One year ago, after winning the Dutch elections while forfeiting his right to be Prime Minister in order to get a coalition government formed, populist ‘far-right’ politician Geert Wilders thought all the ducks were in line to begin a shift away from what he felt were many of the ruininous European Union policies, particularly their immigration diktats.
In July of 2024, a Dutch government including Wilders’ Freedom Party (PVV) was sworn in, and hopes were high all over Europe that a retreat from progressive leadership was beginning.
The Netherlands’ new cabinet was sworn in Tuesday, making it the first time that Geert Wilders’ far-right party became a part of the Dutch government.
The new government led by Wilders’s Freedom Party wants to significantly reduce migration, marking the most hard-right shift for the country in decades. The cabinet aims to invoke emergency legislation to limit the inflow of migrants and seek an opt-out from the European Union’s migration policy.
The Netherlands’ new cabinet takes office as migration tops voters’ concerns in Europe. Nationalist and far-right parties have moved into positions of power throughout the EU. Marine Le Pen’s National Rally and its allies dominated the first round of voting in France on Sunday.
We all know what happened in France to their populist candidates in the second round of voting and then to their ‘revolutionary’ leader. In Germany, much the same machinations cut the legs out from under their hard-right-wing’s ascendency, even as that party became the second most popular in the country, not only opinion-wise but in votes cast.
Wilders has spent the past year railing against the sclerotic nature of producing the change they’d promised voters, although the coalition did score one notable rebuff to the Brussels Brahmins.
They told Bond villainess Ursula Von der Leyen she’d have to look elsewhere for debtors to carry the load for her European defense fund – the Dutch wanted no part of it.
The Netherlands’ parliament on Tuesday narrowly voted against a multibillion-euro European Union defense plan presented by Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof last week.
The motion was introduced by the right-wing populist JA21 party, also known as the Conservative Liberals.
It was supported by three of the four coalition parties. The motion passed in a 73-71 vote, with the opposition Socialists (SP) also voting in favor.
Though the motion is not legally binding, it raises uncertainty about how the government will proceed.
In the end, though, it all came back to immigration and the disintegrating Dutch standard of living.
Wilders blew up the Dutch government over it this morning by withdrawing his five cabinet ministers.
🚨BREAKING: The Dutch Government collapses after Geert Wilders withdraws over refusal to compromise on the current migration policy
Wilders puts Netherlands first. 🇳🇱 pic.twitter.com/qtisZVyqge
— Inevitable West (@Inevitablewest) June 3, 2025
Wilders explained it clearly afterwards.
🇳🇱🗣️ “I signed up for the strictest asylum policy ever, not the downfall of the Netherlands.”@GeertWildersPVV speaks out after withdrawing his ministers from the Dutch coalition government. pic.twitter.com/ZPZvnkPcoX
— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) June 3, 2025
The other parties immediately accused Wilders of ‘brinksmanship,’ and sniffed that the immigration issue had been addressed during the negotiations to form the government last year.
Interestingly enough, that very coalition, which was only possible thanks to the victory of Wilders’ party, gave the others the latitude to basically ice the PVV out of most decisions. So, in effect, nothing changed, and none of the ‘hard right’ PVV’s priorities or campaign promises have been acted on. There was a cordon sanitaire within the coalition itself.
That sounds very familiar, no?
…Political analyst Wilco Boom told public broadcaster NOS: “It appeared that the three other coalition parties agreed not wanting to bend for Wilders.
“Geert Wilders had an attitude of ‘do as I say’ and apparently they were now fed up with that,” he said.
Since the conception of the coalition on the back of the PVV’s major electoral win, though, the other parties went out of their way to “contain” the party and “protect the rule of law”. That meant most of its proposals were swept aside.
As a result, the coalition has appeared to lack dynamism and has been marked by tensions and infighting.
Pieter Omtzigt, the leader of the NSC, even decided to quit politics, saying he was suffering burn out and was unable to deal with the pressure.
Snap elections are not out of the question if the remaining parties can’t form a new coalition, and even with the populist fervor in Europe at the moment, it doesn’t necessarily guarantee Wilders an advantage to have them called.
…Many observers, however, will see Wilders’ decision not as reckless but as principled. He entered negotiations with a clear promise to enforce the strictest asylum policy in Dutch history — a key factor in his PVV’s victory last November. With no guarantee of support from his coalition partners, continuing in the current arrangement risked diluting that agenda beyond recognition.
Whether Wilders’ move will ultimately hurt his political fortunes remains uncertain. The PVV remains level in national polls with both the VVD and the left-wing GL/PvdA on around 18 percent each. If fresh elections are called, the political arithmetic may shift decisively — and not in Wilders’ favor. Alternative coalition formations without the PVV may now appear more attractive to centrist and left-leaning parties, raising the prospect that Wilders could once again be sidelined despite topping the polls.
There was a piece I read yesterday that absolutely excoriates the Netherlands. It is a breathtaking indictment of what the country has let itself become and should chill the heart of every American watching campuses and city streets in this country as they ring with ‘Free, Free Palestine’ death chants.
I Accuse: The Collapse of Moral Integrity in the Netherlands
On May 13, 2025, upon arriving to teach at my university, I was confronted by demonstrators aggressively chanting slogans such as: “Say it loud, say it clear, we don’t want no Zionists here,” and even more threateningly, “With our blood, with our soul, we will redeem you, Gaza.”
As I attempted to document this explicit hostility by filming it with my phone, senior university administrators and security officials intervened — not to protect me, but to publicly pressure me into deleting my recordings. They falsely insisted I had no legal right to document this open intimidation toward Jews and Zionists. When I refused, they demanded that I physically leave — not for my safety, but explicitly because demonstrators refused to pass by me, unwilling even to tolerate my presence. Again, I refused, unwilling to legitimize antisemitic exclusion. I am a human being, it is my workplace, I have the right to exist.
…When I announced my intention to formally report this intimidation, campus security — on whom I depend for protection due to ongoing threats — informed me in that case that I would stand entirely alone against the institutional establishment. With a nauseating feeling of fear in my stomach and my blood sugar rising to extreme highs — I am diabetic — I managed to say quietly, without any sense of bravery: “So be it.”
I stood alone, symbolic of the isolation imposed upon Jewish students and faculty nationwide. Today, I require a security escort simply to reach my classroom safely.
How did it come to this? It began subtly, with silence and hesitation in the face of rising hostility toward Jews. Institutional failure to challenge antisemitic rhetoric disguised as political critique allowed it to flourish unchecked. Academic colleagues, driven by fear, ideology, or convenience, chose complicity over courage. Municipal and national authorities selectively demonized Israel, legitimizing antisemitic discourse. Ultimately, it solidified through media, cultural institutions, and even Holocaust and genocide scholars abdicating moral responsibility, lending legitimacy to distorted accusations against Jews and Israel — with devastating results…
A Jewish newspaper in Amsterdam is now worried about subscribers receiving their magazine. Why?
‘The postal carriers, many of whom are Muslim.’
…Recently, however, NIW began concealing its vaunted covers. Shortly after the surge of antisemitism that followed Oct. 7, 2023, the weekly began reaching subscribers sandwiched between blank sheets of paper, for security reasons.
Likely the only Dutch publication receiving this treatment, the NIW’s concealment encapsulates the reality of its intended readership: Members of a proud and prosperous minority that is gradually being stripped of its voice and confidence by the resurgence of antisemitism after the Holocaust.
…“I’ve always opposed this move whenever it came up in internal discussions because it’s symbolic: We’re proud Dutch Jews and we don’t want to hide,” Esther Voet, the paper’s longtime editor-in-chief, told JNS in a recent interview in her canal-side home in Amsterdam. But after Oct. 7, “readers were afraid. They told us: ‘I don’t want my neighbors to know that I’m Jewish at this time’,” she added.
Some subscribers to the NIW worried not only about their neighbors, but also the postal carriers, many of whom are Muslim.
In a city becoming infamous for its Jew hunting.
Wilders wanted asylum centers closed. So-called coalition partners? Not so much.
…”The gloves are off,” Wilders said during a press conference to announce the plan, adding that his party would withdraw from the cabinet if migration policy was not toughened up.
The proposal called for a complete halt to asylum, as well as a temporary stop to family reunions for asylum seekers who have been granted refugee status, and the return of all Syrians who have applied for asylum or are in the Netherlands on temporary visas.
Wilders, who has long campaigned against immigration, also wanted to close asylum centres.
Opposition parties and activists have called for new asylum centres to be opened to prevent overcrowding and inhumane conditions for asylum seekers who need shelter.
They wanted more humane conditions for asylum seekers and don’t seem too concerned about their fellow Dutch.
