The triumph of Geert Wilders at the Dutch polls is one of the biggest political upsets in European politics and, just like Brexit, will send reverberations across the continent. But in the Dutch city of Rotterdam, where the far-right Party for Freedom (PVV) is now the biggest political grouping, the earthquake was met with more of a shrug than a gasp.
“While he said ‘enough is enough’ he is right: enough is enough,” said Jeannette, 34, receiving a delivery of bags of potatoes for the chip shop where she works. “We pay too much tax, too much for healthcare, too much for rent. We can’t take it any more.”
Like millions of other Dutch voters on Wednesday, Jeanette voted for Wilders, largely, she says, out of anger that she and her family face a struggle to make ends meet. Reeling off a litany of monthly costs she must pay out of her €2,422 (£2,106) a month net salary, she appeared to have been drawn to his positioning as a champion of the ordinary person struggling amid the cost of living crisis.
“People from the outside think we are OK here in the Netherlands. We are wealthy compared to Belgium or Turkey, that is true. They don’t understand why people voted for Wilders but if you are here you know why,” she said.
Jeanette said she did not agree with all Wilders’ past anti-Islam declarations, including a call for fewer Moroccans in the country and a ban on the hijab – “If people want to wear that I understand.” But amid her socioeconomic complaints there is a familiar whiff of resentment.
“We are a wealthy country, but how do we in Holland have to pay that much and yet they say to migrants: ‘Come on in, have what you like, we will give you everything’?” she asked.
Jamie, 23, a waitress at the Grand Cafe in The Hague, just half an hour from the port, said only one of her circle of seven close friends had not voted for Wilders’ PVV, including one who had previously voted for the outgoing prime minister, Mark Rutte’s party.
“He [Wilders] is a bit harsh in what he says, but he is a straight-talker and says it like it is. It is really a big change. Mark Rutte has been in for as long as I can remember,” she said.
Like Jeanette, she was drawn to Wilders for what he has said about housing and a promise of free transport for elderly people. But she also supported his deeply controversial policy on migration. On Wednesday the PVV leader vowed: “The Netherlands will be returned to the Dutch, the asylum tsunami and migration will be curbed.”
“I’m not against migrants,” said Jamie. “They have to come through Belgium and Germany to get here, but they come here, they don’t stay in the two neighbouring countries because we are an open country, it’s better here.” She claimed this was not fair.
Matthijs Rooduijn, associate professor of political science at Amsterdam University, says such views are common among Wilders voters. “When you look at the electorate of the PVV in general, it consists of people who experience more difficulties to get by. They are more lonely. They feel that they are being neglected. They have tough lives basically, economically but also culturally,” he said.
“The PVV, of course, is not a party that is really leftwing when it comes to socioeconomic politics, but it is a party that is also when it comes to socioeconomics is not really rightwing … Wilders presents himself as there for the poor: it’s also what people sometimes call welfare chauvinism. So he argues that the people who have difficulties should be helped, but that is only true for what he calls ‘Henk and Ingrid’, the Dutch names that he calls his voters. And that’s not ‘Mohammed and Fatima’, so to speak. So it is welfare, but only for, according to him, our people.”
after newsletter promotion
Such opinions fill Esperansa, a 20-year-old film and literature student, with fear. Esperansa voted for the Frans Timmermans-led GroenLinks-PvdA alliance.
“I’m not happy,” she said. “I never liked Wilders and his policies because he is an extreme-right politician. Some of his policies are disgusting: his Islamophobia, his ideas to forbid people from wearing the hijab or eating halal meat, or to close the mosques.”
Referring to Wilders’ decision to soften some of his rhetoric during the campaign, she added: “I think it’s very stupid that a lot of people voted for him but Wilders presented himself as milder than extreme.”
For Franklin, a 71-year-old from Aruba, the result was not surprising if, like him, you had followed all the debates. “It is to be expected. Holland has changed a lot over the years and the big topics of discussion in the debates were migration, housing, the cost of living for all candidates,” he said.
“[Wilders] is a very experienced politician and knows how to censor himself. He advanced his arguments in a very mild manner. Often opponents called him a wolf in sheep’s clothing but people voted for him. The far right are growing everywhere – look at Brazil, Argentina, the US, Hungary.”
Additional reporting by Senay Boztas