View Full Version : The Dutch
We had them on France, America, Germany or just about everything, but you would almost forget about that tiny little country called the Netherlands, which despite it's tiny size can be quite the subject of both disgust and admiration. We do things different here in many ways. Maybe the dutch are more subject to generalisations then the other european country's but something is wrong. There is us being soddom&gommora and there is us being boring calvinists, some consider us to be very friendly and some consider us to be very rude, we don't really have a solid label and that is starting to sting. At least the french are hated, the flemmish get mocked, and the germans are german. How would you non-dutchies define our tiny little space on this clay grown tall.
LittleGrizzly
11-26-2008, 19:53
hmm, well over here in the UK, weed is instantly the first thing that comes to mind when anyone mentions netherlands, prostitution is another.....
All in all when i think of nethlands i tend to think of very relaxed attitudes towards social issues, basically a bunch of cool people with a progressive attitude...
Just like the U.S. the Netherlands fought to overthrow the shackles of an oppressive monarchy ruling their country from a faraway place, and succeeded in securing their independence and religious freedom.
Just like the U.S. the Netherlands fought to overthrow the shackles of an oppressive monarchy ruling their country from a faraway place, and succeeded in securing their independence and religious freedom.
That's a rather modern point of view, it wasn't odd to the dutch to be governed by a spanish king, no such things as 'country's' at that time. The father of King Phillip II we had so much trouble with was actually born in what is now the Netherlands.
That's a rather modern point of view, it wasn't odd to the dutch to be governed by a spanish king, no such things as 'country's' at that time. The father of King Phillip II we had so much trouble with was actually born in what is now the Netherlands.
Just like the American colonists were loyal subjects of the British crown until the good old King George decided that he could mistreat and disrespect us.
LittleGrizzly
11-26-2008, 20:30
Well protection aint free ya know :tongue:
Wasn't it parliment that set the taxes rather than the king ? (unsure)
Well protection aint free ya know :tongue:
Wasn't it parliment that set the taxes rather than the king ? (unsure)
Either way. I'm gonna try to help keep this thred Dutch: Levees, Windmills, Tulips, Drugs, Hookers == good stuff.
Louis VI the Fat
11-26-2008, 20:43
How would you non-dutchies define our tiny little space on this clay grown tall.It's great! Friendly people, gorgeous women, good beer! I especially loved Tivoli, Carlsberg and the Little Mermaid statue! :2thumbsup:
yesdachi
11-26-2008, 20:44
When I hear “Dutch” I think of our Dutch, the ones in Holland, MI. – they are cheep, simple meat and potato eaters, of giant proportion, and a bit arrogant and egotistical, the Dutch genome seems to generate the largest people on the planet.
To think outside my monkeysphere, when I hear “Dutch” I think of loose sex and drug laws and this quote…
Nigel Powers: All right Goldmember. Don't play the laughing boy. There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch. :laugh4:
It's great! Friendly people, gorgeous women, good beer! I especially loved Tivoli, Carlsberg and the Little Mermaid statue! :2thumbsup:
Oh damn you. Tivoli is great by the way especially that rollercoaster that looks like a bee, I mean you can look into peoples houses!
Rhyfelwyr
11-26-2008, 20:55
Two types of ideas come to mind when I think of the Netherlands.
On the one hand there's Amsterdam, with the prostitution, drugs, very pro-EU, and very liberal and obsessed with being green. A progressive image to some.
Then on the other hand there's the windmills, little wooden shoes, lots of flowers and canals, a nice picturesque setting in general.
Oh yeah, plus lots of really bright orange!
Vladimir
11-26-2008, 21:33
...are (as the host of Top Gear put it) the coolest race on earth. :flowers: :netherlands:
AlexanderSextus
11-26-2008, 22:14
Just like the U.S. the Netherlands fought to overthrow the shackles of an oppressive monarchy ruling their country from a faraway place, and succeeded in securing their independence and religious freedom.
That, and the fact that they respected people's freedom of choice to do what they want with their own bodies'. In short, the greatest nation on earth. And that is coming from an american.
I want to move there.
All in all when i think of nethlands i tend to think of very relaxed attitudes towards social issues, basically a bunch of cool people with a progressive attitude...
Two types of ideas come to mind when I think of the Netherlands.
On the one hand there's Amsterdam, with the prostitution, drugs, very pro-EU, and very liberal and obsessed with being green. A progressive image to some.
Then on the other hand there's the windmills, little wooden shoes, lots of flowers and canals, a nice picturesque setting in general.
These two gentlemen have pretty much summed up my feelings on -- and view of -- the Netherlands and her people. Progressive, yet also charmingly quaint. :bow:
Ser Clegane
11-26-2008, 22:31
Great country - always had a good time there - relaxed and friendly people. I really like to work with colleagues in the Netherlands (direct and to the point they are).
Gping to Amsterdam or Utrecht has always been a great time (which reminds me that we really have to visit some friends again this spring - looking forward to our favourite Appelbollen(?) in Utrecht)
The rivalry between the Dutch and Germans tends to be very overated - I think we became great neighbours over the last decades
:bow:
Hosakawa Tito
11-26-2008, 22:31
Apart from what has already been mentioned I have always admired the Dutch business acumen. Tulip Mania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania) immediately springs to mind, and of course, buying Manhattan for $24 dollars in shiny trinkets. :laugh4:
King Henry V
11-26-2008, 23:08
The Dutch summed up in one minute (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRfluaMKoOY).
In addition to what has been said above, I would also include the Dutch reputation for being stingy buggers.
Vladimir
11-26-2008, 23:59
The Dutch summed up in one minute (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRfluaMKoOY).
In addition to what has been said above, I would also include the Dutch reputation for being stingy buggers.
Sweet! Look what I found: http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=OGqX-tkDXEk&feature=featured
Sarmatian
11-27-2008, 02:52
It's great! Friendly people, gorgeous women, good beer! I especially loved Tivoli, Carlsberg and the Little Mermaid statue! :2thumbsup:
Isn't Carlsberg Danish beer?
On topic - weed, sex, riotous living, more sex and weed, liberal, more sex and weed, good beer and more sex and weed...
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-27-2008, 03:46
How would you non-dutchies define our tiny little space on this clay grown tall.
Clogs. Clogs and cannabis.
Peasant Phill
11-27-2008, 10:00
Isn't Carlsberg Danish beer?
On topic - weed, sex, riotous living, more sex and weed, liberal, more sex and weed, good beer and more sex and weed...
So is the little mermaid statue. Oh louis you joker you.
On topic - weed, sex, riotous living, more sex and weed, liberal, more sex and weed, mediocre beer and more sex and weed.
Hey somebody had to say it. In the land of the blind, the cyclops is king.
But yeah, the Netherlands is a pretty sweet country.
the fact that is most prominent is that you have a Royal Marines and that they train with ours, so the Dutch Armed Forces cacn't be all bad. :)
InsaneApache
11-27-2008, 13:40
Just like the American colonists were loyal subjects of the British crown until the good old King George decided that he could mistreat and disrespect us.
It's good to see that the 230 year old spin is still effective. :shame:
As for the Dutchys, I like them. In the the 80s I had a very good friend who moved back to Aalsmeer when his marriage broke up. In fact he was the roundabout reason I got into computers. We used to play chess on sundays and when he went 'home' I bought a rubber mat Spectrum so that I could carry on playing chess.
One shock I had was when I stayed at his house one night and he asked me if I'd like some ham and eggs for brekky. It was ham and eggs but not what I was expecting, it was boiled ham. :dizzy2:
Oh clogs, windmills and tulips spring to mind as well as hashish and tarts. What a country! :2thumbsup:
I have a very good friend who is dutch, we also have a lot in common, I always call him Papa...
Anyway, I think the dutch are very nice people etc, as has been said already.
They're also my team of choice in FIFA 09 although I might have chosen a somewhat older cadre, but the dutch are also a good football team for me that deserved to win cups often but then let everybody down and stopped playing for some reason. Maybe they're just humble. :shrug:
Kralizec
11-27-2008, 15:20
The Dutch? Drug-addled millers with wooden shoes, mostly.
LittleGrizzly
11-27-2008, 15:22
They realise that as a small nation it would be awfully embaressing for the other football powers if the dutch won something, humble, putting others first... is there no end to dutch virtues...
Mete Han
11-27-2008, 16:19
We had them on France, America, Germany or just about everything, but you would almost forget about that tiny little country called the Netherlands, which despite it's tiny size can be quite the subject of both disgust and admiration. We do things different here in many ways. Maybe the dutch are more subject to generalisations then the other european country's but something is wrong. There is us being soddom&gommora and there is us being boring calvinists, some consider us to be very friendly and some consider us to be very rude, we don't really have a solid label and that is starting to sting. At least the french are hated, the flemmish get mocked, and the germans are german. How would you non-dutchies define our tiny little space on this clay grown tall.
great people, very beautiful women.
Alexanderofmacedon
11-27-2008, 17:31
In the USA the common thought is simply: weed.
I think a bit differently of a culture with interesting historical roots, an interestingly different, yet similar culture to those around them. I find it would be a nice place to live and intend to visit this summer. :2thumbsup:
I really like to work with colleagues in the Netherlands (direct and to the point they are).
Often mistaken with rudeness, just dutch working ethics. It is expected from you that you work your :balloon2: of. Always hated having to call foreign contacts; enough with the pleasantries already.
seireikhaan
11-30-2008, 05:28
The Dutch? :inquisitive:
Hmm...
Four things pop into my mind right away:
1) Weed. :hippie: :smoking:
2) Hookers. :belly:
3) Tulips :daisy:
And, of course, 4) Fragony :soapbox:
~:grouphug:
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-30-2008, 05:47
I forgot the ships. There is something about the Dutch that reminds me of them.
Yoyoma1910
12-02-2008, 00:59
The Netherlands are an interesting nation. I've been on three trips there, and seen all sorts of things, from actual milkmaids going to their cows in the morning, to some guy who looked like a really pale Lou Reed in a trench coat, chasing after a man with a very stiff face, and yelling "Come on (guy's name)! Come on, man! Don't do this. Don't do this to me man!"
If I had to some up the populace in one word, it would be: Merchants.
Seamus Fermanagh
12-02-2008, 01:47
Why is everybody so endlessly fascinated with the Netherlands choice to decriminlize marijauna and sex-for-hire?
I mean, give them points for libertarianism, sure, but as the defining image of a culture?
I think of polders and merchant guild and banking and ice skates and such.
Perhaps its my status as a non-user that influences this? Or my age?
Sarmatian
12-02-2008, 02:13
Because it's something that's unique, or very rare at least. There are a lot of other countries with tulips, developed banking or diamond trade. but such a totally hedonistic-libertarian paradise??? Just Netherlands :2thumbsup:
Louis VI the Fat
12-02-2008, 02:51
Why is everybody so endlessly fascinated with the Netherlands choice to decriminlize marijauna and sex-for-hire?I realise the question i semi-hypothetical, but I'll answer it regardless, since I was pretty much thinking the same thing.
Firstly, it is a big world and the Netherlands is a small country. People can't have an extensive knowledge or even elaborate stereotypes about the entire world. So stereotypes are limited. Brazil - beach, bikinis and football. New Zealand - nature, rugby and sheep. The Netherlands - drugs and prostitution.
Secondly, this is owing to the Netherlands itself. The Dutch are part embarrassed*, part a-historical**, part uncultured***. The tragedy is that they have not always been like this. The Dutch trading towns are in historical importance, in artistic and architectural merit, even in sheer beauty, every bit the equal of the Italian city-states, or of the great Flemish towns. Just the province of Holland alone is peerless in Europe: Amsterdam, Leyden, Haarlem, Delft, Rotterdam, the Hague. An empire was run from here, global trade was conducted from here and even developed here, art flourished, censored books were printed, philosophy flourished, law flourished. Henry Mechoulan wrote a book, 'Amsterdam au temps de Spinoza', which is probably not available in English. It is astonishing. For full century, not the Spanish, British or French were the centre of European civilization, but a few acres of wetland. Which, to top it all of, these semi-amphibian Masters of the Universe forged themselves from the bottom of the sea.
If you visit it though, you'll have to look for it. In every village, every French town, everywhere in europe, there are signs that direct you to the house of famous historical persons. If there isn't any, they'll invent one. Any structure that is over two centuries old is protected. Old landscapes are still intact. There is a pride in it. The Netherlands on the other hand feel like it has been taken over by aliens, colonised. They don't promote their old culture, they don't love. They are embarrased about it, want to be modern. It is like with Italy and antiquity, there is so much of it that it is carelessly left to rot. It is maddening. One can visit the Netherlands and remain completely oblivious of its history.
For example:
Amsterdam is a sad place. Once, simultanously!, Spinoza and Descartes created modern thought, and Rembrandt and Vermeer worked here, and Grotius developed modern law, and more books were printed than in the rest of Europe combined. And now? Now the place is handed over to prostitutes, pimps, McDonalds, English stag and hen parties, piss, alcohol and endless 'XXX Sex Shows!!'. It is a complete travesty.
The difference in historical pride between Flanders and Holland is shocking. Bruges looks like a dream, absolutely gorgeous and phenomenally restored. Prague, despite the onslaught of mass tourism remains an intact historical city, with some integrity. Copenhagen is every bit as liberal as Amsterdam, but without the nonsense.
Amsterdam could be Venice. It could also be Florence. Or Oxford. Even, shockingly, all three combined. Yet, it chooses to be a third rate :daisy:hole.
https://img505.imageshack.us/img505/122/amsterdambb0.jpg
*See: Embarrassment of Riches by Simon Schama.
**The Americans here can't go a topic without referring to the Founding Fathers, the English mention Magna Carta, Nelson, the Empire. The French go on and on about the Revolution and Republican values. However, when was the last time any Dutch poster here mentioned the Dutch Republican tradition, or Spinoza, or Grotius 'Mare Liberum'?
***See wikipedia's entry on 'Fragony'. ~;)
Seamus Fermanagh
12-02-2008, 04:45
Very much my point, Louis, though much better developed and eloquently extended.
I am a bit of a libertarian myself. Though I personally would avoid most such legal vices, I really don't see the need to criminalize them (providing no harm is done to others and for consenting adults only).
If it were the defining "image" of my culture, however, I would be horrifically embarrassed. The image of an entire county centered on a Seaman first's ideal liberty port? :daisy:
Vladimir
12-02-2008, 18:12
Very much my point, Louis, though much better developed and eloquently extended.
I am a bit of a libertarian myself. Though I personally would avoid most such legal vices, I really don't see the need to criminalize them (providing no harm is done to others and for consenting adults only).
If it were the defining "image" of my culture, however, I would be horrifically embarrassed. The image of an entire county centered on a Seaman first's ideal liberty port? :daisy:
Interesting. I never thought of it as a seamen port. :laugh4:
The usual generalizations: weed and hookers, windmills, tulips, and clogs. Plus tall people (the better to breathe when the floods hit! ~D), the incredible dikes (to prevent said floods), and the Dutch Master (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exlBHTyB1R0&feature=related).
Seamus Fermanagh
12-02-2008, 21:20
The usual generalizations: weed and hookers, windmills, tulips, and clogs. Plus tall people (the better to breathe when the floods hit! ~D), the incredible dikes (to prevent said floods), and the Dutch Master (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exlBHTyB1R0&feature=related).
I get "sorry, this video is no longer availabe" so the joke is lost....:shame:
I get "sorry, this video is no longer availabe" so the joke is lost....:shame:
No joke, just class.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFvXVlfu4vs&feature=related
There are some vids of this in English, but the ones with the Dutch commentator are the best. :2thumbsup:
Kääpäkorven Konsuli
12-03-2008, 00:15
For me, Netherlands is the home of Alfred (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_J_Kwak).
"Amsterdam? Isn't that...like....the place where you can smoke weed without getting busted dude?"
Basic label of the Netherlands, at least around here, is they're very relaxed with their laws, and it's a druggy get together nation. :sweatdrop:
Banquo's Ghost
12-03-2008, 08:08
There are many astonishing things about the Dutch, but we seem to have forgotten the most iconic - of which the following is merely one of the best examples:
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v695/aslanngrae/gwape.jpg
It was not God, but the Dutch masters that invented light. :bow:
there is so much of it that it is carelessly left to rot.
Amsterdam has one of the world's best preserved historical centre's :inquisitive:
Strike For The South
12-03-2008, 15:14
pot brownies and loose women. Oh and all of this is done in clogs and then at some point they put them outside and Santa Claus stuffs them. Which leads me to belive the Dutch get the short end of the stick on Christmas. Santa must be a Belgian.
AlexanderSextus
12-04-2008, 07:42
Why is everybody so endlessly fascinated with the Netherlands choice to decriminlize marijauna and sex-for-hire?
because it should be like that in every nation!
because it should be like that in every nation!
There is a darker side to all that, you would almost forget that these women are usually from eastern europe and aren't doing it because they like it so much they are forced, prostitution is still the realm of organized crime there is nothing progressive about legalizing prostitution it's looking away from a very cynical, and in our case, massive trade.
LittleGrizzly
12-04-2008, 13:18
I remember discussing this issue with you a while ago....
I think prostitution should be legalised but it seems they haven't put strict enough rules and regulations in Netherlands to make it work...
The idea behind legalisation is that it would take organised crime out of it, or at least force them to give the workers certain rights, and it also gives them an avenue to complain to the goverment (the workers) because they are no longer criminals...
The other side of it is health and safety, if its a legalised trade then things like condoms are health and safety and various other rules to protect the workers and customers from transfering diseases... i assume this part does work in Netherlands ?
The other side of it is health and safety, if its a legalised trade then things like condoms are health and safety and various other rules to protect the workers and customers from transfering diseases... i assume this part does work in Netherlands ?
Yes we did,
It does on the red-lights, but the red lights are a disneyland for adults, behind that facade is a lot of human suffering I think it's a sad sad place if I could close it down I wouldn't hesitate to do so, private clubs and escort service fine these girls do it out of their own choice, are well looked after and make a lot of money, girls are mostly students. Not all exploiters are bad a friend of mine has two girls in The Hague, they actually came to him, guy is a bit of a puppy nothing mean about him, he asked me in but I would never do that not my trade legal or not. The extra dark side, there are also unofficial places that are 'tolerated' that are as sinister as can be, there is nobody looking out for these girls and they don't get very old, they stand in the cold in a line and wait for a car to pick them up it's rediculous that is allowed.
AlexanderSextus
12-05-2008, 10:21
Yes we did,
The extra dark side, there are also unofficial places that are 'tolerated' that are as sinister as can be, there is nobody looking out for these girls and they don't get very old, they stand in the cold in a line and wait for a car to pick them up it's rediculous that is allowed.
That is quite ridiculous and should be illegal, but the ones who willingly choose and enjoy the oldest profession in the world should be kept legal and safe.
AlexanderSextus
12-05-2008, 10:23
nothing progressive about legalizing prostitution that is linked to organized crime and is not a legitimate buisiness
Fixed!!!
The Stranger
12-05-2008, 14:10
IMHO holland isnt that progressive any more... it just conservatively sticks to that image. You can call the (extreme) right wing progressive but I think they are not really contributing, so that would be POV.
Kralizec
12-06-2008, 18:03
pot brownies and loose women. Oh and all of this is done in clogs and then at some point they put them outside and Santa Claus stuffs them. Which leads me to belive the Dutch get the short end of the stick on Christmas. Santa must be a Belgian.
We've got Saint Nicolas instead, wich is where you guys ripped the idea of Santa Claus from ~;p
I realise the question i semi-hypothetical, but I'll answer it regardless, since I was pretty much thinking the same thing.
Firstly, it is a big world and the Netherlands is a small country. People can't have an extensive knowledge or even elaborate stereotypes about the entire world. So stereotypes are limited. Brazil - beach, bikinis and football. New Zealand - nature, rugby and sheep. The Netherlands - drugs and prostitution.
Secondly, this is owing to the Netherlands itself. The Dutch are part embarrassed*, part a-historical**, part uncultured***. The tragedy is that they have not always been like this. The Dutch trading towns are in historical importance, in artistic and architectural merit, even in sheer beauty, every bit the equal of the Italian city-states, or of the great Flemish towns. Just the province of Holland alone is peerless in Europe: Amsterdam, Leyden, Haarlem, Delft, Rotterdam, the Hague. An empire was run from here, global trade was conducted from here and even developed here, art flourished, censored books were printed, philosophy flourished, law flourished. Henry Mechoulan wrote a book, 'Amsterdam au temps de Spinoza', which is probably not available in English. It is astonishing. For full century, not the Spanish, British or French were the centre of European civilization, but a few acres of wetland. Which, to top it all of, these semi-amphibian Masters of the Universe forged themselves from the bottom of the sea.
If you visit it though, you'll have to look for it. In every village, every French town, everywhere in europe, there are signs that direct you to the house of famous historical persons. If there isn't any, they'll invent one. Any structure that is over two centuries old is protected. Old landscapes are still intact. There is a pride in it. The Netherlands on the other hand feel like it has been taken over by aliens, colonised. They don't promote their old culture, they don't love. They are embarrased about it, want to be modern. It is like with Italy and antiquity, there is so much of it that it is carelessly left to rot. It is maddening. One can visit the Netherlands and remain completely oblivious of its history.
For example:
Amsterdam is a sad place. Once, simultanously!, Spinoza and Descartes created modern thought, and Rembrandt and Vermeer worked here, and Grotius developed modern law, and more books were printed than in the rest of Europe combined. And now? Now the place is handed over to prostitutes, pimps, McDonalds, English stag and hen parties, piss, alcohol and endless 'XXX Sex Shows!!'. It is a complete travesty.
The difference in historical pride between Flanders and Holland is shocking. Bruges looks like a dream, absolutely gorgeous and phenomenally restored. Prague, despite the onslaught of mass tourism remains an intact historical city, with some integrity. Copenhagen is every bit as liberal as Amsterdam, but without the nonsense.
Amsterdam could be Venice. It could also be Florence. Or Oxford. Even, shockingly, all three combined. Yet, it chooses to be a third rate :daisy:hole.
https://img505.imageshack.us/img505/122/amsterdambb0.jpg
*See: Embarrassment of Riches by Simon Schama.
**The Americans here can't go a topic without referring to the Founding Fathers, the English mention Magna Carta, Nelson, the Empire. The French go on and on about the Revolution and Republican values. However, when was the last time any Dutch poster here mentioned the Dutch Republican tradition, or Spinoza, or Grotius 'Mare Liberum'?
***See wikipedia's entry on 'Fragony'. ~;)
Historical knowledge/consciousness of the average Dutchman is atrocious. Other than William of Orange people'd be hard pressed to name any other important statesman or political figure from our history. Few have any idea what Hugo de Groot's or Erasmus' contributions to philosophy, or Leeuwenhoeks or Zernike's scientific achievements were. If this were any other country, the majority of people would at least know these people's names.
I don't think that this can be ascribed to any embarassment on our part. I think it's got more to do with down-to-earth disinterest in non-recent history, and having no particular need to bolster national pride.
As for Amsterdam, I've only visited it 3 times and never as an adult. Giving it a makeover to look like a 17th century city might make it more pitoresque but that'd be phony. We should really consider the idea of enabling everyone to open casinos instead of just the state, with already legalized prostitution and decriminalized weed we could become more legendary than Las Vegas and Babylon combined :smash:
KukriKhan
12-06-2008, 19:54
The only Dutch people I know who actually live in the Ned's are the fellows here at the org. But I married a Dutch-American girl in '72 (her grandmother was the immigrant, from Amsterdam). So, my impression is based on those two sources.
A direct-speaking, hard-working, naturally curious, clever people, their free-wheeling Libertarian ways ("Live, and let live") are tempered by a Calvinist streak, so they vigorously defend personal freedom of choice with a zeal usually seen only among the religious.
They really, really, REALLY don't like to be told what to do, or be ordered about - neither do they tend to order others about. When happy, or contented, they spread their warm-fuzzy feeling to those around them. This is their usual state. When they are down, however, they go to internal brooding places so dark they would scare a Russian in mid-winter. I've learned to leave brooding Dutchies alone; they'll snap out of it soon enough on their own. I've never been able to assist them in those dark times.
They must be kept busy; idleness makes them brood.
Quite adventurous as young people (they love to travel), they grow more conservative and home-body-ish with age. They appreciate humour, but don't tell a joke very well.
My :2cents:
The Stranger
12-07-2008, 14:33
i can relate a bit to kukri's vision... oh kukri, youre soooo wise :P
Vladimir
12-08-2008, 15:57
i can relate a bit to kukri's vision... oh kukri, youre soooo wise :P
So, what have the Undutchables been up to lately?
I like how the Dutch have their G's. energie, technologie, grootfontein...
so funny:2thumbsup:
Mangudai
12-09-2008, 19:19
Good people, I can't really stereotype them. I greatly enjoyed my visit there.
One thing that really impressed me about the Netherlands was the amount of work previous generations had done. I do woodworking as a hobby/sidejob. I examined old Dutch window frames very closely. I would estimate a master woodworker spent a week to make one window frame. Everything was carefully shaped and fit perfectly over 100 years later. America is all about production. Southern Europe is all about perfection. The Dutch seem to combine production and perfection.
I also thought a lot about the canals, and how rivers are elevated above the surrounding farmland. That's impressive civil engineering for any society. The Dutch accomplished these things centuries ago mostly with wooden shovels. The amount of labor involved is simply staggering.
Adrian II
12-10-2008, 15:53
However, when was the last time any Dutch poster here mentioned the Dutch Republican tradition, or Spinoza, or Grotius 'Mare Liberum'?About five months ago, when I discussed Montesquieu with Seamus Fermanagh and others. That must have been during your sabbatical.
Anyhoo.. the test for real Dutchness is eating a raw herring with chopped onions and a pickle, in one go - dangle it above your head, let it slide in, then bite it off just before the tail.
Louis VI the Fat
12-10-2008, 17:03
You're back! You're back! :jumping::jumping:
About five months ago, when I discussed Montesquieu with Seamus Fermanagh and others. That must have been during your sabbatical. I have absolutely no recollection of this. Maybe I was away.
But do you disagree with the point too? That the Dutch identity is constructed more on social progressiveness than on historical tradition?
Anyhoo.. the test for real Dutchness is eating a raw herring with chopped onions and a pickle, in one go - dangle it above your head, let it slide in, then bite it off just before the tail.The Dutch are famous for shoving anything all the way down their throat. :2thumbsup:
I don't think that this can be ascribed to any embarassment on our part. You are quite correct. Schama specifically spoke about the 17th century. In blissful ignorance I presumed this cultural trait still lingered on. :embarassed:
Talk about being stuck between two cultures. Pickles? Everybody knows that only in Amsterdam they serve herring with pickles and these barbarians chop the herring up into conveniently bitesize bits that are that much easier to consume. Idiots, eating a herring properly should be a trial by fire.
I think the problem with the national identity is just that there is not identity. The Dutch are basically a collection of several tiny communities, each with their own language and culture. Then, a central government promoted some sort of fake identity - the so-called 'Republiek der Batavieren' was used as a large umbrella over these communities, and 'the Netherlands' were born.
Most of the Dutch are simple people - a reason why they don't know much of culture, or history, is because they just don't care. It's not useful to them, and why spend time learning it while they can just enjoy their lives?
There's a lot of good things about my country. Also a lot of foul things I wish I could make go away.
Adrian II
12-11-2008, 14:22
The Dutch are basically a collection of several tiny communities, each with their own language and culture. Then, a central government promoted some sort of fake identity - the so-called 'Republiek der Batavieren' was used as a large umbrella over these communities, and 'the Netherlands' were born.Right on the mark. Until 1814 the Dutch were a patchwork of local communities with diverging religions, languages and regional affinities. After King William I had been installed, the Calvinist ruling elite tried to unify the country and shape it according to its self-image. Its main instrument was the moral campaign, which created the impression that Dutch identity revolves around moral precepts such as hard work, hygiene, the security of public life (removal of beggars and thieves into workhouses, etcetera), and the sanctity of personal property and profit. For a time it certainly did. The subjects they campaigned on were issues that appealed to all religions and communities, both before and after the Belgian secession of 1830 removed a large Roman Catholic component from Dutch public life.
But the need to accommodate Catholics and Jews, to integrate cities and rural areas and to keep the nation together also required compromise and backroom politics. Hence a second Dutch tradition: moderation and accommodation are regarded as virtues, not as signs of (social or intellectual) weakness. A prime example of Dutch accomodation have always been the waterships, where people of all walks of life and personal convictions worked together for the common good of water management.
As for Dutch culture, we have always been so deeply influenced by the larger nations around us that we couldn't tell our own traditions from those of our neighbours. I'm cool with that. So are our business people who make money all across the world because they are used to adapting to other customs, cultures and languages.
Mangudai
12-12-2008, 07:32
Do contemporary Dutch still have a great work ethic? Or do you think their work ethic is much weaker than their grandparents had?
Adrian II
12-12-2008, 09:05
Do contemporary Dutch still have a great work ethic?Good enough, I would say. Productivity is as high as it ever was, foreign investors have no complaints. And the mentality is still as Fragony says: it's a git-er-done society.
RAs for Dutch culture, we have always been so deeply influenced by the larger nations around us that we couldn't tell our own traditions from those of our neighbours.
Yet we aren't like them, the dutch are a real people with their own traditions and customs, despite being hammed in by Germany, France and what is now left of the united kingdom. That is a small miracle, that we ruled the world for a century is unbelievable.
Adrian II
12-12-2008, 15:28
Yet we aren't like them, the dutch are a real people with their own traditions and customs, despite being hammed in by Germany, France and what is now left of the united kingdom.Define 'real'.
That is a small miracle, that we ruled the world for a century is unbelievable.That's because it is untrue. The Dutch had a nice naval empire going which allowed them to play off the big powers against one another, but that doesn't equate to hegemony, let alone strategic dominance. Of much more importance was the fact highlighted (with some hyperbole) by Louis, namely that fact that the Low Countries were an enlightened Republic and a political inspiration to others.
Of course it is but it's our golden age regardless and pretty damn impressive.
Adrian II
12-12-2008, 21:49
Of course it is but it's our golden age regardless and pretty damn impressive.Yours maybe. I hadn't been born at the time.
I'll tell you what. I have a friend in Nijmegen whose ancestor went on the first Crusade, and guess what, his sword has been preserved and it is still in the family. How cool is that? Eh?
But my friend never claims that it was he who conquered Jerusalem in 1099.
Meneldil
12-13-2008, 00:52
Yours maybe. I hadn't been born at the time.
I'll tell you what. I have a friend in Nijmegen whose ancestor went on the first Crusade, and guess what, his sword has been preserved and it is still in the family. How cool is that? Eh?
But my friend never claims that it was he who conquered Jerusalem in 1099.
I'm fairly sure this would be a great way to get chicks, Dutch or not.
Yours maybe. I hadn't been born at the time.
I'll tell you what. I have a friend in Nijmegen whose ancestor went on the first Crusade, and guess what, his sword has been preserved and it is still in the family. How cool is that? Eh?
But my friend never claims that it was he who conquered Jerusalem in 1099.
Every old family does, there has been quite an extensive trade in fake crusader-charts. But I don't get your point, I just say that the dutch are their own people, their own language their own traditions their own oddities. You know someone who doesn't claim to have conquered Jeruzalem in 1099 which I believe because Jeruzalem was conquered in 1098.
“the test for real Dutchness is eating a raw herring with chopped onions and a pickle, in one go - dangle it above your head, let it slide in, then bite it off just before the tail.” I did it: nothing special to report.
I worked for a Dutch Charities for few years. It was a mixture of efficiency, greed, almost-professionalism and family business…
To negotiate (or report) contracts with Dutch Foreign Ministry (or Embassy) was always nice and almost informal. Contact with the ambassadors (in all countries) are easy, (unlike with the French) similar with the US personal. Changing budget line is possible if you stay within the budget, and they are very reasonable people.
Side comment, the only reasonable comments during NATO bombing campaign I heard were on a Dutch Channel.
In fact the Dutch TV was the only channel where opponents to this war were heard without been mocked or/and ridiculed…
The Dutch proud themselves about to be pragmatic and efficient (at least the one I worked with). They were nice people and I mostly enjoyed working with them.
We never came real friends, but it never happened in Charities any way (turn-over).
And here comes the dark side.
Their acceptance of “what other do until it doesn’t hurt me” is as well called indifference or hypocrisy. Prostitution and drugs are all right if it is not their children doing or using it.
A friend of mine working The Hague Tribunal suffered a lot there of loneliness.
She ended to think that all this so-called liberalism is in fact a cover for a superb selfishness and egocentricity excluding any empathy for the others.
Pragmatism can lead to do things absolutely atrocious (if we can’t do something about it, just do it) as illustrated but the deportation of the Jews of Amsterdam.
The real Politic / pragmatism can be easily turned in a nasty way.
And here comes the dark side.
Their acceptance of “what other do until it doesn’t hurt me” is as well called indifference or hypocrisy. Prostitution and drugs are all right if it is not their children doing or using it.
A friend of mine working The Hague Tribunal suffered a lot there of loneliness.
She ended to think that all this so-called liberalism is in fact a cover for a superb selfishness and egocentricity excluding any empathy for the others.
But of course, what's in a word, when you tolerate something you allow something you don't agree with. Nothing hypocritical about it, do what you want as long as it doesn't affect me. Consequences of a nanny state people become selfish. I am from the countryside, if your house burns down and you aren't properly insured don't be surprised if the community collected enough money to build you a new one. In the city's it is different.
Adrian II
12-13-2008, 10:17
But I don't get your point Quite. My point is that there is no 'we', no collective that spans centuries. You and I are connected to our ancestors only in the genealogical sense.
I hate to disappoint you, Fragony, but you and I never had an empire. Nor did you and I fight at Waterloo, deport Jews for the nazi's, or rescue victims of the 1956 flooding disaster in the province of Zeeland.
(..) because Jeruzalem was conquered in 1098.Tsk tsk (http://www.bartleby.com/65/cr/Crusades.html)
Quite. My point is that there is no 'we', no collective that spans centuries. You and I are connected to our ancestors only in the genealogical sense.
I hate to disappoint you, Fragony, but you and I never had an empire. Nor did you and I fight at Waterloo, deport Jews for the nazi's, or rescue victims of the 1956 flooding disaster in the province of Zeeland.
Tsk tsk (http://www.bartleby.com/65/cr/Crusades.html)
Dangit 1099 it is. Again don't get your point, I just say there is such a thing as a dutch identity. You claim there is no such thing? That would get us somewhere.
Adrian II
12-13-2008, 11:05
Dangit 1099 it is. Again don't get your point, I just say there is such a thing as a dutch identity. You claim there is no such thing? That would get us somewhere.The joke is that people always claim the glorious aspects of the national past as 'theirs' and discard the rest. Is the seventeenth century Dutch trade empire in my genes? Then so is the illiterate peasantry of the province of Drenthe, or the colonial massacres like Rawagade, or the collaboration with the nazi's between 1940 and 1945.
The joke is that people always claim the glorious aspects of the national past as 'theirs' and discard the rest. Is the seventeenth century Dutch trade empire in my genes? Then so is the illiterate peasantry of the province of Drenthe, or the colonial massacres like Rawagade, or the collaboration with the nazi's between 1940 and 1945.
So if I get things straight acknowledging that the dutch did pretty well in the past is really one step away from channeling Hitler? That does make sense in a rather nonsensical sort of way.
InsaneApache
12-13-2008, 11:57
The joke is that people always claim the glorious aspects of the national past as 'theirs' and discard the rest. Is the seventeenth century Dutch trade empire in my genes? Then so is the illiterate peasantry of the province of Drenthe, or the colonial massacres like Rawagade, or the collaboration with the nazi's between 1940 and 1945.
I seem to recall a general strike being called over the forced deportation of the Jews. The only occupied country to engage in direct action against that edict of the Third Reich. (and largely get away with it!) I'd be righty proud of that if I was a Dutchman.
Please carry on gentlemen.
No dutchman heard of that one and those that do know it's not-done to bring up, when it comes to the dutch in WW2 believing is not enough you have to know we collaborated and couldn't wait to hand over these nosy fella's. Lest we never forget :yes:
InsaneApache
12-13-2008, 12:18
I remember it from the excellent World at War produced back in the '70s. I'm now furiously looking for a link to back me up. :laugh4:
I remember it from the excellent World at War produced back in the '70s. I'm now furiously looking for a link to back me up. :laugh4:
The february strike http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_strike
InsaneApache
12-13-2008, 12:33
The strike was set for February 25, a Tuesday. The Communists particularly wanted the participation of the city's municipal workers, especially the Amsterdam's streetcar conductors and drivers. The absence of streetcars, so it was thought, would be particularly dramatic. There was some hesitation among the streetcar employees---but on the day of the strike many of the streetcars never left the sheds and many of those which did, returned after their first run. By 12:00 not a single streetcar was running in Amsterdam. By day's end nearly 50% of all municipal employees had gone on strike. In turn, they were joined by many of Amsterdam's metal and shipyard workers. The strike spread among white and blue collar Large crowds assembled in the streets of Amsterdam. The Dutch police undertook no serious action against the strikers.
http://www-lib.usc.edu/~anthonya/war/febstrik.htm
Thanks Fragony.
Kinda odd that nothing is to be found of this quite unique event in dutch schoolbooks, too busy making up stories of Marroccan soldiers who drowned near Dunkerk and washed ashore fought of 8 panzerdevisions armed with nothing other then their ancestral daggers and a strong desire for peace.
InsaneApache
12-13-2008, 13:18
So it's not taught in schools anymore? Strange. When I first met my erstwhile friend and colleague, I jokingly referred to the Dutch Waffen SS divisions recruited in The Netherlands. (The old 'don't mention the war' ploy :laugh4:) and he got quite upset.
He reminded me of the February strike, which I'd forgotten about. I felt a right tit at the time, I'll never forget the look of hurt and anguish on his face, that's why I remember it to this day.
Although the Danes did something similar when they spirited the Jews across to Sweden on one night, going on strike in Nazi occupied territories was a brave thing to do.
So it's not taught in schools anymore? Strange.
Learned about it a few years ago. You have to take into consideration that dutch schools are run by social democrats, bit like labour but radicalised. Could be that it was tought but I mostly remember how I was to educate my parents about acid rain. Take notice on how the mind of my buddy AdrianII instantly switches to the holocaust when confronted with national achievements.
sounds very like the British educational establishment, populated by the left wing in general, with the teaching unions staffed by people who still regard Maggie as the devil incarnate to this day! :laugh4:
sounds very like the British educational establishment, populated by the left wing in general, with the teaching unions staffed by people who still regard Maggie as the devil incarnate to this day! :laugh4:
Thank god for that, the english are so intend on being the biggest idiots in Europe that they forced us to stop trying there is just no way to compete for even the most willing surface-to-air kamikazi pilot.
The joke is that people always claim the glorious aspects of the national past as 'theirs' and discard the rest.
Yes, I remember how I united Germany, beat france several times and then resisted Hitler, man, I'm so proud of myself. :sweatdrop:
Well, to a certain degree I do identify myself with all that, but it is a very low degree and nothing to be proud of myself, just that my ancestors in a wider sense did some cool things and I may have a similar culture which may or may not enable myself to do cool things as well, or not. :dizzy2:
Maybe better would be to say I'm proud of some things my dad did and here it makes more sense because I have inherited some of his traits etc. so I can imagine myself being a bit like him. Actually my humor is almost a copy of his. :sweatdrop:
Oh and to come back to the original topic, I am also a bit proud to be half dutch (you know, my dad), that makes me only half a Nazi and I hope it gives me some dutch coolness. ~;)
Louis VI the Fat
12-13-2008, 20:24
February Strike Persistent myth and propaganda, I cry (http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp412.htm)!
Well, there was a strike, but it was neither very large nor effective. Honour to whom honour is due of course, but this single strike, and some small groups of brave men and women, I am afraid, seems to be the grand total of Dutch resistance. Yet the benign Dutch war image has held on for over sixty years, internationally and in the Netherlands. This, despite the fact that in all of the occupied countries, nowhere were more Jews murdered than in the Netherlands. Historians have long since unmasked the great discrepancy between national myth and cold, hard fact:
The myth that the great majority of the Dutch people had a highly positive attitude toward the Jews during World War II, identified with their suffering, and took risks to help them has gradually been unmasked in The Netherlands itself over the past decades. The historian Nanda van der Zee summed this up in 1997: "The vain national self-image of the most tolerant people on earth, which had assisted its Jewish fellow-citizens so 'charitably,' was corroded in the 1960s when another generation born after the war started to ask questions."
Israeli historian Joel Fishman has also refuted a follow-up myth. He has referred to the treatment of the Dutch Jews in the postwar years by the country's democratically chosen government. The internationally known Dutch political scientist Arent Lijphart wrote that Holland "has no minorities that are disfranchised, deprived of their civil liberties, or subject to systematic discrimination." Fishman has retorted that Lijphart's statement could only be true if "the Jews in The Netherlands counted for absolutely nothing, and their history was of no consequence."
Internationally, the benign Dutch war image has held on for over fifty years. In its introduction to The Netherlands, the 1999 Jewish Chronicle Travel Guide still writes: "the Germans transported 100,000 [Jews] to death camps in Poland, but the local population tended to behave sympathetically towards their Jewish neighbors, hiding many."
Israel, where at least the authorities should know better, is no exception. One former Israeli ambassador to The Netherlands told this author that he regularly corrected draft speeches of visiting high-ranking Israeli politicians, to prevent them from thanking the Dutch for their "extraordinary efforts" for the Jews during World War II without mentioning the substantial collaboration with the Nazis.
Why Were So Many Dutch Jews Killed?
The percentage of Jews from The Netherlands murdered by the Germans and their associates in World War II was higher than in any other Western European country.
[article continues in link]
Adrian II
12-13-2008, 21:29
So if I get things straight acknowledging that the dutch did pretty well in the past is really one step away from channeling Hitler?This is known as a non sequitur.
The Danes were the only occupied people that managed to oppose the deportation of their Jewish citizens with any success. Although that episode, too, is surrounded with myths, it is at least something to write home about.
I have no time for Europeans who boast about 'their' war past or belittle that of others. That's usually just crap meant to serve present-day purposes.
This is known as a non sequitur.
The Danes were the only occupied people that managed to oppose the deportation of their Jewish citizens with any success. Although that episode, too, is surrounded with myths, it is at least something to write home about.
I have no time for Europeans who boast about 'their' war past or belittle that of others. That's usually just crap meant to serve present-day purposes.
Getting rather specific aren't we, never said anything about our heroic behaviour in WW2 that would make me look rather stupid, considering, I again, said there is such a thing as a dutch identity. So far that has gotten me slavery, Rawagade, and the collaboration with the nazi's between 1940 and 1945. Self-denial is an identity as well, see Luigi's post on page two.
Why Were So Many Dutch Jews Killed?
The percentage of Jews from The Netherlands murdered by the Germans and their associates in World War II was higher than in any other Western European country.
Quite simple, dutch civil records you could see what religion someone had all the nazi's had a nice list to work with, and it's a small easily managed country. Where to hide there is no nowhere to hide.
Adrian II
12-14-2008, 12:44
Self-denial is an identity as well, see Luigi's post on page two.Once again, what is this 'self' you are talking about? Does it encompass only the supposed 'heroic' past or also the greed, cruelty and stupidity that were part of Dutch history?
National identity is a catch-phrase that never passes a reality test. To me, nationhood is defined by the laws and institutions of a nation, not by a supposed national identity. I'm a Renaniste, as Luigi will immediately recognise.
Once again, what is this 'self' you are talking about? Does it encompass only the supposed 'heroic' past or also the greed, cruelty and stupidity that were part of Dutch history?
Why do you keep throwing it on an a heroic past when I have used no such words? We share a language, customs, oddities distinctly dutch as most here would agree, what you chose to attribute to it is up to you free country, if that would be the indo-china massacres or handing over these nosy fellas all fine with me.
Louis VI the Fat
12-15-2008, 01:51
Why Were So Many Dutch Jews Killed?
The percentage of Jews from The Netherlands murdered by the Germans and their associates in World War II was higher than in any other Western European country.
Quite simple, dutch civil records you could see what religion someone had all the nazi's had a nice list to work with, and it's a small easily managed country. Where to hide there is no nowhere to hide.The article already rubbished both excuses:
Nice lists and a well-managed country? Why, indeed it was, and far from being on massive strikes, the famous Dutch work ethic functioned unhampered. What's more, it appears this Dutch Protestant work ethic was more about finishing off a job than about any ethics:
In their preparations for the extermination of the Jews living in The Netherlands, the Germans could count on the assistance of the greater part of the Dutch administrative infrastructure. The occupiers had to employ only a relatively limited number of their own. Dutch policemen rounded up the families to be sent to their deaths in Eastern Europe. Trains of the Dutch railways staffed by Dutch employees transported the Jews to camps in The Netherlands which were transit points to Auschwitz, Sobibor, and other death camps. Van der Zee writes that with respect to Dutch collaboration, Eichmann later said "The transports run so smoothly that it is a pleasure to see."
Nowhere to hide in a small and flat country? Apparantly, there were no places to hide for Jews about to be murdered, but plenty for Dutch to evade labour service:
Yet another reason sometimes given for the high Jewish death-toll is that The Netherlands is a small and flat country in which it is more difficult to hide than in Belgium or France. This is a weak argument since, in the later war years, many hiding places were found for Dutch workers who had been called up for labor service in Germany.
-~-~-~<o(o{O}o)o>~-~-~-
A Jew was twice as safe in Catholic Belgium. A Jew was three times as safe in France, even in Vichy. Four times as safe in Italy. In fact, in the 1940's, a Jew was even safer in Berlin than in Amsterdam.
Part of the explanation is, that contrary to public perception, in West Europe, including Germany, Jews were much safer amidst Catholics than amidst Protestants. All the later uproar about the indifference of the silent pope Pius? Pah. For real cold, bitter disinterest in the plight of Jews, read some Protestant sermons of the time.
It is in Protestant theology, and in Calvinism even moreso than in Lutheranism or Episcopialism, that a man's misfortune is regarded rightful punishment from God for the error of his ways. And the reverse: a man's plight is proof of his wickedness. Being send to Ausswitch meant one had deserved it. And if one deserved it, obviously one ought to be send to there. Can't interfere with the will of God.
Short of memory and long of hypocrisy they are, our pious Protestant friends.
Sorry Fragony, I hate it when threads descent into WWII debates yet again, but it is a hobby of mine to debunk national mythology. A Renaniste will carefully point out that nationhood is as much about remembering a common past as about common 'forgetfulness' about the past.
I'll go one better and say that there isn't a past at all. There is but a representation of the past. In the case of nationalism, a construction of a past to create and bind a community, often were there wasn't a community to begin with. A construction founded on narratives that are, if not necessarily false, based on selective cherry-picking of events, out of which a narrative is build to support contemporary demands. A past does not create an identity, an identity creates itself a fitting past.
There is a gaping hole in the above: a construct of a past creates a national identity, and this identity creates a construction of a past. This is a circular reasoning that remains unexplained. This is because I, in fact, haven't got a clue what I'm going on about You shall all have to work it out for yourselves. I shall leave it it as a challenge. With no small hope of enticing Adrian into further discussion and lure him back into the abyss of Backroom debate.
Sorry Fragony, I hate it when threads descent into WWII debates yet again, but it is a hobby of mine to debunk national mythology.
No national mythology your version is the commonly accepted one, you confusing what has been said about us not what we say ourselves. National myths should be known to the population I'd say, good luck finding a dutchman who has heard of that strike. There is a whole lot more to the high number of jews deported not in the least the role of the jews themselves.
http://www.humboldt.edu/~rescuers/book/Strobos/Conditions.Holland.html
The second factor was the German device of setting up a Jewish Council, the Joodsche Raad, composed of a group of prominent middle-class Jewish leaders, for the purpose of conveying German commands efficiently to the Jewish population. The Jewish leaders reasoned among themselves, as they did in other occupied countries, that their role in keeping the channels of communication with their German oppressers open, and of maintaining law and order in the newly formed chaotic ghetto population of uprooted families, would help the bereft Jews more than harm them. In retrospect it is easy to see how wrong they were, as the Council quickly became the unwitting tool of the German destruction machinery, actually delivering the Jews directly to the German deportation trains.
^-didn't work out that well for them
Adrian II
12-15-2008, 13:41
Dutch policemen rounded up the families to be sent to their deaths in Eastern Europe.Some did, but the majority of policemen didn't. Some Jews were rounded up by Dutch police, but the majority of Jewish victims were rounded up in German razzia's conducted by SS, Grüne Polizei and the regular army.
The source which you quote is rich on hyperbole, as is the work of the historian, Nanda van der Zee, on which it is partly based.
In fact, in the 1940's, a Jew was even safer in Berlin than in Amsterdam.Eh?
You know as well as I that such comparisons are crap. But if you can't even get your crap right, what does it tell us about your real views?
Let's see if it's even approximately true.
By 1943 all Berlin Jews had been officielly deported. The city was declared 'Judenrein', i.e. 'clear of Jews', in that year. After the war it appeared that about 8.000 (out of almost 200.000) had managed to survive undercover. That's 4 % of the total. In Amsterdam there were about 90.000 Jews in 1940. Just over 25% survived, equalling about 23.000. If you factor in the comparative sizes of both cities, the difference becomes even more .. thought-provoking.
Regarding the February Strike (as it is known here) of 1941, this was the first and largest mass protest against the deportation of Jews anywhere in Europe. Are we to conclude that a Dutchman was ten times more likely to protest the deportations than a German, twenty-five times more than a Frenchman, etcetera...?
As for you statement that during 1940-1945 Jews were safer in Catholic countries and areas - try good old Catholic Austria for size. Not only did it do worse than most other nations in protecting Jews, it also provided a remarkable number of the actual persecutors. Among them Arthur Seyss-Inquart, Hitler's Reichskommissar for the occupied Netherlands.
As you can see I don't shy away from a good peeing contest. Or a crapping contest, rather. But it has little to do with history as we pretend to know it.
Louis VI the Fat
12-15-2008, 14:54
CrapAh, but is that your hurt historical sense speaking, or your hurt national pride? Perhaps a mix?
I would venture to say that it is not just the wee bit of hyperbole and poetic license in my presentation of WWII in the Netherlands that got your back up.
Could it be, that maybe you too are not insensitive to nationalism? That your Dutch identity then is, in fact, present, and is based on more than just 'laws and institutions'?
National identity is a catch-phrase that never passes a reality test. To me, nationhood is defined by the laws and institutions of a nation, not by a supposed national identity.
Could it be, that maybe you too are not insensitive to nationalism? That your Dutch identity then is, in fact, present, and is based on more than just 'laws and institutions'?
Was waiting for you to move in for the kill.
But AdrianII is correct that van der Zee work is controversial, often accused of being a political pamflet rather then a real historical study. It is dripping with rethoric and isn't that much respected nowadays.
Adrian II
12-15-2008, 15:12
Could it be, that maybe you too are not insensitive to nationalism?Oh, stop the second-guessing. Let us say that I am related to people who were personally involved in all this. The good and the bad were always mixed in these episodes. The art is in getting the mixture right.
And what you did in your post is akin to mixing large chunks of Fourme D'Ambert into a bowl of lemonade and topping it off with potato chips and soy sauce. :toilet:
although that episode, too, is surrounded with myths, it is at least something to write home about.
I have no time for Europeans who boast about 'their' war past or belittle that of others. That's usually just crap meant to serve present-day purposes.
Yep. You even make the time when someone isn't boasting, pre-emptive pc strike.
Regarding the February Strike (as it is known here) of 1941, this was the first and largest mass protest against the deportation of Jews anywhere in Europe
Make up your mind. Can rub the wrong way can't it I have never seen such nationalistic zeal for quite some time. Stuck between two reflexes aren't we. A (somewhat) hostile when being proud of anything that goes back before you, but still you do appear to be kinda stung by Louis. I kinda am but that just me.
Louis VI the Fat
12-15-2008, 17:50
Let us say that I am related to people who were personally involved in all this. The good and the bad were always mixed in these episodes. The art is in getting the mixture right.
And what you did in your post is akin to mixing large chunks of Fourme D'Ambert into a bowl of lemonade and topping it off with potato chips and soy sauce. :toilet:I love fusion cooking! http://matousmileys.free.fr/miamm2.gif
As to the other points: we all are related to people who lived the age. All my grandparents and great-grandparents were in the resistance. :yes:
Which means, as most Europeans will know: they weren't. Or rather, they somewhat were. They did what everybody did: they tried to get through as well as they could. They did some things right, other things...not so much. WWII is not black and white, it is grey. The good and the bad were always mixed in these episodes indeed. The divide is certainly not between nations, nor, more relevantly, even between individuals. It was within each person. Empathy, context, an eye for the human scale of events are what is needed to write the history of WWII.
Edit: which is not to say that my post wasn't factually correct. With the exception of saying 'Berlin' where it should've been 'Germany'. If one compares the number of Jews pre-1933 with the number that were murdered, Germany's murder percentage is rather low. This is of course because many German Jews had fled abroad beore 1939, and were later murdered abroad or from abroad. And later appeared on the statistics of these countries. Lies, gross lies and statistics: shelter a lot a fleeing Jews in the 1930's, whom are duly at great risk a few years later because they haven't had time to integrate well in their host societies, and you end up in the history books as a nation with a high percentage of murdered Jews, easily surpassing Germany.
Which shows that it is all too easy to impose a ridiculous narrative on historical events while still sticking to historical fact. Which is pretty much what all the different nationalistic histories of European nations are all about.
Adrian II
12-15-2008, 18:06
Make up your mind. Can rub the wrong way can't it I have never seen such nationalistic zeal for quite some time.Where's the zeal. The February Strike is a fact. So is the record of the Danes, which is better than ours. Without context however, these comparisons go nowhere. Denmark for instance was Hitler's pet fellow Aryan nation, hence his tendency to go soft on them at the start and take their contrary attitude in his stride. Poland or Bohemia on the other hand got to feel the wrath of the Führer straight away and suffered much, much worse, in both human and economic terms, than either Denmark or The Netherlands (or the two combined, if you want).
I regard nationhood as a project, looking to the future instead of the past. That's how all great nations were shaped. Let's hope we will be one day, and let's look forward to it instead of staring vacuously into a past that never was.
Much controversity even when using the same number, that's the thing with history you can never be certain. I think the dutch 'myth' is actually from before the war, a lot of jews used the netherlands to flee to the US prior to the invasion, and in the US the cookies&rainbows view of the dutch in WW2 is the most persistant. There was such a thing as the dutch resistance and there is such a thing as the highest number people joining the SS, both facts. We have the most dead jews but also the highest amount of survivors, also facts. I feel really uncomfortable discussing the netherlands under german rule, but do remember that it one bad man can undo the good work of ten, and the other way around. I have always regarded the holocaust as a european crime not a german one and we are just as guilty as everyone but taking on that role is a bit hard when you have so much to point at, but you picked the most radical interpretation keep that mind.
instead of staring vacuously into a past that never was.
Or focussing on a position that was never taken.
Louis VI the Fat
12-15-2008, 18:29
I regard nationhood as a project, looking to the future instead of the past. That's how all great nations were shaped. Let's hope we will be one day, and let's look forward to it instead of staring vacuously into a past that never was.But how can one even build a -forward-looking - nation without a national identity? And how can one possibly have an identity without a past?
Kralizec
12-15-2008, 19:14
Some did, but the majority of policemen didn't. Some Jews were rounded up by Dutch police, but the majority of Jewish victims were rounded up in German razzia's conducted by SS, Grüne Polizei and the regular army.
That reminds me of a story my late grandmother told me (several times): they had an old friend of the family who was an officer in the Royal Marechaussee. He along with several collegues refused to arrest several men when directed so by the Germans (I believe they were jews, but I'm not entirely sure- at any rate they weren't what any of us would call criminals in any sense of the word), and was discharged dishonoroubly because of it.
After the war, they refused to reinstate him in his position because of the "dishonourable" label :shame:
He tried to build a new life with a different job, but for various reasons he became an alcoholic and died a couple of decades afterwards because of it.
A Jew was twice as safe in Catholic Belgium. A Jew was three times as safe in France, even in Vichy.
I don't remember any numbers on how many jews the Vichy regime deported; but Petain persecuted them eagerly without much encouragement from the Germans. Thousends of jews fled there under the assumption that they'd be safe there, it being a non-occupied zone afterall. I hold little love for Jacques Chirac, but he at least had the moral fortitude to admit that many French actively and voluntarily participated in these horrorible crimes- something wich Mitterand had catagorically denied a few years earlier.
Adrian II
12-15-2008, 19:26
But how can one even build a -forward-looking - nation without a national identity? And how can one possibly have an identity without a past?A political project requires no collective identity, no common religion, no shared history.
Look at the United States, an immigrant society that used to be a shining beacon to mankind long after the novelty of the young Republic had worn off. Why? Because it invited (and often enabled) each and every immigrant to realise his own view of the 'good life'. Do you think that many Americans feel less American because their ancestors have different roots from the Pilgrim Fathers, the Protestant faith and the English language? They don't give a hoot. It's their country, as much as anyone else's.
Why should we restrict a country's future by adhering to all these humbug assumptions. Why fret about a supposed national identity and a 'common heritage' that is considered to be in our genes or in our memes or whatever and that tells us who 'belongs' and who does not 'belong' to the nation? Meh.
'frontier' ahum. Relativily modern crusade.
Louis VI the Fat
12-15-2008, 21:27
A political project requires no collective identity, no common religion, no shared history.
Look at the United StatesWould you be terribly dissapointed if I said that I have an entirely different idea about any lack of collective identity in the US? Freedom of religion and freedom from history are the identity of the US. Well those and several other ingredients.
The US is not more succesful at absorbing immigrants because it has a less developed idea of collective identity, but because it has a stronger sense of national identity than European countries.
Why should we restrict a country's future by adhering to all these humbug assumptions. Why fret about a supposed national identity and a 'common heritage' that is considered to be in our genes or in our memes or whatever and that tells us who 'belongs' and who does not 'belong' to the nation? Meh. Ah, but now you reveal yourself to be an adherent of multi-culturalism. Or, of nationalophobia. The urge to deny any organic, historical or cultural identity out of a stated political goal of creating a new, and 'better' post-national and multi-etnic identity.
It doesn't work and has gotten Western Europe into enormous trouble over the past few decades. This recent leftist top-down project is entirely different from America's ancient, bottom-up, national identity, even when both do bear a superficial resemblance.
-~+~- -~+~- -~+~- -~+~- -~+~-
I don't remember any numbers on how many jews the Vichy regime deported; but Petain persecuted them eagerly without much encouragement from the Germans. Thousands of jews fled there under the assumption that they'd be safe there, it being a non-occupied zone afterall. I hold little love for Jacques Chirac, but he at least had the moral fortitude to admit that many French actively and voluntarily participated in these horrorible crimes- something wich Mitterand had catagorically denied a few years earlier.Well, naturally I have a thing or two to say about national myths in other European countries as well. I limited myself to the Netherlands since that was the subject of this thread. But now that you've brought it up:
Yes, Petain did indeed persecute Jews. And by the end of the war, 25% of French Jewry had been murdered while three quarters had found a safe haven in France during the war. In the Netherlands, there was no Petain, no Vichy, and no virtual civil war, yet 75% of Jews were murdered. I presented a single-sided version of Dutch WWII behaviour, but based on actual and correct numbers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_War_Against_the_JewsTable.png).
Whatever the French fascists threw at the Jews, they were far safer even under fascist Petain than in the 'dutifully compliant' Netherlands, where, according to national myth, unlike elsewhere in Europe, there was little to no anti-Semitism, just 'unfortunate circumstances'.
I appreciate Chirac for finally admitting in 1995 what French public opinion had gradually come to accept: that 'Vichy' was entirely of French making, and that 'circumstances' are no excuse. I would love for the Netherlands to also finally come to terms with it's dark past. Unfortunately, fear for financial claims has so far prevented any Dutch government from following the example of most of the other European countries. A few half-baked statements about unfortunate post-war treatment of returning Jews seems to be the grand total of official Dutch acceptance of its own responsibility.
-~+~- -~+~- -~+~- -~+~- -~+~-
The funny thing is, that both points above are deeply connected. 'Adrian's' urge to build a post-national, multi-etnic identity is the direct result of the aftermath of the moral compromisation during WWII and the stubborn denial of that until the 1960's.
Since 1968 - which was at heart a generational conflict - a new generation has tried to prove that they were not their parents or grandparents. They set out to prove that they, unlike their parents, would shelter Jews. That they did not share the pityful, petit, and provincial mental world of their parents. Nationalism became suspect. Any national identity the sign of proto-fascism. The 'Dark skinned immigrant' is a substitute Jew. And the more pityful and helpless he is, the better. In the multi-cultural mind, there must be a helpless 'other' - incapable of any independent action, and a brutal and oppressive 'host country' - the source of all misfortune of this 'other'. See, for example, HoreTore's ambulance thread.
Milticultural post-nationalism does not in the least bit accept 'the other' as equal or even independent. It can only accept them as hapless and helpless. It does not create a strong post-national identity, it can only make collective identity suspect. By both mechanisms, the function of a strong collectivity that can easily absorb strong newcomers is prevented.
Kralizec
12-15-2008, 23:20
Whatever the French fascists threw at the Jews, they were far safer even under fascist Petain than in the 'dutifully compliant' Netherlands, where, according to national myth, unlike elsewhere in Europe, there was little to no anti-Semitism, just 'unfortunate circumstances'.
I've never heard someone make that claim before. Part of the reason why many people (myself included) despise comparisons between the current muslim community and the jews before and during WW2 is because people are fully aware that they were always considered suspect at best. Over here it was mostly ol' fashioned prejudices, religious ire and bigotry rather than some sort of "race" ideal.
Nevertheless, there certainly were circumstances that made the deportation of jews easier than it was in France:
1) unlike Vichy France, the Netherlands didn't border a neutral country that could serve as a safe refuge (Spain)
2) there were, relatively speaking, more jews in the Netherlands than in France and they were mostly concentrated around the larger towns and cities in Holland
3) somewhat cliche but still true; the Dutch comprehensive census records wich showed how many jews there were and their general whereabouts. (did France hold similar censuses based on religious affiliation?)
That wasn't the point though; rather that the persecution of the Dutch jews occurred under collaborating civil servants with German and Austrian people at the helm. The Vichy persecution was entirely French.
Unfortunately, fear for financial claims has so far prevented any Dutch government from following the example of most of the other European countries. A few half-baked statements about unfortunate post-war treatment of returning Jews seems to be the grand total of official Dutch acceptance of its own responsibility.
I don't consider myself particulary knowledgable about the subject, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the Dutch record on returning property and whatnot to holocaust survivors to be atrocious. I'm open to any proof you can give me, so far I'm not impressed by your off hand knowledge of my country.
Since 1968 - which was at heart a generational conflict - a new generation has tried to prove that they were not their parents or grandparents. They set out to prove that they, unlike their parents, would shelter Jews. That they did not share the pityful, petit, and provincial mental world of their parents. Nationalism became suspect. Any national identity the sign of proto-fascism. The 'Dark skinned immigrant' is a substitute Jew. And the more pityful and helpless he is, the better. In the multi-cultural mind, there must be a helpless 'other' - incapable of any independent action, and a brutal and oppressive 'host country' - the source of all misfortune of this 'other'. See, for example, HoreTore's ambulance thread.
Milticultural post-nationalism does not in the least bit accept 'the other' as equal or even independent. It can only accept them as hapless and helpless. It does not create a strong post-national identity, it can only make collective identity suspect. By both mechanisms, the function of a strong collectivity that can easily absorb strong newcomers is prevented.
Seriously, I'm not a fan of what we'd call "multiculturalism" because of the association with failed integration policies and denial of (partially) ethnic causes in social problems in the last century. But the picture you paint both here and in the ambulance thread is a caricature.
Louis VI the Fat
12-16-2008, 01:33
Netherlands, where, according to national myth, unlike elsewhere in Europe, there was little to no anti-Semitism, just 'unfortunate circumstances'.I've never heard someone make that claim before.I have heard the claim that there was little anti-Semitism in the Netherlands before. For example, five seconds ago from you yourself.
How? Because again, a Dutchman repeats the myth that the astonishingly high percentage of murdered Jews in the Netherlands had little to nothing to do with any Dutch behaviour. That there were just some 'collaborating civil servants', and all the other excuses and that it all happened under the helm of German and Austrian orders. This, to top it off, you contrast with France, where anti-Semitic genocide was of French / Vichy's own making, that is, worse than the Dutch and that you are delighted with French formal acceptance of responsibility by Chirac. You overlook the whole point of the acceptance: it is an acceptance of one's own actions, an end to formal claims that the mass murder of Jews was a strictly German affair.
Let me make be clear: the Germans did not at any time at gunpoint force the Dutch to round up their Jews.
They didn't have too. Nowhere in Europe did they need to. All they needed was to unleash the dark undercurrent of their occupied countries. In the Netherlands, this led to an orgy of anti-Semitic violence on a scale unparalled in Western Europe. In France, three quarters of Jewry was saved.
Yet France has accepted responsibility, formally, fifteen years ago, and in public opinion, slowly in the decades before. Almost all of Europe has.
This is stark contrast to the Netherlands, were it is both common public myth and formal government policy that there is no responsibility whatsoever. In this, the Netherlands stands virtually alone amongst formerly occupied countries. The Netherlands even sees fit to lecture other countries.
I don't consider myself particulary knowledgable about the subject, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the Dutch record on returning property and whatnot to holocaust survivors to be atrocious. I'm open to any proof you can give me, so far I'm not impressed by your off hand knowledge of my country.Well I am impressed by my knowledge of the Netherlands since I succeeded in - apparantly for the first time - pointing out to several Dutchmen here the national myth of an 'innocent' WWII history, and the fact that the Netherlands has never officially accepted any responsibility for the behaviour of the government in exile and the Dutch state and its institutions at home during WWII.
The Netherlands are one of the few remaining countries that refuses to accept responsibility. Even the neutral Swiss and Swedes accepted their wrongdoings. Small wonder that the myth persists when it is the official government policy.
Good read (http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=624&PID=0&IID=1633).
The issue of Dutch institutional and governmental apologies for Holocaust behavior came to the fore again with the unexpected apology of Dutch Railways to the Jewish community in September 2005. These belated apologies should be seen in a broader Dutch context. After World War II, many myths about crucial aspects of the Dutch Jews' fate substituted for history.
Currently, the Dutch government's refusal to apologize to the Jewish community stands out even more. It should do so for both the collaboration with the German authorities in the Netherlands and the failure of the London government-in-exile to undertake whatever little it could have done for the persecuted Dutch Jews. In 2000 Prime Minister Wim Kok, under pressure, presented partial apologies for the postwar Dutch governments' treatment of the Jews. These expressed a new fallacy: that these failures were unintentional. In March 2005 Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, described the deportation of Dutch Jewry as a "pitch-black" chapter in Dutch history. In April 2005, he became the first prime minister to mention Dutch wartime collaboration without, however, apologizing.
More than sixty years after the end of World War II, occasionally the question reemerges in the Netherlands whether apologies to the Jewish community should be presented by the successor managers of those institutions that participated in the German-controlled process of detention and deportation of most Dutch Jews to their extermination. The same goes for the Dutch government, whose predecessors, in exile in London, ignored what happened to their country's Jews.
[...]
Myth and History
The importance of these belated apologies goes far beyond the specific case of Dutch Railways. The expressions of regret should be seen in a broader Dutch context. After World War II, many myths about crucial aspects of the Dutch Jews' fate substituted for history. Major falsifications of national wartime history occurred throughout Europe, taking specific forms in different countries.
In the Netherlands, there were courageous individuals who took major risks to rescue Jews. The Dutch authorities, on the other hand, executed almost all German orders without protest. Whereas the collaboration of the government authorities has largely been ignored, the size and effectiveness of the Dutch resistance movements has been greatly exaggerated as has the role of the major ones in helping the Jews. At the same time, the importance and numbers of the many Dutch collaborators with the Germans were diminished. Among the latter was a contingent of twenty-five thousand Dutch Waffen SS volunteers.[4]
The myth of widespread Dutch resistance was most affected by the way Anne Frank's story was presented after the war. The publication of her diary, and later the movie based on it, created the impression of broad Dutch support for the Jews in wartime Netherlands. Particularly in the United States, the Anne Frank story fostered a very one-sided picture of Dutch resistance.[5] Almost all the emphasis in her story was put on her time in hiding, whereas no attention was paid to her struggle for survival in Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen and eventual demise.
Little if any attention was given to the fact that 8,000 of the 24,000 hidden Dutch Jews, including Anne Frank and her family, were betrayed by Dutchmen to the German occupiers. The reward for informing on Jews amounted to about 30 euro in today's money. Most of those betrayed were murdered in the death camps.[6]
Another aspect of Anne Frank's life was only stressed in 1988 when Dutch filmmaker Willy Lindwer received the international Emmy award for his documentary The Last Seven Months of Anne Frank focusing on her short life after betrayal. The director of the Anne Frank House in Amsterdam demonstrated his support for the whitewashing of wartime Dutch history when he refused to allow Lindwer to film at the museum. Lindwer quotes him as saying: "Anne Frank is a symbol. Symbols should not be shown to die in a concentration camp."[
Adrian II
12-16-2008, 02:07
The US [..] has a stronger sense of national identity than European countries.Call it 'sense of purpose' and we are in agreement. Purpose is forward looking, identity politics is stagnant, inward-looking and plain dumb.
Ah, but now you reveal yourself to be an adherent of [..] a new, and 'better' post-national and multi-etnic identity.I want to work for a better state and a better country, if that's what you mean. Yeah, I subscribe to that.
But a 'new multi-ethnic identity'? What is that? Does it imply that The Netherlands is at present mono-ethnic or something, and that it could or might be changed to multi-ethnic? Do you know how many people from all parts of the world have lived here, intermingled and built their own lives here for hundreds of years.
And pray, what exactly would it mean if I had a 'multi-ethnic identity'. Would I be part white, part black? Part Chinese, part Albanian? Hahaha. It's just fashionable nonsense.
Louis VI the Fat
12-16-2008, 02:58
Here is an excellent report (http://www1.yadvashem.org/about_yad/departments/institute/pdf/5.pdf) about WWII, the Dutch, and the whitewashing of history on behalf of national mythology.
~_~_~_~~~+~+~~~_~_~_~
But a 'new multi-ethnic identity'? What is that? It is not my terminonoly. It is the terminology of the people I disagree with. And who, amazingly, both clamour for multi-etnicity while simultanously denying the existence of etnicity.
The term is somewhat interchangeble with multi-cultural. Which is often a mere euphemism for multi-etnic. Since etinicity is supposed to not exist, it is substituted by culture.
Multi-cultural, of course, is an even more uneasy term than multi-etnic, since a) it assumes that nations are monolithic, that the Netherlands, or other countries, have but one single culture. And b) that culture is inextricably linked to one's etnicity. That is, if you look Moroccan, you are culturally Moroccan and not European. This is one of the great pitfalls of multiculturalism, the word as much as the concept. It is all the more silly, since it is a euphemism for something which supposedly doesn't even exist, yet which is always implied by the very phrase.
~_~_~_~~~+~+~~~_~_~_~
Meanwhile, back to the topic of 'let's see the Dutch sweat a bit by bringing up non-glamourous aspects of Dutchness'.
"Once again Dutch responsibility is denied and others are to blame (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1923884.stm) for the fall of Srebrenica and the genocide that followed,"
I notice remarkable parrallels between Dutch behaviour in WWII and Srebrenica. That largest European genocide after WWII. Perhaps if the Dutch had substituted their national war mythology for some soul-searching before 1995, they would've been better prepared?
8000 Muslims murdered while the Dutch stood by. Well this time they didn't actively participate, which is progress of some sort.
Although we'll never know for sure since the Dutch army destroyed the films of the events, and the Dutch government-financed report concluded, controversially but unsurprisingly, that there was little blame on the peacekeepers. The circumstances left them no choice.
Nothing wrong then, with organising themselves a fine decadent party directly after the massacre to celebrate their safe delivery.
The government did seven years later accept partial responsibility and resigned. Although elections were due a few weeks later anyway.
In December 2006 the Dutch government awarded the Dutch UN peacekeepers that served in Srebrenica an insignia because they believe they "deserved recognition for their behaviour in difficult circumstances", also noting the limited mandate and the ill-equipped nature of the mission. However, survivors and relatives of the victims condemned the move calling it a "humiliating decision" and responded with protest rallies in The Hague, Assen (where the ceremony took place) and Bosnia's capital Sarajevo
'Why are you so mean to the Dutch, Louis?'
'Mean? There are five thousand threads that discuss the exploits of Pakistan, the US, the UK, Russia, Israel and China. Might as well have ourselves a thread about the Netherlands then that moves beyond drugs and prostitution for a chance. It is a medium sized European country'.
"Once again Dutch responsibility is denied and others are to blame (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1923884.stm) for the fall of Srebrenica and the genocide that followed,"
Still debunking national myths or are we stepping into hostile territory?
clue, in Afghanistan we brought our own toys because you never know what allies are going to do('nt)
Perfectly fine with some healthy critisism but this is kinda becomming it's own story is this about WW2 or about the dutch I am getting confused (and very annoyed). We not taking responsibility you have got to be kidding me it is the tool du jour of the equality-industry can't sneeze without gassing Anne Frank.
Adrian II
12-16-2008, 10:37
Still debunking national myths or are we stepping into hostile territory?Dis is da infomashun age, man. Louis doesn't know what the hell he is talking about. But he is all over you because he has found something on the Internet.
Louis VI the Fat
12-16-2008, 12:14
'Sermon diplomacy'', that is, lecturing others, is a well known characteristic of Dutch diplomacy. Apparantly, they can't stand a bit of criticism themselves.
This thread is called 'The Dutch', no? I believe that in threads named 'America' all the evil imperialism of America is discussed, with all our Dutch members seeing quite fit to lecture about Iraq, Vietnam, slavery and obesity. Same with threads about Israel, Pakistan, the UK. I seem to recall Fragony being a major critic of the current English political landscape. I remember a thread openend by Adrian about Finland's dark 20th century history.
So no, exploring the dark side of the recent Dutch history is not at all unsympathetic or hostile. It is the common .org standard. The Netherlands simply usually escapes attention - until a thread was opened about it, that, lest we forgot, was opened by a Dutchman with the specific request to discuss Dutch topics. Yet when it moves from a self-congratulatory 'you Dutchies are so tolerant and enlightened and liberal' panic breaks lose.
Well welcome to the Big League, chaps. Where one's history is debated by both outsiders and by fierce internal debate. Neither of which seems to happen a lot with Dutch history.
Besides, it is important because I am exploring territory that is apparantly unchartered in Dutch public debate. I am shocked that most of what I wrote is apparantly news to our Dutch patrons. Please feel free to shoot holes in anything I've written, I shall happily oblige and respond to any criticism.
And to think that I haven't even yet mentioned the Colonial War that raged in Indonesia after the war. Conveniently named, to this day, 'police actions'.
Kralizec
12-16-2008, 12:44
I have heard the claim that there was little anti-Semitism in the Netherlands before. For example, five seconds ago from you yourself.
...
They didn't have too. Nowhere in Europe did they need to. All they needed was to unleash the dark undercurrent of their occupied countries. In the Netherlands, this led to an orgy of anti-Semitic violence on a scale unparalled in Western Europe. In France, three quarters of Jewry was saved.
I already admitted that anti-semitism (in the broad sense) did exist, but that it wasn't a result of a eugenic ideal. Even our nazi party (wich never was very popular and very rarely coopted into the occupation, but I digress) didn't preach racial/genetic purity until the occupation. Many Dutchmen collaborated with the holocaust out of indifference, and it's repugnant. But if the Netherlands had become a mostly independent satelite state like Vichy France instead of a directly controlled area it would very likely not have come to pass.
Let me make be clear: the Germans did not at any time at gunpoint force barely asked the Dutch French to round up their Jews.
Corrected :yes:
Rather than congratulate yourself that 3/4 of French jews survived, maybe you ought to thank the Spanish for accepting tens of thousends of refugees crossing the pyrinees.
'Sermon diplomacy'', that is, lecturing others, is a well known characteristic of Dutch diplomacy. Apparantly, they can't stand a bit of criticism themselves.
You think you are doing new but you are just repeating what is commonly accepted here. Minus sebrenica of course why apoligise for the UN screwing up, small-arms work well against machette-wielding mobs (in theory never been tried) but with tanks it's nice when you aren't denied air-support.
Please feel free to shoot holes in anything I've written, I shall happily oblige and respond to any criticism.
That would be taking on google
Adrian II
12-16-2008, 12:56
Well welcome to the Big League, chaps. Where one's history is debated by both outsiders and by fierce internal debate.Quite. But where is the debate? What is your argument? You are not addressing your opponents, that's for sure.
A monologue intérieur may be the Gallic idea of 'fierce debate', the rest of the world doesn't think so.. :sneaky:
Luigi does have one point, we do get away with it and we might get too used to it, I know too little to make a stand when it comes to the jews and the sebrenica massacre can ride my swinging :daisy: , but what happened in Indonesia after WW2 must be the biggest blind spot in our, and others history. Credit where it's due and to be honest Luigi really hurt my feelings. I always try to be consequent as possible so me would be the gnat in the hailstorm for a while.
Adrian II
12-16-2008, 15:39
[..] what happened in Indonesia after WW2 must be the biggest blind spot in our, and others history. Credit where it's due and to be honest Luigi really hurt my feelings.Well, he didn't hurt my feelings about 'our' colonial past. :laugh4:
I think I must have posted in this forum about Dutch colonial exploits more than a dozen times over the past years. It feels really weird to be told now that I always got away scot-free with 'my' colonial horrors, that I tried to deny them at all costs, and that it's about time that they were discussed openly.
Well, not weird, just a tad boring.
By the way, Louis missed 17th and 18th Dutch slavery, the main source for the personal fortune of our House of Orange. Beatrix is a multi-billionaire thanks to a 'sound' investment policy that goes right back to the West Indies Company and its profits from slavery.
Of course this is an episode that is taught extensively in Dutch schools, if only because it helps to understand why we have a multi-ethnic society these days. Oh wait, according to Louis we don' t. Or do we?
Whatever.
Louis VI the Fat
12-16-2008, 17:17
Well, he didn't hurt my feelings I never thought I would say this to a man, but:
[deep Gainsbourg accent]
'Mon chéri, I can hear your heart beating faster over what I said all the way from here. Don't pretend my words didn't affect you. They went straight to your heart like a bolt of lightning and set you on fire. Admit your feelings and come over here to get some'
[/ :beatnik: ]
I never thought I would say this to a man, but:
[deep Gainsbourg accent]
'Mon chéri, I can hear your heart beating faster over what I said all the way from here. Don't pretend my words didn't affect you. They went straight to your heart like a bolt of lightning and set you on fire. Admit your feelings and come over here to get some'
[/ :beatnik: ]
Can I get some too or do I have to start a thread about Belgium?
Proletariat
12-16-2008, 18:15
If Andres' allowed some without having to start a thread, can I claim nexties?
Strike For The South
12-16-2008, 19:22
Reading this thread makes me realize why my ansectors left Europe
Adrian II
12-16-2008, 21:01
Reading this thread makes me realize why my ansectors left EuropeNever mind your inancecstros. You just want some too, right?
Oh, le pew... ze Frenchman ees walkeeng away with zis thread. :bow:
Seamus Fermanagh
12-16-2008, 23:12
National identities & myths DO exist and DO influence current events and behaviors.
I am freely willing to stipulate that many of these identities/myths are a mix of fact and fantasy, aided by that most robust of human psychological behaviors -- selective perception.
But it doesn't make those myths/identities any less relevant.
Take, for example, Iraq 2003. Despite all the cries of "oil war," it would probably be more correct to assert that this was a war conducted in order to enact "Freedom" on behalf of the Iraqis. Now, care to bet how much this version of "freedom" owes to America's national myth/identity as opposed to the facts about the Iraqis themselves? These things do matter.
Adrian:
You are quite correct that, if you are intellectually honest with yourself, to embrace your national identity as part of yourself is to embrace the good and the bad.
I am from the nation of the founding fathers, the Constitution, the great immigrant melting pot and the Marshall plan. I am also from the nation that displaced its indigenous population while all-too-often treating them as subhumans, immigrant exploitation and discrimination (often featuring the nation that attempted to conquer Canada even before we had established our own nation, the nation that freed our slaves after a bloody civil war and then promptly used to law to discriminate against them anyway for another century -- our first slaves were sold to us by....the Dutch! -- the only nation to have used atomic weapons (and good arguments have been made that the 2nd was unnecessary), and the nation whose greed has the ability to engender a global economic downturn.
Most folks only like the good parts, so they remember those. Boone and Crockett are HEROES dad gummit. Do NOT pester me with annoyances like Boone's breaking the law by leading settlers across the Appalachians or Crockett's efforts to support an insurrection in a foreign country despite having been a government official in a friendly neighboring country.
Ain't history a rich subject!
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.