A Systemic Meltdown? Demographic Change and Progressive Political Strategy in the Netherlands

8/7/2019 A Systemic Meltdown? Demographic Change and Progressive Political Strategy in the Netherlands

1/33

A Systemic Meltdown?Demographic Change and Progressive Political Strategy in the

Netherlands

Hans Anker, Ren Cuperus & Pim Paulusma April 2011


2/33

Te Demographic Change and Progressive Poliical Sraegy series o papers is a join projec organized

under he auspices o he Global Progress and Progressive Sudies programs and he Cener or American

Progress. Te research projec was launched ollowing he inaugural Global Progress conerence held in

Ocober 2009 in Madrid, Spain.

Te preparaory paper or ha conerence, Te European Paradox, sough o analyze why he orunes o

European progressive paries had declined ollowing he previous auumns sudden nancial collapse and

he global economic recession ha ensued. Te saring premise was ha progressives should, in principle,

have had wo srenghs going or hem:

Modernizing rends were shiing he demographic errain in heir poliical avor. Te inellecual and policy bankrupcy o conservaism, which had now proven isel devoid o creaive

ideas o how o shape he global economic sysem or he common good.

Despie hese laen advanages, we surmised ha progressives in Europe were sruggling or hree pri-

mary reasons. Firs, i was increasingly hard o diereniae hemselves rom conservaive opponens who

seemed o be wholehearedly adoping social democraic policies and language in response o he eco-

nomic crisis. Second, he nominally progressive majoriy wihin heir elecorae was being spli beween

compeing progressive movemens. Tird, heir radiional working-class base was increasingly being

seduced by a poliics o ideniy raher han economic argumens.

In response, we argued ha i progressives could dene heir long-erm economic agenda more clearly

and hus diereniae hemselves rom conservaivesas well as esablish broader and more inclusive

elecoral coaliions, and organize more eecively among heir core consiuencies o convey heir mes-

sage, hen hey should be able o resolve his paradox.

Te research papers in his series each evaluae hese demographic and ideological rends in greaer

naional deail and presen ideas or how progressives migh shape a more eecive poliical sraegy.

We are graeul o he Friedrich-Eber-Siung or heir suppor o his projec.

Mat Browne, John Halpin, and Ruy eixeira
http://www.boell.org/downloads/Browne_Halpin_Teixeira_EuropeanParadox.pdfhttp://www.boell.org/downloads/Browne_Halpin_Teixeira_EuropeanParadox.pdf


3/33

1 Introduction and summary

5 Evolution of the Dutch party system

5 Patterns of electoral behavior: From census to real choice

7 Decline of the Volkspartei

9 The electoral position of progressive parties

12 Dutch society in flux

12 Social and cultural trends

14 Class

15 Education

16 Age

17 Gender and marital status

19 Ethnicity

19 Urban areas

20 Union membership

20 Religion

22 A new progressive coalition?

26 References

27 Appendix

28 Endnotes

29 About the authors

Contents


4/33

1 Center for American Progress | A Systemic Meltdown?

Introduction and summary

June 9, 2010. Elecion nigh. Is 9:00 p.m. Te polls close. Wihin seconds,

elevision screens all over he counry ligh up wih he bar chars o an exi

poll. Te resuls are asonishing. Te race beween he main paries on he righ

and he lebeween he liberal-conservaive Peoples Pary or Freedom

and Democracy o Mark Rute and he social-democraic Labour Pary o Job

Cohenhas urned ino a clianger. Boh paries are projeced o receive 31

seas, wih a small edge or he social democras. Te race will go down o he wire.

Poliically, he resuls o he exi poll can be summarized in wo words: sysemic

meldown. Te hree righ-wing parieshe Peoples Pary or Freedom and

Democracy, or VVD; he Chrisian Democraic Appeal Pary, or CDA; and he

Pary or Freedom, or PVVare projeced o be one sea shy o a majoriy in

parliamen. Te le-wing paries are a 68 seas, eigh seas shor o a majoriy.

Resurrecion o he so-called purple coaliioncomprised o he Labour Pary,

or PvdA; he cenris VVD; and progressive liberal Democras 66, which governed

he counry rom 1994 hrough 2002 under social-democraic Prime Miniser

Wim Kokalso ailed o reach a majoriy (72 seas, our seas shy o he magic 76).

Te only easible opions were an unprecedened Grand Coaliion o so-called

sysem paries CDA, VVD, and PvdA (82 seas) or a purple-plus coaliion

ormed by PvdA, VVD, D66, and he Greens (83 seas), neiher o which seemed

paricularly atracive. An alernaive opion was a cabine composed o so-called

wise men and women (zakenkabine), wih minisers wih weaker links o he

poliical paries in parliamen.

Jus a ew monhs beore he elecion, he very idea o becoming he larges pary

would have been unimaginable or boh PvdA and VVD. In he polls, he socialdemocras, led by Miniser o Finance Wouer Bos, had paid a huge elecoral

price or heir paricipaion in an unpopular and unloved coaliion governmen

wih he CDA and a small orhodox Proesan pary, he Chrisian Union, or

CU. Relaionships wihin he governmen were ense. Prime Miniser Jan Peer


5/33


Balkenendes job approval was very low. wo ou o hree voers el he counry

was headed in he wrong direcion. An overwhelming majoriy o voers el i was

ime or change. A is lowes poin in he polls, he PvdA held on o jus 13 seas,

a measly 8 percen o he voe. Compare ha wih he spring o 2006 when elec-

oral suppor or he pary reached is high-waer mark o 60 seas (40 percen)

aer successully urning he municipal elecions ino a reerendum on he embar-rassing prolieraion o ood banks.

Ten, on February 20, in he ace o municipal elecions in March, he unpopular

coaliion governmen collapsed over a plan o exend he Duch miliary mission

in he Aghan province o Uruzgan. Te PvdA minisers oered heir resignaion;

he remaining minisers sayed on o prepare early elecions or June 9. Tree

weeks aer he collapse o he cabine, Wouer Bos unexpecedly sepped down as

PvdA pary leader.

Ta very same day, Job Cohen, he popular mayor o Amserdam, announced hiscandidacy hrough a riveing speech drenched in social democraic values. Te

sudden move riggered a kind o Duch Obama eec (Yes we Cohen), propel-

ling he PvdA o 35 seas virually overnigh. Tese gains, however, would no

las. Unable o manage expecaions, he new pary leader los momenum during

he elecion campaign, due o personal misakes, awkward errors in he pary

manieso, and quesionable sraegic decisions. Te likable Cohen hus became

a modern-day Icarus, he Greek myhical gure who ew oo close o he sun and

had his wings burned.

For he VVD and is leader Rute, he 2010 parliamenary elecions represened

nohing less han a miraculous comeback. Rutes leadership had been severely

conesed by wo populis MPs who ulimaely le he VVD o sar heir own

movemens: Ria Verdonk wih he Proud o he Neherlands Pary, or ON, and

Geer Wilders wih his PVV. Verdonks advenure was shor-lived due o inernal

srie bu Wilders pary urned ou o be a successul enerprise, posing a huge

elecoral challenge o he VVD. Rute, hough, kep his cool; his excellen debae

perormances helped him a grea deal in ouperorming his rivals. Wih 38 seas

in he polls on he eve o he elecion, he VVD was poised o become he larges

pary or he very rs ime in Duch hisory.

I was no unil he morning aer Elecion Day, when he overseas voes had come

in and he dus had setled, ha i became clear ha he VVD, no he PvdA, had

become he larges pary wih 31 seas. Te PvdA ended he race wih 30 seas.


6/33


Tis mean he VVD had he iniiaive o orm a majoriy coaliion. In addiion

o he Grand Coaliion and purple-plus coaliion, he hree-pary righ-wing

coaliion also reached a one-sea majoriy. A long and difcul ormaion period

ulimaely produced a righ-wing minoriy coaliion governmen o he VVD and

CDA, led by Rute, and suppored in parliamen by he PVV.

Rute hus became he rs conservaive-liberal prime miniser in 93 years, aer

Pieer Cor van der Linden, whose minoriy governmen in 1913-1918 passed

universal surage and brokered he pacicaion, he landmark legislaion ha

ended he biter gh abou he unding o religious and public schools. Tis is

a sark reminder ha minoriy governmens can be very producive in erms o

new legislaion.

Bu which underlying orces led o his exraordinary elecion oucome? Why did

radiional Volkspareien (peoples paries) like he PvdA and CDA receive so litle

suppor? Will i remain so difcul o orm coaliions or was his an excepion?And mos imporanly, wha does all o his mean or he uure o progressives in

he Neherlands? Wha are he sraegies o could lead o a progressive comeback?

Over he las decades, weve winessed a someimes abrup ransormaion rom

a very sable pary sysem where group ideniy deermined voing oward a

uid pary sysem in which voers really sared o choose based on heir own

individual preerences. Tis has made i more and more difcul o orm a sable

coaliion governmen. A he same ime he dierences wihin he elecorae have

also become ercer, especially on he le. I seems ha radiional poliical paries

are unable o accommodae he preerences o he elecorae wihin he curren

poliical sysem. Te poliical landscape is racured.

o undersand where his siuaion is coming rom, i is imporan o undersand

he hisory o he Duch poliical sysem. Tereore, his paper will highligh he

major changes and developmens wihin boh he Duch poliical sysem and

Duch sociey, as i has been ransormed by demographic and srucural change.

We will ocus less on specic paries han on he dynamics beween righ-wing

paries and le-wing paries. Tis will no only shed ligh on he peculiar posi-

ion o progressives in he Neherlands, which, in spie o our oleran and liberalimage abroad, never obained a majoriy, bu will also give new insighs ino he

special dynamics beween le-wing paries.


7/33


Te aim is o nd ways o ge ou o he curren cul-de-sac. Which way should

he PvdA go in his divided poliical landscape? Should he pary make a clear-

cu choice in avor o he enlighened proessional middle classes as our mos

imporan consiuency, leaving he working class behind? Or should he choice

be wha has been labeled a social democracy o ear by hisorian ony Jud,

cenered around workers lack o economic securiy? Or are here sill chanceso ree ourselves, Houdini-like, rom our curren resricions and resore he

broad coaliion o working class and middle class, exible workers in he personal

services secor and proessionals in he new knowledge secors, and enlighened

enrepreneurs and unionized indusrial workers? Finally, i none o hese srae-

gies are deemed easible or desirable, anoher opion could be considered: he

ormaion o a progressive alliance uniing he ragmened le agains he hrea o

an increasingly aggressive and populis righ.


8/33


Evolution of the Dutch party system

Patterns of electoral behavior: From census to real choice

Tis unprecedened elecoral oucome in 2010, close o a meldown o he pos-

war pary sysem, did no come ou o he blue. Over he pas several decades, he

dynamics o he Duch poliical sysem have changed severelyrom a sable and

rigid sysem wih only a ew signican Volkspareien o a swirling arena wih a

high urnover rae o new paries in he new millennium. Bu wha are he causes

o hese changes? Are hey only caused by changes in sociey? Or do specic char-acerisics o he poliical sysem play an imporan role as well?

o answer hese quesions, we will ake a closer look a he developmens aer

he 1950s. Te Neherlands has a well-developed mulipary sysem. In he period

aer World War II, 7 o 14 dieren paries were ypically represened in he par-

liamen. Te relaively large number o paries is due o a sysem o proporional

represenaion wih a low elecoral hreshold (jus 0.67 percen o he popular

voe). None o he paries in parliamen has ever come close o reaching a majoriy

in parliamen, which means ha a coaliion governmen has always been neces-

sary in poswar Duch coaliion building.1

Te large number o paries and he low elecoral hreshold has he poenial o

produce grea volailiy in he elecoral orunes o poliical paries. A good index

or measuring elecoral shis is he Pedersen index.2 Tis index is he ne percen-

age o voers who changed heir voes beween paries. I all paries remain a he

same level o suppor, he index score is zero. I new paries wipe ou all exising

paries, he score is 100. Tere is one cavea. Te index measures aggregae move-

mens beween paries, no he volailiy o individual voers. Tis means ha

when equal numbers o voers swich rom pary A o pary B and vice versa, herewill be no ne elecoral change, and he index score will be zero.


9/33


Figure 1 shows he Pedersen index or he Duch parliamenary

elecions beween 1959 and 2010. wo clear periods can be dis-

inguished: a period o relaive sabiliy rom 1959 hrough 1989

and a more volaile period ha sared in 1994 and coninues

unil his very day.

From he inroducion o universal surage in 1919 hrough

1967, he Neherlands were an archeypical example o wha

poliical scienis Sein Rokkan has called a rozen pary

sysem.3 Elecions essenially uncioned as a gloried census,

mirroring he division o power beween he dieren pillars

(zuilen), which ormed he so-called pillarized sociey.4 Group

membership and hus voing behavior could be prediced wih

high accuracy on he basis o wo characerisics: religion and

class. Tere was no clear compeiion beween he Caholic,

Proesan, liberal, or socialis pillar paries: Volailiy wasmainly due o composiional change. Pary suppor was here-

ore sable and volailiy low, wih Pedersen scores around 5.

Te rs crack in he icy surace o he Duch pary sysem became visible in 1967.

New Duch Pary Rises in Parliamenary Elecion was he ron-page headline

oTe New York imes on February 17, 1967. I was he rs ime ha newcomer

pary D66 (Democras 66) paricipaed in he elecions, resuling in almos 5

percen o he voe. Te Pedersen scores rom hen on are also slighly higher,

around 10, indicaing ha a ne 10 percen o seas would shi beween paries

each elecion. While hese changes le a big imprin a he ime, hey are sill

mild compared wih he level o change we have winessed in he more modern

elecoral period saring in 1994.

As o 1967, elecoral oucomes show wo clear rends. Firs, religious-afliaed

paries lose a signican share o heir suppor due o he secularizaion o

sociey.5 Second, he liberal pary gains more srucural suppor. Bu he balance

beween suppor or le- and righ-wing paries remains remarkably sable and

slighly in avor o righ-wing paries. Poliical scieniss Cees van der Eijk and

Kees Niemoller have demonsraed convincingly ha voers shi mainly wihinhese blocks, no beween hem, which makes heir size relaively sable.6

Whas more, voers in he Neherlands sared o voe based on heir own polii-

cal preerences, raher han merely express wih heir voe ha hey are par o

a paricular segmen o sociey, according o Eijk and Niemoller. In he amous

Figure 1

After 1989, voters were more likely

move between parties

Pedersen index, 1959-2010

Source: Authors analysis of Dutc

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

59

63

67

71

72

77

81

82

86

89

94

98

02

03

06

Election year


10/33


words o poliical scieniss Richard Rose and Ian McAlliser: Voers begin o

choose.7 Te resul: decreasing core elecoraes or he sysem paries.

Tis change, however, ully maniesed isel during he 1994 elecions, when large

elecoral shis ook place aer a period o severe welare sae auseriy poliics.

Te Pedersen index or he 1989 elecion was 5; in 1994 he index score was 22,meaning ha a ne 22 percen o he seas changed. Boh governing paries were

beaen badly. Te Chrisian Democras los an unprecedened 20 seas (ou o

54); he Labour Pary los 12 (ou o 49). From hen on, elecion aer elecion

produced major shis in he voe. During he nineies, hese shis occurred,

mainly wihin he radiional pary sysem and wihin he le or he righ. Voers

would move rom CDA (Chrisian democras) o VVD (conservaive-liberal) or

D66 (social-liberal) or rom he PvdA (social democras) o he SP (he Socialis

Pary, old-syle socialiss wih populis leanings, comparable o Die Linke in

Germany) or he Greens or D66.

As o 2002 i has been he new poliical enrepreneurs o populism ha have

beneed rom ooloose voers looking or a home. In 2002 i was Pim Foruyns

pary (Lis Pim Foruyn, or LPF), which obained a remarkable 17 percen o

he voe, jus nine days aer is leader Pim Foruyn was murdered by a poliical

acivis. In 2006 i was he Socialis Pary, which go 16 percen. In 2010 i was he

PVV o Geer Wilders ha grew rom 6 percen o 16 percen. Bu which acors

explain his elecoral earhquake?

Te volailiy o he elecorae shows ha pary loyaly has become quie weak.

From 1994 unil now volailiy on he aggregae level has been high, wih

Pedersen scores beween 15 and 30. Te dierence, however, beween he 1990s

and now is ha he shis in he 1990s were accommodaed wihin he pary sys-

em, bu ha he shis o las elecions broke ou o he radiional pary sysem

oward new paries like he LPF, Ria Verdonks ON, and Geer Wilderss PVV.

Te pary sysem wih he radiional cener paries PvdA, CDA, and VVD as pil-

lars does seemingly no accommodae he preerences o voers as new paries and

movemens ener he elecoral arena.

Decline of the Volkspartei

Te volailiy o he Duch elecorae has produced wha appears o be he sruc-

ural decline o he wo main poswar Volkspareien, or peoples paries: he

Chrisian democras and he social democras. Sure, here are reversals o elecoral

Electoral shifts

1946-1967No shifts, only

marginal changes

1967-1998Shifts within the

party system

1998-nowNew parties, traditi

party system challe


11/33


orunes now and hen (noably 2003 or Labour), bu he sruc-

ural picure is ha he suppor or he Volkspareien is declining.

As we can see in Figure 2, he PvdA has los considerable ground

since he era o Labour Pary leader Joop Den Uyl (1977: 35.3

percen; 1986: 34.7 percen): Te peaks are less high, he roughs

are lower, and he rend is downward. Te pary is leaking in alldirecions: o he liberal le (D66), o he populis le (SP), and

o he righ-wing populiss (PVV). A similar, even seeper, patern

exiss or he CDA and is predecessors (no shown).

No only is suppor or he social democras declining, bu i is

declining or he hree radiional paries (PvdA, CDA, VVD)

combined as well. Where hese hree paries could coun on

more han 90 percen o he voe in he 1950s, heir overall

suppor now has declined o jus above 50 percen. Tis is wha

could be diagnosed as a sysemic meldown o he poswar Duch pary sysem.

Tere is a coninuing process o ragmenaion across he poliical specrum. Te

larges pary in Duch poliics has never been so small. All grea radiional polii-

cal ideologies wih heir radiional ocus on making compromises wih heir

poliical opposies, heir inernaionalis atiude, heir deense o he open sociey,

and heir radiional atemp o be rue peoples paries, atemping o bind boh

he elie and he masses, have problems. Smaller paries ha ocused on paricular

ineress or paricular voer groups bene.

In general, here is now no single dominan pary in he Duch poliical landscape.

Te bes wo perormers carry a mere 20 percen o he voe, he wo nex bes

beween 14 percen and 16 percen, and he hree runners-up beween 7 percen

and 10 percen. Tis rend represens he Balkanizaion o Duch poliicsa

nighmare or anyone asked wih he ormaion o a new coaliion governmen. I

is poliics married o a Sudoku puzzle.

So oday wha he Neherlands needs is an increased number o paries o orm

a governing coaliion wih majoriy suppor. radiionally, wo paries once

were enough or a majoriy. From 1994 onwards, hree-pary governmens havebecome he sandard. In 2010 here even have been serious alks abou a our- or

ve-pary coaliion, comparable o siuaions in Scandinavia, Flanders, and prob-

ably in he near uure in Germany.

Figure 2

Voter support for PvdA has decline

over time

Percentage of votes received by the Labou

Party, 1958-2010


15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

59

63

67

71

72

77

81

82

86

89

94

98

02

03


12/33


The electoral position of progressive parties

An imporan characerisic o he Duch proporional poliical sysem is ha paries

always are dependen on oher paries o orm a majoriy coaliion and ge o power.

Tis means he elecoral posiion o he social democraic pary by isel is no

enougho ge ino power, i is necessary o orm a coaliion wih oher paries.

So is here a possibiliy o orm a majoriy coaliion wih only progressive paries?

In Figure 3 we have accumulaed all progressive paries and all righ-wing paries

o compare he resuls over he pas several decades. Te resul is no very prom-

ising. Indeed, hey may surprise oreign observers o he permissive-liberarian

Duch sociey because righ-wing paries have always had a majoriy share o he

voe, excep or 1998. Tere is no naural progressive majoriy in he Neherlands,

in spie o is progressive image.

Te 1998 campaign is a posiive oulier. Alhough nomajoriy was won, boh sides were in balance. Te

incumben social democras won signicanly. Te

campaign was characerized by a srong socioeconomic

prole (Serk en sociaal) and an ideniable leader, Wim

Kok. Te pary was in ouch wih he middle class. From

hen on, suppor or progressive paries declined, wih an

all-ime low in 2002 during he rise o populis maverick

Pim Foruyn.

Tis means ha in order o ge ino power, progressives

radiionally always have needed he suppor o a righ-

wing pary (CDA or VVD), even when small social-lib-

eral cener pary D66 is included in he leis block.

Ten here is he problem o inernal ricions wihin he progressive amily.

Figure 4 shows he srong dierences and ensions among all progressive paries

by deailing he relaive size o all paries wihin he progressive block. Te PvdA

has los he hegemonic posiion i had on he le or decades.

Figure 3

Support for the right-wing block has genebeen higher than for the left-wing block

Division of votes between left and right, 1956-201

Percent of vote


59 63 67 71 72 77 81 82 86 89 94 98 02 03 30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


13/33


Basically, he le is divided beween, on he

one side, a more liberal, cosmopolian progres-

sivism, direced oward change and reorm

and wih a srong emphasis on labor-marke

reorms and appreciaion o he advanages

o migraion and globalizaion. Tis sidecomprises he Greens and D66. Tey unie

well-educaed proessionals, he urban middle

classes, and he suden populaion, scoring

high in universiy ciies.

On he oher side, here is he more conserva-

ive or radiional le, which cherishes he

achievemens o he welare sae, ghs he

inroducion o marke orces in he public sec-

or, and represens he ineress o workers inhe healh care secor and indusrial areas. Tis side is represened by he SP.

Where is he PvdA, he voice o Duch social democracy, in his picure? Hasn

is ambivalence and a imes is srengh always been is abiliy o combine blue-

collar workers wih he proessional elie? Te aim and ideal o he pary have

always been o connec hese wo groups, which are now increasingly represened

by he SP and he Green/D66 alliance, and work ogeher or a shared projec, he

welare sae, and a progressive sociey. A his momen, however, here seems no

such clear shared projec, or clear common ineres.

Te dierences wihin he le are hus considerableone o he reasons closer

cooperaion beween hese compeiors on he elecoral marke has no ye

maerialized. Besides ha, he le as a whole has been relaively sable, wih

around 40 percen o 45 percen o he voe, excep or he dip in 2002, bu always

lacking a majoriy.

Summarizing, here are a couple o srucural rends and characerisics o he

Duch elecorae ha are imporan or any design o a progressive poliical sra-

egy in he Neherlands. Firs o all, as a resul o he proporional represenaionsysem wih a low hreshold, a coaliion governmen is always necessary. Secondly,

here is no naural le-wing majoriy. Combining hese wo means he le is

dependen on a righ-wing coaliion parner.

Figure 4

The PvdAs share of the left vote has been declinin

Division of votes on the left, 1986-2010

Total left-wing vote


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%90%

100%

86 89 94 98 02 03 06 10


14/33


Furhermore, he volailiy o he elecorae has increased signicanly since 1994.

Voers began o choose. Pary loyaly has become weaker, which has resuled in

a decreased core elecorae or he radiional emancipaion or peoples paries.

Pary compeiion has become ercer, mainly wihin he le-wing and righ-wing

blocks, which makes close cooperaion beween paries on he le more difcul.

Te as rise and all o new paries and he absence o clear winners (he bigges

paries recenly received only 20 percen o he voe) indicae ha he curren

poliical sysem has serious problems in accommodaing he changing preerences

o voers. In his respec, we can speak o a sysemic meldown o he poswar

pary sysem, buil around inermediaing peoples paries.


15/33


Dutch society in flux

Social and cultural trends

Te slow bu seady decline o he radiional Volksparei did no lead o a decline

o he le-wing block. As can be seen in Figure 3 on page 9, he suppor or boh

blocks has remained similar, alhough 2002 shows an all-ime low or he le. As

he elecions in 2006 and 2010 show, however, le suppor reurned o levels

similar o he years beore 2002. Te changes beween years have only become

larger. Tis means he decline o he Volksparei has no direc eecs on hedivision o voes beween le- and righ-wing paries, bu i makes he coaliion

process more difcul.

Te oher major developmen, he developmen ha voers began o choose, is

more ineresing or his paper because i also implies ha voers migh be choosing

beween he le- and righ-wing blocks. Tese developmens are deniely ineres-

ing or he composiion o he progressive elecorae because i migh lead o shis

in size o hese blocks and hus ell us somehing abou which groups are essenial

or a progressive coaliion. Combined wih predicions o demographic changes,

his could give us indicaions o how he elecoral oulook or he le migh evolve.

Te 1998 and 2002 elecions are mos ineresing o look a rom his perspec-

ive because hey show major shis beween he le and righ, wih 1998 being a

posiive oulier or he le, and wih 2002 or he righ. Boh elecions can ell us

somehing abou groups in he elecorae, which are swiching beween blocks

and hus are essenial.

Agains his background o a lack o a le-wing majoriy, declining suppor or

Volkspareien, and ever-increasing difculies o orm majoriy coaliions, we willnow look a rends wihin cerain demographic groups o he Duch elecorae o

draw a picure o he elecoral oulook or he le. Tese rends can aec elecoral

oucomes in wo ways. Firs o all, he relaionship beween cerain demographic

characerisics and voing behavior can change.


16/33


Secondly, hese groups which suppor paricular paries can change in relaive size,

aecing he overall suppor or he paries hey voe or.8

Te relaive size o groups will be looked a based on daa rom he Duch govern-

mens Cenral Bureau or Saisics. o look or changes in he connecion beween

groups and voing behavior, he division beween le- and righ-wing voes wihinhe groups will be looked a. Te le-righ divide is a simplicaion ha deniely

has some disadvanages, such as he posiion o D66, which akes someimes a

righ-wing posiion, bu i enables us o ocus on shis beween blocks insead o

all he shis beween paries, which are mos o he ime o less signicance.

Tis comparison will be made on he basis o graphs showing

he dierence beween le-wing and righ-wing suppor per

group. o clariy our mehodology, a cional example o his

way o visualizaion is provided in Figure 5. Tis gure shows

he gap beween le- and righ-wing suppor among smokersand nonsmokers. Te le-righ gap is consruced as he rs

order dierence, meaning he suppor or le-wing paries

wihin he group minus he suppor or righ-wing paries.

Te le-righ gap among smokers o 15 percen in 1971

means he suppor or le-wing paries is 15 percen higher

among nonsmokers han he suppor or righ-wing paries.

Tis way o visualizing dierences makes i possible o see di-

erences across groups a a glance. From his cional graph, i

can easily be deduced ha nonsmokers are more likely o voe

le wing han smokers, bu ha his dierence has seadily

been declining over he las decades. Figure 5 does, however,

no ell us anyhing abou he relaive size o boh groups.

Tereore, each caegory will be inroduced by a look a rends in group size.

Tis paper will use wo main sources. Mos o he daa on demographic change will

come rom he Saline daabase rom he Cenral Bureau or Saisics. Te elec-

oral daa used or he comparisons come rom he Duch Parliamenary Elecion

Sudies, or DPES. Unorunaely, he later daa are currenly available only hrough2006 so our demographic voing analyses do no include he 2010 elecion.

Figure 5

Fictional demonstration of changing l

right support within a social group

Hypothetical example of left-right gap among

smokers and nonsmokers, 1971-2006Left-right gap


-25%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Smoke

Nonsm

71 72 77 81 82 86 89 94 98 02 0


17/33


Class

Subjecive social class (sel-image o responden) was esablished as a very

imporan deerminan o voing during he period o pillarizaion unil he 1970s.

Sociey was divided in pillars based on class and religion, and hese pillars deer-

mined voing behavior o a large exen. Te working class would voe more lewing; he upper class more righ wing. Tis con-

necion beween social class and voing behavior

has remained seady beween 1971 and 1998.9

Figure 6 shows he le-righ gap among he dier-

en classes beween 1971 and 2006. I is clear ha

he working class is more likely o voe le wing

han righ wing.10 Looking a 2002, however, he

working class did, more han he higher classes,

swich rom he le o he righ. Te same shi isvisible in he middle class.

Looking a he 1998 vicory, i sands ou ha he

le scored especially well among boh middle-class

and upper-middle-class voers compared o oher

elecions, bu los voes among he upper class. Anoher developmen is ha he

le-righ gap amongs upper-class and middle-class voers has been declining over

he las decades, avoring le-wing paries.

Te relaive size o he groups has changed signicanly, oo. Te

working class has shrunk o a mere 15 percen o he elecorae

while he middle classes have grown o more han 60 percen.

Tis means he naural suppor or le-wing paries has declined

over ime as well, as we demonsrae in Figure 7.

Anoher key rend is he composiion o he secular middle

classes. Tese groups are increasingly heerogeneous and no

bound o a specic pary or ideology. Given he decreasing size

o he working class, he increasing size o he middle classes, andhe possible shis o he middle classes beween le and righ (as

in 1998), he imporance o he middle class o he le will only

increase in he near uure.

Figure 6

Workers historically are more likely to vote for th

Left-right vote by social class, 1971-2006

Left-right gap

Source: Authors a

71

72

77

81

82

86

89

94

98

02

03

0%

10%20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70% U

c

U

m

c

M

c

W

c

Figure 7

The working class is declining shar

the middle class is increasing

Class self-image, 1971-2003

Share of electorate (%)

Source: Authors a

U

c

U

m

c

M

c

W

c-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

71 72 77 81 82 86 89 94 98 02 03 06


18/33


Education

Higher-educaed voers have a higher urnou and are more poliically ineresed.

Besides ha, hey are more suscepible o le-righ orienaion. Tis means hey

are more aware o where hey posiion hemselves on a le-righ axis, which

aecs heir voe. Te higher he level o educaion, he bigger he role o his ideo-logical sance is, and hus he smaller he inuence o oher acors such as class.

Te combinaion o hese inuences means higher-educaed voers are less bound

o a cerain pary.11

Figure 8 shows he relaive size o each educaion group

over he las 25 years. Te average level o educaion has

seadily increased. Te share o higher-educaed people

has almos doubled rom 17 percen in 1985 o 33 percen

in 2009. Figure 9 shows he dierence in le-and righ-

wing suppor among he dieren levels o educaion.

Tese rends poin o several conclusions. Firs o all,

le-wing suppor is radiionally highes among he lower

educaed. Te higher educaed were radiionally righ

wing bu have become more le wing over he years.

Indeed, rom 1994 o 2002 suppor was even higher

among highly educaed voers han among lower-edu-

caed voers. Te increasing

numbers o he higher edu-

caed does hus oer possibili-

ies or le-wing paries.

Ye his educaion gap was

relaively small in 2006. In all

ve caegories, he dierence

beween le- and righ-wing

suppor is lower or jus

slighly higher han 10 percen.

Tis means educaion levelwas less imporan in deer-

mining he le-righ voe in

ha elecion.

Figure 8

Education levels are rising rapidly

Trends in education levels, 1985-2009

Labor force (%)

Source: Statline

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

85 90 95 00 05 09

Elem

Seco

Voca

High

educ

Figure 9

The highly educated are increasingly likely to vote for the left

Education and the left-right divide, 1971-2006

Left-right gap

Source: Authors a

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40% Elementary

(Lower)

Vocational

Secondary

Middle level

vocational, h

level seconda

Higher levelvocational,

University

71 72 77 81 82 86 89 94 98 02 03 06


19/33


Wha is sriking, hough, is he increased division in sances on cerain opics

like he European Union, poliics, and migraion. In hese areas here is a clear

cleavage along he lines o educaion, wih he highly educaed being more in

avor o labor migraion and EU-inegraion, while he less educaed srongly

oppose many o hese policies. Tis cleavage also shows he limis o our le-righ

dichoomyensions like hese wihin he le and righ blocks are invisible.

Age

As in almos every Wesern European sociey, he Neherlands

is acing a rapidly aging populaion. Back in 1950, only 7.7

percen o he populaion was above 65 years o age, and 37.3

percen younger han 20. In 2008, more han 14 percen was

above 65, and only 24 percen below 20 years o age. Figure 10

shows his rend. Reecing hese changes was a recen pressrelease by he Bureau or Saisics, noing ha here was a

new record o 40h wedding anniversaries las year.

Tis process o aging will coninue over he nex ew decades,

resuling in an esimaed 26.5 percen o he populaion being

above 65 in 2040. Te imporance o he grey voe will

hus only keep increasing. Specic issues o he elderly are

expeced o become more imporan in he poliical debae,

a developmen rom which a jus-esablished new 50+ pary

hopes o bene.

I is difcul o assess he imporance o he Millennial generaion (hose born

beween 1978 and 2000). Teir relaive size in he elecorae will never be

very large due o he aging o he Duch populaion, and heir urnou is lower.

Ineresing, however, is he momen o heir denie voing decision. Tis has

seadily become laer and laer, resuling in more han 70 percen deciding during

he las weeks o he campaign.

Anoher noeworhy developmen is he role o elecronic voer guides such asSemWijzerand Kieskompas: Almos 70 percen o he Millennials used such a

guide in he 2006 elecions. Te direc eec o hese guides on voing behavior is

quesionable bu i does show ha voers are willing o look around.

Figure 10

Seniors gain in numbers; those under

are decreasing

Trends in the size of age groups, 1970-2010

Population (%)

Source: Statline

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

70 75 80 85 90 95 00 05


20/33


Te dierences in le-righ suppor beween generaions are especially srong

wihin he le and wihin he righ. Looking closely a suppor or he Labor Pary

in he 2010 elecions pains a gloomy picure: 50 percen o he voers are over

50 years old, while only 17 percen are beween he ages o 18 and 34. Only CDA

voers have a higher average age.

O course, he Greens and D66 are also par o he le-wing voe. Bu heir vo-

ers are relaively young, wih almos 30 percen beween 18 and 34 years o age.

Boh paries are exremely popular among universiy sudens. Ye he suppor

o he Millennial generaion is almos equally divided beween le and righ.

Wha is remarkable, hough, is he dierence in educaion beween hese groups.

Young voers on he le have a signicanly higher level o educaion han young

voers on he righ.

Figure 11 shows dierences in le-wing and righ-

wing suppor by age caegory. Beween 1988 and1998, le-wing paries scored beter among voers

beween he ages o 17 and 50. Especially in he

good year o 1998, he lead among voers in he

17-o-50 age caegory showed he willingness o

relaively young voers o swich beween he le-

and righ-wing blocks. In 2006, however, here was

almos no dierence beween le-wing and righ-

wing suppor in he age groups up o 65 years old.

In conras o younger voers, he leanings o voers

above 65 years o age are very sable. Voers in his

age caegory end o voe signicanly more righ

wing. Tis age group will only gain in relaive inu-

ence. Tis is no a avorable developmen or he

cener-le.

Gender and marital status

radiionally, here has been a gap beween he poliical behavior o men and

women. Te gure below shows or boh men and women he dierence beween

le-wing and righ-wing suppor. From 1971 o 1989, he le-righ dierences

among boh genders were relaively small and do no poin in a clear direcion.

Figure 11

The left generally does best among youngervoters, worst among the oldest voters

Left-right support by age group, 1971-2006

Left-right gap

Source: Authors a

71 72 77 81 82 86 89 94 98 02 03 06-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%


21/33


Bu rom 1994 onwards (when voers began o choose),

women show more le-wing voing behavior han

men, especially in 1998. Bu as we have seen wih oher

characerisics, in 2006 he dierence beween genders

almos disappeared (see Figure 12).

Daa on subgroups are scarce. wo gender-based

developmens are, however, noeworhy. Firs, he ull

increase o suppor or he Greens in 2010 (2.2 percen,

hree seas compared o he previous elecion) is due o

an increase in suppor among women, especially young

women. Second, no only do he Greens boas an over-

represenaion o young, higher educaed women, bu

he Labor Pary does as well.

Te number o unmarried voers in he ages beween 20and 65 is rapidly increasing. Beween 1998 and 2010,

he percenage o he oal populaion in his caegory

increased rom 26 percen o 36 percen. Unmarried

voers are hus becoming more and more a acor o

imporance. In he same ime span, he percenage o

married voers decreased by 13 percen o 53 percen

(see Figure 13).

Figure 13 shows he dierences in suppor wihin he

dieren sauses. Married voers voe more righ wing,

whereas voers who have never been married are on

average more le leaning. Te sronges le-wing sup-

porers are o be ound amongs divorced people. In

spie o he ac ha his is only a small percenage o

he elecorae, i is a growing group as well.

Figure 12

In recent elections, women are more likely

vote for the left than men

Left-right support by gender, 1971-2006

Left-right gap

Source: Authors a

71 72 77 81 82 86 89 94 98 02 03 06-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30% Men Women

Figure 13

The left receives more support among sing

than married voters

Left-right support by marital status, 1981 to 2006

Left-right gap

Source: Authors a

81 82 86 89 94 98 02 03 06-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%50%

60%

Div

W

Ne

ma

Ma

or

tog

as


22/33


Ethnicity

Migrans orm a relaively modes par o he Duch populaion. Figure

14 shows he composiion o he Duch populaion in 2010, based on

ehnic background.

Approximaely hal o he migran populaion is o Wesern origin,

wih he res rom around he globe. According o recen predicions,

he share o migrans wihin he Duch populaion will increase o 26

percen in 2040.

Tere are no daa available on he aggregae voing behav-

ior o migrans. Bu researchers have conduced signican

research on he voing behavior o migrans in big ciies

beween 1986 and now.12 Tey ound ha migrans end

o voe le wing and show signicanly lower urnou raes(almos hal o he average). Voing decisions are primarily

based on ideology o he pary bu ehniciy does play a big

role in he voing process o migrans. Tey preer o voe or

a candidae wih he same ehniciy. Tis is possible due o

he preerenial voe sysem. Tis has especially led, wihin

he PvdA, o he elecion o migran candidaes who were

placed a he lower end o he pary liss.

Urban areas

In 2007 55 percen o he Duch populaion

lived in ciies. Tis percenage will keep growing

over he nex several decades, alhough he rae

o growh is unknown. radiionally, le-wing

suppor is high in urban areas, which means his

should be benecial.

Figure 16 conrms his. Te le block doesbeter he more urbanized he area. Ye

in 2006 dierences in suppor or he le

beween he dieren levels o urbanizaion

were relaively small.

Figure 14

The overwhelming proportio

the Dutch population is nativ

Ethnic groups in the Netherlands, 2

Source: Statline

Figure 15

About half the migrant population is o

Western origin

Trends in migrant population origins in theNetherlands, 1996-2010

Population (%)

Source: Statline

Native

Westernmigrants

MoroccoDutch An

Suriname

Turkey

Rest non-immigran

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

96 00 05 09 10

Dutch AnMoroccoSurinameTurkeyRest non-immigran

Westernmigrants

Figure 16

Voters in urban areas are more likely to support th

Left-right support by degree of urbanization

Left-right gap

Source: Authors a

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40% Very stron

urban

Strongly u

Mildly urb

Hardly ur

Not urban

71 72 77 81 82 86 89 94 98 02 03 06


23/33


Tere is anoher ineresing developmen in he urban areas ha canno be

deduced direcly rom he daa due o he aggregaion o he le-wing paries

in our le block. radiionally, he Labour Pary received srong suppor in big

ciies among working-class voers, bu heyve los many o hese voers over he

pas several decades. Mos o hese voers sopped voing or are now voing or

populis paries, boh on he righ and le side o he poliical specrum. Tisdecline o suppor in he ciies has parly been compen-

saed or by increasing numbers o he highly educaed,

who mainly voe or he Greens and D66.

Union membership

Figure 17 shows he share o he labor orce which

belongs o a union. Over he las 30 years, he level o

union organizaion has decreased rom 34 percen o24 percen. Tis is no a posiive developmen because

i decreases he legiimacy o unions when hey negoi-

ae wage agreemens. Tey claim o represen all Duch

laborers bu ha claim becomes harder o susain when

union membership keeps dropping.

Figure 18 shows he dierence in le-wing and righ-wing suppor

beween members and nonmembers o unions. Te gure is prety clear:

Union members are more likely o voe le wing han nonmembers. Te

dierence over years seems consan. Tis is on he one hand good news

because i shows a very sable le-wing inclinaion on he par o union

members. On he oher hand, i is also negaive: Union membership is

declining, so his group o voers will ge smaller.

Religion

wo main developmens in he religious area should be highlighed.

Firs o all, he imporance o religion o voe decisions has signicanlydecreased. Tis is caused parly by he decline o he inuence o social

groups on voing. Voers increasingly base heir voe on heir own polii-

cal preerences raher han expressing wih heir voe ha hey are par o

a paricular segmen o sociey.13

20%

22%

24%

26%

28%

30%

32%

34%

36%

70 75 80 85 90 95 00 05 09

Figure 17

Union membership is declining over time

Union membership in the Netherlands, 1970-2009

Labor force (%)

Source: Statline

Figure 18

Union members consistentl

vote more left wing thannonmembers

Left-right support by union

membership, 1977-2006

Left-right gap

Source: Authors a

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Member

Nonmember

77 81 82 86 89 94 98 02


24/33


Figure 19 shows he rends in religious afliaion wihin

Duch sociey. Te secular share o he populaion has

increased signicanly, whereas he share o Caholics and

Proesans appears o be in reeall. Bu he oher religions

caegory has increased. Tis is mainly caused by he rise o

Islam in he Neherlands (nearly 1 million Muslims currenlylive in he counry).

Figure 20 shows he suppor or le-wing and righ-wing par-

ies by religious afliaion. Le-wing paries ge more suppor

rom secular Duch and voers wih anoher religion (includ-

ing Islam). Anoher ineresing developmen is ha here are

sill major dierences in pary suppor beween he dieren

religious groups. While he le-righ gaps in oher graphs

ended o converge over ime, especially in 2006, suggesing

declining group inuence on voing, his gure sill shows alo o variance in 2006.

Figure 19

Secular Dutch and those with non-

Christian religious faiths are increasin

Trends in religious affiliation in the Netherland

1971-2009

Population (%)

Source: Statline

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

No

religion (%)

Roman

Catholic (%)

Protestant (%)

Other (%)

71 75 80 85 90 95 00 05 09

Figure 20

The left does best among seculars and

those with a non-Christian faith

Left-right support by religious affiliation in th

Netherlands, 1971-2006

Left-right gap

Source: Authors a

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

N

R

C

P

O

71 72 77 81 82 86 89 94 98 02 03 06


25/33


A new progressive coalition?

Te Labour Pary has been airly successul in erms o governmen paricipaion

since 1989, bu raher unsuccessul elecorallyhe rade-o beween voe-seek-

ing and ofce-seeking sraegies. Te pary has been par o dieren coaliions in

governmen, all sharing he mainsream views o his period, such as he Tird

Way approach o welare sae reorm, liberalizaion and privaizaion o he

public secor, and promoing a larger and deeper European Union, combined wih

a raher pragmaic syle o governance. Since 1990 (locally) and 1994 (naion-

ally), Duch poliics has been conroned wih an exreme volailiy among voers,a decline o core elecoraes, a more polarized and ragmened elecorae, and an

erosion paricularly o he wo classical Volkspareien, he Chrisian democras and

he social democras.

Culural and economic cleavages and new poliical issues such as immigraion,

crime and anisocial behavior, and European inegraion divide social-democraic

consiuencies, leading o he erosion o he leis working class, wih many urn-

ing insead o righ-wing populis ani-EU and animigraion paries. And a new

meriocracy is arising, spliting he elecorae ino a higher-educaed par ha is

opimisic abou he uure and embraces change and inernaionalizaion, and a

less-educaed par, which eels i has more o lose rom inernaionalizaion and

modernizaion o sociey.

A he same ime we have winessed a rise in suppor or paries on boh exremes

o he poliical specrum, wih a hihero unknown populis appeal. Tey bene

rom aniesablishmen atiudes. And hey accelerae a sense o disrus o polii-

cal paries and poliicians and mobilize animigraion senimens.

As a resul o all his, he Duch social-democraic pary, PvdA, has los ismonopoly on he le. While he le as a whole remains airly sable, he PvdA is

losing is quaniaive and poliical hegemony wihin he progressive camp: 30

seas in he 2010 elecions compared o 15 seas or he more radical Socialis


26/33


Pary, 10 seas or he GreenLe, and 10 or he progressive liberals o D66. Te

ragmenaion o he le is cause and consequence o he erosion and ragmena-

ion o he poswar Volkspareien.

Boh in erms o ideology and in erms o consiuency, Duch social democracy

is aced wih ough challenges and ineviable choices. Will i remain Volksparei,bridging he social gaps ha give rise o he modernizing D66 and Greens and o

he Socialis Pary on he le? More specically, can i resore he grand poswar

coaliion beween he working and he middle classes?

Since he meeoric ascen o he Lis Pim Foruyn in 2002 in he Neherlands,

new atemps have been made by progressives o ge back in ouch wih he

(presumably) los elecorae. Former Labour Pary leader Wouer Bos criically

evaluaed he Tird Way accommodaion-ype poliics o he PvdA in 2010.

Earlier, he PvdA had published a new pary documen on immigraion and

inegraion, proposing a much sricer approach. Tis documen, however, provedo be divisive wihin he consiuency o he Labour Pary. Te pary has been le

in limbo: Neiher he social-liberal Tird Way adapaion o he economy nor he

inegraionis adapaion o ani-immigran populism have unied and inspired he

pary wih a new sel-condence or a new common sense o direcion.

Wha are he sraegic choices or progressives oday? Are we rying o reanimae

an aavisic poliical movemen (a workers pary in a posindusrial sociey), or

does social democracy sill conain hidden poenial capable o reuniing rag-

mening and polarizing socieies? Alhough rends are challenging, we hink

here is enough room o maneuver o allow innovaion and he redeniion o he

social-democraic projec under new circumsances.

Basically, hree opions are open or social democracy. Te rs would be o make

a clear-cu choice in avor o he enlighened proessional middle classes as

our mos imporan consiuency. Tey represen he uure o he knowledge

economy and are a growing segmen o sociey, concenraed in he meropoli-

an areas. Tey are he carriers o opimisic, liberal, and cosmopolian views on

inernaionalizaion, muliculural inegraion, and European unicaion. Such a

choice would aciliae a coaliion or even close cooperaion wih wo oher leparies, he D66 and he Greens, around a common projec o urher exibiliy

in he labor marke, European poliical inegraion, green innovaion, individual

auonomy, and simulaing alens. I would represen a culural ollow-up o he


27/33


primarily social and economic Tird Way, Duch-syle. As a side eec, his opion

migh atrac specic suppor rom he new career and power eminiss and

migran groups.

Te second opion would be o choose wha, agains all he laws o markeing and

PR, has been labeled a social democracy o ear by hisorian ony Jud. Tiswould be aimed a regaining he suppor o he radiional as well as he new, ex-

ible working classes and he lower middle class, and hose dependen on public

services, social securiy, and welare. I would deend he proecion and securiy

ha he classical welare sae used o oer. I would be exremely criical o mar-

ke orces, especially in he public secor, and o he European Union, a leas o

he marke undamenalis way in which i currenly uncions. I would be more

acivis, wih srong local roos. Tis choice would enail closer cooperaion wih

he Socialis Pary. I would also resore a close coaliion wih he rade unions.

Ten here is a hird opion. Tis opion would involve reeing ourselves, Houdini-like, rom he limiing condiions in which we currenly nd ourselves and

resoring he broad coaliion o working class and middle class, exible workers

in he personal services secor and proessionals in he new knowledge secors,

enlighened enrepreneurs, and unionized indusrial workers. Tis opion would

unie he aims o proecion and emancipaion wih he aspiraions and commi-

mens o hose who are succeeding in conemporary sociey. I would address he

responsibiliy, commimen, paricipaion, and ciizenship o boh hose who have

a lo o gain and hose who have already gained a lo. I would enail a broad coali-

ion o he le, bridging he gap beween he conservaive and liberal le, and new

alliances wih he hird secor and civic iniiaives.

As he 2010 Duch naional elecions have shown once again, social democracy

is losing elecoral suppor o he conservaive le, he SP, and he progressive-

liberal le, he Greens and social-liberal D66.14 I is even losing voes o Wilderss

PVV pary, no direcly a hese elecions bu cerainly in he long erm indirecly,

because he Labour Pary is being bypassed by absenions or a voe shi o he SP,

illusraing he arewell o he leis working class.

Te Labour Pary is sill he main orce on he le (wih 30 seas, compared o10 or he Greens and D66 and 15 or he SP) bu i is having rouble dening an

auhenic posiion vis--vis is progressive compeiors. I can survive, wheher as

an independen orce o he le or as par o a larger progressive alliance, only i i

comes up wih a projec o is own.


28/33


In order o resore a coaliion o he dieren consiuencies o social democracy,

a program is needed ha connecs he maerialis perspecive o air pay, decen

work, opporuniies o move orward, and social and physical securiy wih a

posmaerialisic or culural perspecive involving a susainable environmen, an

open oulook on he world around us, and, up o a poin, an accepance o culural

diversiy. Such a program would counerbalance he srong cenriugal orces inhe economic, culural, and poliical realms: growing inequaliy, ossiying culural

cleavages, and division lines o disrus and absenion in our democracies.

Moreover, i would hal he commercializaion o public inrasrucure and ser-

vices, insead srenghening res publica by inroducing a public ehic and orien-

aion in governmen as well as he privae and nonpro secors. I would also

produce an agenda characerized by modesy, sel-resrain, and moderaion, buil

around noions o ecological, social, and culural susainabiliy, couneracing

he hyper-consumeris ra race. Tis could be seen as a resoraion o he concep

o qualiy o lie bu in an unprecedened ashion.

A ourh and nal opion, however, could be he ormaion o a progressive alliance

o couner ragmenaion wihin he le and o gh he cener-righ/righ-wing

populis majoriy. Tis opion o close cooperaion beween he Greens, social lib-

erals, socialis populiss, and social democras may be he bes hope o resore he

progressive, oleran, and culurally liberarian world image o he Neherlands.


29/33


References

Aars, Kees, Henk van der Kolk, and Marin Rosema. 2007.Een verdeeld elecoraa. Urech: Specrum.

Anker, Hans 1992. Normal Voe Analysis.Amserdam:HeSpinhuis.

Becker, Frans, and Ren Cuperus. 2010. Poliics in a rag-mened sociey: Te 2010 elecions in he Neherlands.Berlin: Friedrich-Eber-Siung.

Becker, Frans, and Ren Cuperus. Social democracy in heNeherlands: Tree uure opions. Berlin: Friedrich-Eber-Siung (orhcoming).

Eijk, Cees van der, and Mark N. Franklin. 1996. ChoosingEurope?: Te European Elecorae and Naional Poliics in

he Face of Union. Ann Arbor, MI: Universiy o Michi-gan Press.

Eijk, Cees van der, and Broer Niemller. 1992. Te Neh-erlands. In Mark N. Franklin, Tomas . Mackie, andHenry Valen, eds., Elecoral Change: Responses o EvolvingSocial and Atiudinal Srucures in Wesern Counries.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Universiy Press.

Lipset, Seymour M., and Stein Rokkan. 1967. Party

systems and voter alignments: Cross-national per-

spectives. Toronto: The Free Press.

Michon, Laure, Jean illie, and Anja van Heelsum. 2007.Poliical paricipaion o migrans in he Neherlands

since 1986. Dra.

Pedersen, Mogens N. 1979. Te Dynamics o EuropeanPary Sysems: Changing Paterns o Elecoral Volailiy.

European Journal of Poliical Research 7 (1): 126.

Rose, Richard, and Ian McAlliser. 1986. Voers Begin oChoose: From Closed Class o Open Elecions in Briain.Beverly Hills: Sage Publicaions.

Tomassen, Jacques, Kees Aars, and Henk van der Kolk.2000. Poliieke veranderingen in Nederland 1971-1998:kiezers en de smalle marges van de poliiek. Te Hague:Sdu Uigevers


30/33


Appendix

Tis char shows he disribuion o seas in Duch parliamens back o 1988. I

illusraes how he division o seas beween le and righ paries creaes he need

or increasingly complicaed coaliions o reach 50 percen o parliamenary seas.

Distribution of seats in parliament in % (1986 - 2010)

Source: Authors analysis of Dutch election results.

0 5025 75 100

1986

1989

1994

1998

2002

2003

2006

2010

SP GL PVDA D66 PVDD CDA VVD CHRISTIAN PARTIES PVV


31/33


32/33


About the authors

Hans Anker is an independen pollser and sraegis wih consuling experience in

more han 45 counries.

Ren Cuperusis direcor o inernaional relaions a he Wiardi BeckmanFoundaion and in charge o he Amserdam Process.

Pim Paulusma is a junior researcher a he Wiardi Beckman Foundaion, working

on he Amserdam Process.


33/33

The Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational institute

dedicated to promoting a strong, just and free America that ensures opportunity

for all. We believe that Americans are bound together by a common commitment to

these values and we aspire to ensure that our national policies reflect these values.

We work to find progressive and pragmatic solutions to significant domestic and

international problems and develop policy proposals that foster a government that

is of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Date post:	08-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	center-for-american-progress
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

A Systemic Meltdown? Demographic Change and Progressive Political Strategy in the Netherlands

Documents