October 1, 2004
AND HALF WAY, THEY WILL PAUSE TO KISS THE BONES OF SAINT KARL
Hey, look! A strike in Holland! (Thomas Fuller, International Herald Tribune, October 1st, 2004)
Port workers, garbagemen, airport employees, ambulance drivers and tram operators have also taken part in strikes and demonstrations during the past few weeks as ill humor has built over a wide-ranging package of changes that the government says are necessary to get the Dutch economy growing again and to prepare for an aging society.The protests will climax Saturday, when unions expect at least 100,000 people to congregate in Amsterdam in what could be one of the largest antigovernment demonstrations in recent Dutch history.
The changes proposed by the government, and the reaction of unions and workers, are familiar in Europe.
Faced with an aging population, creaking health care systems and a swelling tide of red ink, leaders have vowed to cut taxes and government spending and make it harder for people to get unemployment and disability benefits.
What is different in the Netherlands is that the Dutch are not the striking type.
Over the past decade an average of 19 days per 1,000 employees has been lost to strikes in the Netherlands, fewer than half the level of the United States and one-sixth the level of Italy.
Economists say it is a measure of the deep resistance to the changes sought across the Continent that even the Dutch are now hitting the streets. [....]
Angry workers say this is not the "Dutch way."
"The Dutch way is to take care of people who have less," said Gerard Admiraal, an emergency services worker who attended a protest at Schiphol airport Tuesday.
Economics is against them, history is against them, sociology is against them, demographics are against them, even actuarial science is against them, but still they march in anger to preserve some fantasy called the “Dutch Way”. Is this not proof that modern secular “rationalists” are no more rational than the most fevered of medieval mobs?
It's worth noting that the Christian Democrats got almost half the votes last elections. Also, the Christian union is one of the major backers in the strikes tomorrow. Hardly a backlash by secular rationalists.
Posted by: Dutch at October 1, 2004 8:36 PMDutch
Surely you aren't arguing the fight in Europe against the cutbacks in social services is a Christian revolt?
Progressive causes have never had any trouble getting the support of "modern" churches.
Posted by: Peter B at October 1, 2004 8:44 PMI'm arguing that the strikes in Holland aren't necessarily being spearheaded by a secular rationalist mob.
Posted by: at October 1, 2004 9:07 PMThe Christian Democrats (CDA) got 28.6 percent of the vote, slightly ahead of the socialists at 27.2%, but hardly almost half the votes.
And the only thing christian about the union is the name. They wouldn't be caught dead promoting christianity or religion in general.
The past decades of spend-and-tax and ignoring demographics are catching up. As usual Labour as nothing better to offer than tax the rich, but its Siren song still attracts many.
Posted by: Daran at October 2, 2004 1:49 AMChristian Democratic parties were created by the Catholic and Lutheran Churches in the 19th century as a means of keeping the workers from backing socialist candidates. They have survived to the modern age by combining anti-Communism with welfare state guarantees, while being comfortable with using State power to interrupt people's private consensual behavior all in the name of preserving morality, and using the occasional thug tactic. In Italy, they have been in bed with the Mafia(see Giulio Andreotti). In France, they have spearheaded the knee-jerk Gaullist anti-Americanism. In Germany, they were to the left of the Social Democrats on economic issues.
Calling this protest an act of secular rationalism is just plain dumb.
Posted by: Bart at October 2, 2004 7:31 AMBart:
Just as many secularists evince a religiously inspired sense of morality, so many of the nominally religious and their churches stand shoulder to shoulder with socialist humanism. It's not the conscious self-identification of the protesters that is important, but the ideas and worldviews motivating them. The argument that the extensive post-war welfare state in Europe must be defended as some kind of sacred "Dutch Way" is hardly a religious one. The point of the post is that the modern secular world will defend its credos in the face of contrary objective truths as fervently and irrationally as traditional dogmatic believers will defend theirs.
Posted by: Peter B at October 2, 2004 8:41 AMThat, Peter B., is exactly because secularism is a religon by all 'rational' tests.
Posted by: Uncle Bill at October 2, 2004 9:38 AMEconomics, history, sociology, demographics, even actuarial science -- these can all be overcome. But first they must overcome their despair.
Posted by: Paul Cella at October 2, 2004 11:00 AMPeter, if you are arguing that secular people are no more rational than religious people, I agree with you. But the point that Bart is making is important. Socialist welfare state politics in Europe crosses religious/secular philosophical boundaries. I would modify your question to say "Is this not proof that modern rationalists are no more rational than the most fevered of medieval mobs?"
Socialist welfare state politics in Europe crosses religious/secular philosophical boundaries.
Likewise, free-market Republican politics in America cross them too. But that doesn't mean that it's not driven, built and dependent upon Christians. People flow with the majority whatever their religion. In Europe it's statist secularists. In America, it's Christian conservatives.
Posted by: Timothy at October 2, 2004 2:04 PM