of tearing down national identities and destroying nationalism in Europe. They probably plan to exterminate the moslems once their utility is at an end.

That may be what Fortuyn saw in the EU's immigration plan, but I haven't read that he openly said so. He wasn't a conservative by our standards for sure. In fact he seems to have been simply another Marxist who fell out of favor with his fellow european commies because he didn't like their overall plan. His murder definitely illustrates the norm in communist methodology in politics: kill the opposition or dissidents. That has always been accepted political practice among those heathens.

However it begs the question of why the liberals defend the Muslim horde when the Muslim's clear aim is to destroy the Liberal West.

Liberals don't see the West as liberal. They see it as a traditional judeo-christian fabric that needs to be destroyed by whatever means. Whatever helps deconstruct the system is OK by them.

I agree they do not appear to have thought much about what happens afterwards. Which either reflects on their intelligence or the level of their fanaticism.

That is true. But the kind of Muslim culture Fortuyn criticized does *not* value freedom of any kind. I would rather live in a free society where people can live as extreme conservatives *or* as libertines like Fortuyn *if they wish,* rather than a society under Islamic law - which is what the Muslim immigrants of the more radical stripe *want to* and *will* impose on Europe (and the US!) if given half a chance.

Under the first circumstance, people are free to be good. Under the second, it's pure force and ultimately murder. I don't champion libertinism by any means, but Fortuyn was right when he pointed out the dangers of sha'riah Islam. His own personal life doesn't take away from the truth of what he said.

Don’t misunderstand, although I pointed out that Fortyun was actually a liberal (and even cursory familiarity with my frequent rants would easily lead one to believe I’d stand against him), I whole-heartedly support the gentleman on this issue.

While the idea of my neighbor being permitted to smoke pot and have gay sex parties in his back yard makes my blood run cold, I’d take it any day over having a neighbor who was actively trying to coerce me into islam or kill me.

BTW- GREAT screen name and welcome!

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

Well, for one it’s against the law.

Secondly, if he was smoking pot and having gay sex parties in his back yard (or just smoking pot) I’d likely be forced to have some conversations explaining this type of behavior to my children. It’s something I’ll obviously do, but when I feel it’s the right time, not when my neighbor decides to get high in his backyard.

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

I don’t approve of people smoking pot anywhere, because it’s illegal and enriches people who disregard our laws, but I’d say my main problem lies with doing it in his back yard where the activity is essentially on display for anyone to see.

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

Thanks for the welcome!

I didn't mean to get testy. It's been a week or so and this horrific murder has really gotten to me. I guess it's because I can see the wacko leftists once again linking up with the jihadists (as they did in the bad old Baader-Meinhof days.)

I guess all the comments like "How can a conservative Christian support someone like Fortuyn" gets me down a bit too. It's like the nattering that went on after 9/11, when it became clear that one of the major fighters on board the PA aircraft was a gay man named Mark Bingham. All I could think of was, "We're on the SAME side, people!"

I consider myself to have "conservative social values" by which I mostly emphasize limited government and strong families and rugged individuals with common ideals.

My understanding of what the terrorists want is a theocratic state with all obeying the edicts of Mohammed. I don't see how that's conservative.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.