Abstract
This chapter takes stock of Tolerance: Experiments with Freedom in the Netherlands. According to pessimists the end of tolerance is imminent throughout the Western world. Indeed, populist politicians achieve great electoral successes with destructive xenophobic and isolationist political programs. Present-day Dutch intolerance is a two-headed monster: large immigrant communities endorse intolerant traditions; many natives react with increasing intolerance to immigrants. Both tendencies reinforce each other, which raises the paradox of tolerance. According to Rawls, justice requires the tolerant to tolerate the intolerant ‘as long as liberty itself and their own freedom is not in danger’. The decisive question is, then, whether toleration is an endangered institution.
Optimists point out that even neo-conservatives and nationalists endorse the values of the Enlightenment, including gay marriage. Policies on euthanasia and drugs are tending to become more liberal. In short, the basic liberal achievements of the 1960s remain uncontested. This also holds true for the institutions of the liberal state. Present-day populists do not call for violent subversion of the democratic order. Despite all this, however, the rise of nationalist intolerance in liberal countries, the threat of Islamist terrorism, and the assertive nationalist attitude of the dictatorial regimes of China and Russia, make many worry about the world in which their children will have to live. In these circumstances it is difficult to make an educated guess about the future of tolerance. The major lesson we can learn from history is that we should continue to fight for freedom.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Also see Chap. 6.14 on euthanasia. Unlike Feinberg, Popper conceives these paradoxes as barriers to the imposition of any restrictions on freedom, democratic majority rule, or tolerance: such restrictions seem to be incoherent, unless these concepts are embedded in a wider political theory. In contrast, Feinberg sees the paradox of freedom as a barrier to complete alienation of one’s freedom: in his view, the latter can nonetheless be coherent if one makes some conceptual distinctions within Mill’s concept of freedom.
- 2.
Also see The Pessimist’s Guide to 2017 (Fraher et al. 2016), setting out the worst scenario for the coming year: ‘Legitimized by Trump’s victory, voters across Europe, starting with the Netherlands, usher in populist leaders who want to tighten borders, tear up free-trade agreements and even break away from the euro and the EU itself’.
- 3.
The percentage of Dutch citizens who agree with the proposition that ‘homosexuality is normal’ and who support gay marriage exceeds that in other countries (cf. Gerhards 2010). The White Dutch majority holds rather uniform moral views (Achterberg 2006, p. 55). In this context, expressions of homophobia have increasingly been represented as ‘alien’ to secular, Dutch ‘traditions of tolerance’ (Mepschen et al. 2010, p. 967).
- 4.
Indeed, in its survey Social state of the Netherlands 2017, the Netherlands Institute for Social Research states: ‘No major shifts have taken place since 1990 in views on moral issues, freedom of expression, the environment, the multicultural society and the European Union; there is no evidence of the frequently cited ‘lurch to the right’. There have of course been some changes: support for abortion and gay marriage has increased, with 74% of Dutch citizens feeling that women should be entitled to an abortion if they so choose, for example, compared with 60% in 1992. Gay marriage is today accepted by 94% of the population, and the acceptance of euthanasia remains as high as ever at 92%’ (Bijl et al. 2017, p. 387).
- 5.
See for instance Brennan (2016).
- 6.
This positive view was supported by the facts. According to the survey Social state of the Netherlands 2017, the quality of life of the Dutch had improved considerably over the past 25 years. Since 1994, gross domestic product had grown by 68%. Average life expectancy, educational attainment, employment participation and income had risen significantly; the crime rate had decreased. A large majority of 84% reported that they had a happy or very happy life. Generally, equality between social groups had increased. However, a combination of poorer quality of life and being unhappy was concentrated in a 5% group of ‘deprived’ people lacking ‘modern skills’. Moreover: ‘The world is changing, and for many people this creates feelings of uncertainty’ (Bijl et al. 2017, p. 399).
- 7.
Immigration of refugees was the major concern. On the one hand, 63% recognized a moral duty to admit people who are fleeing war and persecution (15% did not). On the other hand, 63% assumed that many asylum seekers are economic migrants; 55% found the number of immigrants too high, worrying about costs and illiberal cultural traditions; 56% wanted a stop on immigration.
- 8.
Contrary to what the aggressive tone of the new social media suggests, toleration towards newcomers has increased since 1994 (despite a population growth of 2 million persons, most of whom have an immigrant background): ‘In 1994, 49% felt that there were too many people living in the Netherlands with a non-Dutch nationality; in 2017 the figure is 31%’ (Bijl et al. 2017, p. 387).
- 9.
See Chap. 8.
References
Achterberg P (2006) Considering cultural conflict. Class politics and cultural politics in western societies. Shaker, Maastricht
Bartlett J, Birdwell J, Lange S de (2012) Populism in Europe: Netherlands. Demos, London
Bijl R, Boelhouwer J, Wennekers A (2017) De sociale staat van Nederland 2017. Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau (Netherlands Institute for Social Research), Den Haag
Brennan J (2016) Against democracy. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Buruma I (2006) Murder in Amsterdam: the death of Theo Van Gogh and the limits of tolerance. Penguin Press, New York
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (2015) Concluding observations on the nineteenth to twenty-first periodic reports of the Netherlands, 27 August 2015
Fraher J, Krause-Jackson F, Rojanasakul M (2016) The Pessimist’s Guide to 2017. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/pessimists-guide-to-2017/. Accessed 26 Oct 2017
Fukuyama F (2014) Political order and political decay: from the industrial revolution to the globalization of democracy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York
Gerhards J (2010) Non-discrimination towards homosexuality. The European union’s policy and citizens’ attitudes towards homosexuality in 27 European countries. Int Sociol 25(1):5–28
Israel JJ (2004) Bayle, Enlightenment, Toleration and Modern Western Society. https://bazaarmodel.net/phorum/read.php?1,1197. Accessed 26 Oct 2017
Maris CW (2007) Laïcité in the low countries? On headscarves in a neutral state. Jean Monnet Working Paper 14/07, New York
Maris CW, Bijnaar A (2011) De zaak van Sinterklaas. Zwarte Piet staat terecht. Caribisch Juristenblad 2015(3):185–197
Mepschen P, Duyvendak JW, Tonkens EH (2010) Sexual politics, orientalism and multicultural citizenship in the Netherlands. Sociology 44(5):962–979
Popper K (1969) The open society and its enemies, vol 1, the spell of Plato. Routledge, London
Putters K (2016) Tijd voor een nieuw social contract. NRC O&D6, July 9
Ridder J den et al (2016) Democratie dichterbij: Lokaal Kiezersonderzoek 2016. https://kennisopenbaarbestuur.nl/media/254112/democratie-dichterbij-lokaal-kiezersonderzoek-2016.pdf. Accessed 24 May 2018
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Maris, C. (2018). Coda: The End of Tolerance?. In: Tolerance : Experiments with Freedom in the Netherlands. Law and Philosophy Library, vol 124. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89346-4_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89346-4_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-89344-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-89346-4
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)