6 ms·

> upcoming right-of-center politician Pim Fortuyn Fortuyn was far-right. "Fortuyn's beliefs began to shift to the right in the 1990s, especially related to th

> upcoming right-of-center politician Pim Fortuyn Fortuyn was far-right. "Fortuyn's beliefs began to shift to the right in the 1990s, especially related to the immigration policies of the Netherlands. Fortuyn criticised multiculturalism, immigration and Islam in the Netherlands. He called Islam "a backward culture", and was quoted as saying that if it were legally possible, he would close the borders for Muslim immigrants." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pim_Fortuyn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pim_Fortuyn

adklg 5y ago
Then 45% of France is "far-right" now: https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/french-far-right-jewish-pundit-overtakes-le-pen-in-support-poll/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/french-far-righ... "The online poll of 1,310 people, carried out on October 4 and published in Challenges magazine, implies Macron would win a run-off vote against Zemmour by a margin of 55 percent to 45 percent." Fact is, Europe does not have enough space and is tired of beheadings and other terrorist acts.
- mbg721 5y ago
  I know this wasn't the point, but the idea "France is tired of beheadings" did make me smile a bit.
Chris2048 5y ago
Unless he advocates violence, criticising things and calling them "backwards" is not far-right, which is usually reserved for extremists. Also here's the motivation for "islamophobia": > "I have no desire to go through the emancipation of women and homosexuals all over again."
the-dude 5y ago
I tried to paint a short, coherent, neutral picture of the affair as not to derail the discussion. You are entitled to your opinions. edit: also, the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left.
- _fizz_buzz_ 5y ago
  > also, the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left. that sounds like the oppsoite of a neutral picture ...
  - pangolinplayer 5y ago
    Clinton wanted to drone him.
    - _fizz_buzz_ 5y ago
      Clinton wanted to drone Pim Fortuyn?
- jacquesm 5y ago
  If that was your goal then you utterly failed and this comment makes it worse. If you want to write something neutral it helps to first understand your own biases.
- beckman466 5y ago
  > I tried to paint a short, coherent, neutral picture of the affair as not to derail the discussion. well you succeeded, here we are talking about your 'neutral' picture
- arp242 5y ago
  > also, the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left. That is not my impression at all. If there's any sort of "silent condoning" going on then it's very very silent indeed, as I've never encountered it in spite of spending plenty of time in leftist circles. No doubt you can find a few crazy extremists, but they do not get to define "a large fraction on the left".
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  >"the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left" Is that known for a fact? Implying that someone 'silently condoned' something is very convenient because it's basically impossible to prove or disprove, it's like accusing someone of thoughcrime.
isitdopamine 5y ago
The point is that some innocent was killed. Discussion whether he was right or far-right seems a bit unnecessary given the context.
- the-dude 5y ago
  It is justification. The fact that some consider Pim Fortuyn far-right, makes the murder less bad. Understandable perhaps.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
strken 5y ago
He was also openly gay and used women's rights as a big talking point. In the sense that the far right is a taint, he was tainted; in the sense that it's an entire set of political beliefs, he didn't fit neatly into that box. This kind of black-and-white thinking also applies to Assange and WikiLeaks, and has had the unfortunate effect of removing his support from both the left (because of the Guccifer leaks) and the right (because of the Collateral Murder leaks).
- beckman466 5y ago
  > In the sense that the far right is a taint, he was tainted; in the sense that it's an entire set of political beliefs, he didn't fit neatly into that box. > He was also openly gay you can be gay and be far-right. those are not somehow mutually exclusive. another example off the top of my head: Milo Yiannopoulos and Dave Rubin are both openly gay and far-right. > This kind of black-and-white thinking no. the issue here is doublespeak and misdefining commonly used words. like on that wikipedia page i linked to his far-right views are laid out in detail, yet it also notes that he asserted that these far-right ideas are not far-right. i mean, unless you're arguing that islamophobia and anti-immigration aren't right-wing?
  - strken 5y ago
    I'm arguing that "right" and "left" are a linear one-dimensional approximation of complex multi-dimensional beliefs. I don't associate the far right with drug legalisation, women's and LGBT rights, the right to die, or direct democracy. Pim Fortuyn supported all of these. He was also rabidly bigoted against Muslims, in a way that intersected with his support for other minority groups. Political positions are complicated and sometimes you need more than two words to describe them.
    - __alexs 5y ago
      So if you are far-right, but only to brown people, you aren't far-right? This seems so obviously racist I can't believe you can argue for that position in good faith.

adklg 5y ago

Then 45% of France is "far-right" now: https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/french-far-right-jewish-pundit-overtakes-le-pen-in-support-poll/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/french-far-righ... "The online poll of 1,310 people, carried out on October 4 and published in Challenges magazine, implies Macron would win a run-off vote against Zemmour by a margin of 55 percent to 45 percent." Fact is, Europe does not have enough space and is tired of beheadings and other terrorist acts.

mbg721 5y ago
I know this wasn't the point, but the idea "France is tired of beheadings" did make me smile a bit.

Chris2048 5y ago

Unless he advocates violence, criticising things and calling them "backwards" is not far-right, which is usually reserved for extremists. Also here's the motivation for "islamophobia": > "I have no desire to go through the emancipation of women and homosexuals all over again."

the-dude 5y ago

I tried to paint a short, coherent, neutral picture of the affair as not to derail the discussion. You are entitled to your opinions. edit: also, the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left.

_fizz_buzz_ 5y ago
> also, the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left. that sounds like the oppsoite of a neutral picture ...
- pangolinplayer 5y ago
  Clinton wanted to drone him.
  - _fizz_buzz_ 5y ago
    Clinton wanted to drone Pim Fortuyn?
jacquesm 5y ago
If that was your goal then you utterly failed and this comment makes it worse. If you want to write something neutral it helps to first understand your own biases.
beckman466 5y ago
> I tried to paint a short, coherent, neutral picture of the affair as not to derail the discussion. well you succeeded, here we are talking about your 'neutral' picture
arp242 5y ago
> also, the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left. That is not my impression at all. If there's any sort of "silent condoning" going on then it's very very silent indeed, as I've never encountered it in spite of spending plenty of time in leftist circles. No doubt you can find a few crazy extremists, but they do not get to define "a large fraction on the left".
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
>"the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left" Is that known for a fact? Implying that someone 'silently condoned' something is very convenient because it's basically impossible to prove or disprove, it's like accusing someone of thoughcrime.

isitdopamine 5y ago

The point is that some innocent was killed. Discussion whether he was right or far-right seems a bit unnecessary given the context.

the-dude 5y ago
It is justification. The fact that some consider Pim Fortuyn far-right, makes the murder less bad. Understandable perhaps.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

strken 5y ago

He was also openly gay and used women's rights as a big talking point. In the sense that the far right is a taint, he was tainted; in the sense that it's an entire set of political beliefs, he didn't fit neatly into that box. This kind of black-and-white thinking also applies to Assange and WikiLeaks, and has had the unfortunate effect of removing his support from both the left (because of the Guccifer leaks) and the right (because of the Collateral Murder leaks).

beckman466 5y ago
> In the sense that the far right is a taint, he was tainted; in the sense that it's an entire set of political beliefs, he didn't fit neatly into that box. > He was also openly gay you can be gay and be far-right. those are not somehow mutually exclusive. another example off the top of my head: Milo Yiannopoulos and Dave Rubin are both openly gay and far-right. > This kind of black-and-white thinking no. the issue here is doublespeak and misdefining commonly used words. like on that wikipedia page i linked to his far-right views are laid out in detail, yet it also notes that he asserted that these far-right ideas are not far-right. i mean, unless you're arguing that islamophobia and anti-immigration aren't right-wing?
- strken 5y ago
  I'm arguing that "right" and "left" are a linear one-dimensional approximation of complex multi-dimensional beliefs. I don't associate the far right with drug legalisation, women's and LGBT rights, the right to die, or direct democracy. Pim Fortuyn supported all of these. He was also rabidly bigoted against Muslims, in a way that intersected with his support for other minority groups. Political positions are complicated and sometimes you need more than two words to describe them.
  - __alexs 5y ago
    So if you are far-right, but only to brown people, you aren't far-right? This seems so obviously racist I can't believe you can argue for that position in good faith.