photo: Marthijn Uittenbogaard
News Biography Publications Links Contact search

The interview with Paul Cliteur that did not take place

© 6 May 2019 Marthijn Uittenbogaard

Paul Cliteur showed interest to be interviewed by me on 27 March 2019 (See the email correspondence below at the bottom of this page). He was busy at that time and he responded to me to mail again a month later, for this interview. Unfortunately, when I later mailed the questions I did not hear from him anymore. I decided today to publish the questions I came up with. The answers are not there...

Questions and introduction:

Paul Cliteur is a Dutch professor of jurisprudence at Leiden University, and also a philosopher, writer, publicist, and columnist. [1] In May he will become a member of the Dutch Senate for the party Forum for Democracy. This young party has two seats out of 150 in the Dutch House of Representatives. But in the latest election for the Dutch provinces, they got 86 seats (out of 570) and with this result they became the largest party in this election. The Senate will be selected this month on the 27th by the 570 elected politicians. There is no doubt Cliteur will be elected, because he is number two on Forum's list for the Senate-list and this party will likely get 13 seats (out of the 75 seats). I'm glad Cliteur accepted my invitation for this interview. I have some concerns about this new party (like I have about most of the 'old' parties as well though) but that does not mean we should not listen to, and maybe learn from, each other. Treating people as people, by listening and talking to each other, is a very important aspect of a humanitarian society. The fact that he accepted being interviewed by me is something I really appreciate. Not many other politicians would dare this. Here's the interview, published on the sixth of May. Pim Fortuyn, a freethinker, was killed on this day, already seventeen years ago, in 2002.

Do you feel free to talk about your family life? Maybe, due to safety reasons, you are advised not to talk about these personal matters. You criticized the Islam religion and after the assassination of Theo van Gogh, no one can deny the dangers anymore that such criticism can bring to someone.

How was your childhood? Were you reading books at an early age? Did you play outside much? Did you have many friends or were you more a loner type of guy?

'The family is the corner stone of society,' many people say. 'Kill the family structure,' others said in the 1960s, 'because it is like fascism, with the father as its dictator.' What is your view on this matter?

Desmond is Amazing. Desmond Napoles is a boy who is eleven years old and he is a young drag boy. He likes to wear drag: colorful dresses, make-up and so on. Desmond is Amazing is his artist name. I very much like it if kids are allowed to wear and act as they want. But he and his mother are getting much criticism that he is too young to dress like this. What do you feel when you see Desmond in drag? Happy, concerned or do you have mixed feelings? (You can search his name on Youtube if you never heard of him.)

The Pirate Party in Germany suggested to abandon the voting age restriction in the elections. If you, on your own are able to vote: color a circle in front of someone's name red, then this should be allowed. Do you think eighteen is a good age or are we ignoring basic human rights to people below this age?

Is it a good idea to give every Dutch citizen, when he or she reaches a certain age - eighteen, or maybe twelve - a copy of the Dutch constitution. And should this constitution be binding in our courts? Right now we have a constitution, but in reality it has not much legal value. One of the articles in our constitution is by the way freedom of association. The Martijn association was easily banned in our country. I find this a huge violation of basic human rights.

Speaking of associations. Do you think an organization for the freedom of speech would be valuable? I think we lack such an organization in The Netherlands, or maybe even world wide.

What should such an organization do? Organize debates, or be a pressure group when some laws are under fire?

Universities are places were people learn. Freedom of information is very important in these learning processes. But there is a tendency to not confront students with the 'wrong' opinions. In the United States, books are banned from university libraries and some people are not allowed to speak at universities, if these people are in any way controversial. Ad van den Berg and I were in 2015 invited by a students organization, to the Radboud University Nijmegen (still a catholic university; their name change was just window dressing), but after the board of the university found out, the invitation was withdrawn. Unfortunately the students organization said they approved the canceling of us speaking there while at first they said they would not give in. Do you think universities should allow more controversy within their walls?

I once interviewed Henk Krol of the Gay Krant [2]. He is now in the Dutch Second Chamber for the party 50Plus. You are now becoming a senator. Edward Brongersma (1911-1998), a hero of mine, also was a senator, many years ago. What is your opinion about Brongersma? Have you ever met him personally?

Pim Fortuyn once wrote a column about pedosexuality. I quote: 'In the 1960s and 1970s acceptance of pedophilia gained bit by bit some ground. After the invention of the pill, came the liberation of our sexuality. Gay sex became accepted, and why shall we not accept pedophilia, under the strict condition that the child is not forced in any way. This enlightened viewpoint is no more, and under the influence of 'professionals' the child is now seen as someone without sexual feelings, certainly when it involves adults. We are far away from the understanding Brongersma tried to achieve, which is harmful to us, cause everything that is discussable, is in principal also controllable, you know!' [3] Fortuyn placed a few of his columns on his website when he was running for the Second Chamber. This one was also present. There was a chance that his party would get the most seats and that he would become Prime Minister. Unfortunately he was shot, and after his death his party came second with 26 seats. (Many people believe he would had gotten more seats if he would be still alive at election day.) No politician, and no journalist wrote about his pedophilia views! I'm sure they all knew. But letting the people know that there are people that doubt the existing age of consent laws, is apparently taboo. What do you think of this taboo, the taboo about discussing the age of consent laws?

Pim Fortuyn was a populist they say. But in my view, a populist is someone that only propagate views that score with the public. Fortuyn was honest and he had also views that did absolutely not score with many of his followers. I believe that most of the politicians from the last two decades are the real populist here. Do you think Fortuyn was a populist?

In the 1990s you were two years the chairman of the Humanistisch Verbond. This organization promotes the freedom of speech, they are in favor of equal opportunities and self determination. They are skeptical about religion. Do you think elementary schools based on a religion should be forbidden? This because it is a form of indoctrination of children, with believes that are scientifically not always correct.

Before you became active within the new political party Forum for Democracy, you were sympathizing with the Party for the Animals. That raises the question: are you vegetarian or maybe even vegan? What needs to improve concerning animal welfare?

And now we come to the questions about Forum for Democracy. I was, still am, a fan of Pim Fortuyn. Not that I agreed on everything he said, but I did on many things and I saw him as an honest, as a humanitarian, and as a smart person. I really doubt the honesty of Forum leader Thierry Baudet. I also doubt the humanitarian side of him. If he is smart: I don't know. One of my concerns - I'm not alone in this - is the term 'dobbernegers' (floating Negroes). Annabel Nanninga, elected member of this party in Amsterdam, used this term when she was describing drowned refugees in the Mediterranean Sea. I believe she at least should apologize for this. I would never let a politician represent me if he or she is using this term. That together with Baudet's visits to Jean-Marie Le Pen and Jared Taylor makes people feel anxious. Do you understand these concerns? Do you agree with the term floating Negroes?

A key issue for Forum for Democracy is the European Union: they want to leave this union. If laws are more and more the same in all the EU countries, then the most progressive ones have to walk slower, and the very conservative ones have to walk a little faster. So that everyone one walks in the same pace. I see a problem with this. Progressive Dutch parties become more conservative. And because all parties don't allow dissidents, everyone must vote the same. As a citizen you can not change the direction of a party with your vote by voting on someone on the list with your views: because they all have the same views. The Green Left party is 100% in favor of the EU. This is strange when you think that one of the four parties that formed this party, namely PSP, was totally against the EU in 1981. From their political program (PSP 1981): “Both economic as politic The Netherlands is focused on the European Communion. The elected parliament only gives the EU an air of being democratic. The multinationals profit the most from lifting the borders. [...] [The PSP wants to:] leave the EU. As long as this is not the case, no further transfers of national powers to the EU. No political or monetarily union.” [4] What is your view on the European Union and on the party discipline?

Forum for Democracy wants tougher punishments for violent crimes and for sex crimes. Theo Hiddema, a lawyer, who is member of parliament for this party, recently said that he does not really believe in tougher penalties [5]. Does this mean that more opinions in this party can co-exist? What is your opinion about tougher penalties for violent crimes and sex crimes?

Binding referendums is a key issue for Forum for Democracy. It is a road which could be very dangerous in my opinion. Why do you think binding referendums are a good thing?

Most of the people voted for Forum for Democracy did so because they don't want many foreign people coming to live in our country. Pim Fortuyn, Rita Verdonk, Geert Wilders and now Thierry Baudet: they all have largely the same followers. While these four people are different, 80 or 90% of their voters are voting for close our borders. Well, that's what I think. The immigrants have different believes. Our freedoms are at risk. Our women's rights, our gay rights. That's what they say. While most of these people voting for these parties are very narrow minded people, very intolerant people. Our gay rights victories are not thanks to them, I'm afraid. At the same time there is always a problem with letting people in with different views. For instance, Jews are afraid to walk with a kippah in Amsterdam. Gays are afraid to walk hand in hand in our cities. It is not only a part of the Muslim community that is responsible for this, but it is not something we should ignore too. Are you worried about our immigration policy?

When people must leave their homes because of a war and they end up in a foreign country, they are thankful to get asylum. They did not ask for leaving their own country, but they had no choice. And we should help them! In The Netherlands we also had many so called Gastarbeiters. People we needed to work here on the lower paid jobs. They were only here for a limited time was the plan. But people, once settled, like to stay and many stayed. These people worked hard. They had to deal, I'm sure, with a lot of discriminatory insults and looks. Their children, maybe feel anger because of the disrespect they experienced. Is there research done concerning the view points, the views towards the Dutch society, of the group of these immigrants (and their offspring) in comparison with the views of the asylum seekers that fled a war?

It would have been insane not to give Nemr (9 years old) the right to stay in The Netherlands after living his whole life here. I hope you agree with me.

At the end of this interview I have one topic that is very important: sexuality. We are sexual beings. At school, at work: sexuality is a thing. Religious extremists always have very strict sex rules. In the United States, there are people for decades or even for life in prison for only watching what we call child pornography. Children who are sexual with each other, are more and more send to treatment centers, usually far away from their parent's homes. In Sweden, you need to give informed consent to every sex act. You must ask: 'do you really want this,' even if you are married for decades to each other. If you liberate people sexually, then it will be unlikely that people will become, or sympathize with, terrorists, religious extremists and so on. But politicians nowadays mostly think about sexual repression. The sixties are behind us. Does this need to change?

In The Netherlands we separate women and men. When you need to wear work clothes, we have a dressing room for men and one for women. At an early age we separate girls from boys when they dress for gym and swimming lessons. And 'of course' we have public toilets for both sexes. So when the far rights says in Muslim countries they separate men and women, I find this a bit hypocrite because they don't even see that we do this here also. In my opinion, the far right has only started accepting homosexuality and some of the women's rights. And by doing so they apparently need others as a scape goat in this process. What do you think about mixed showering at schools, that boys and girls would be in the same dressing rooms. And that the swimming lessons would be naked, not in swim clothes. This way, we learn our children that nudity is not a problem and that sex segregation is insane. Thierry Baudet is more a guy - correct me if I'm wrong, but this is how I see him - that wants to have boy schools, were the boys wear uniforms. And girls schools, were they must learn how to sew and be obedient. And later in life, these girls need to give birth to at least four children. And if a child turns out to be gay? Well, unfortunately, but we have to tolerate this... But a Gay Pride: no thanks. No Stonewall. In my opinion it is time for a radical queer movement. Or is that a form of 'cultural Marxism'?

[1] Paul Cliteur at Wikipedia: -
[2] The Gay Krant was a leading gay magazine in The Netherlands. Because of the internet era many magazines did not survive. The Gay Krant was one of them. The interview I had with Henk Krol can be found here: - Marthijn Uittenbogaard & Jeroen Maaskant - OK Magazine, no. 90 - November 2004
[3] source: Pim Fortuyn; 'De moderne schandpaal';; Elsevier; 30 October 1999
[4] source: Verkiezingsprogramma PSP 1981-1985 -
[5] source: 'Hiddema begint kritisch' - - PowNed - 23 March 2017

Mail correspondence (in Dutch):
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 Marthijn Uittenbogaard wrote:

Geachte Paul Cliteur,

U krijgt de laatste tijd erg veel e-mails lijkt me. Waarschijnlijk is dit een understatement ook nog. Deze mail kan er dus nog wel bij.

Ik zou u bij dezen willen vragen of u door mij geïnterviewd wil worden. Zelf was ik aanhanger van Pim Fortuyn. Van Forum voor Democratie ben ik niet zo gecharmeerd. U heeft binnen die partij een zeer prominente rol. Ik ben wel benieuwd of u verschillen ziet tussen Baudet, Fortuyn, Wilders, Verdonk en Hirsi Ali en welke verschillen dit betreft. Ook ben ik geïnteresseerd in uw kijk op de Europese Unie. Zelf ben ik absoluut geen fan van de EU en ik mis de diversiteit binnen partijen als D66, GroenLinks en dergelijke inzake vele standpunten waaronder die over de Europese Unie. De PSP (of PPR, zou ik moeten opzoeken) was vroeger nog tegen de EEG. Nu moet iedereen binnen elke partij dezelfde mening hebben. Ik ben zelf controversieel, volgens anderen dan, niet volgens mezelf. Een interview met mij zou op zich al gedurfd zijn. Toch stel ik misschien net die interessante vragen die anderen niet stellen. Omdat ik er niet bij hoor, kan ik makkelijker afstandelijk kijken naar 'de samenleving'. Door de bomen het bos niet meer zien, daar heb ik minder last van.

Het interview kan persoonlijk plaatsvinden, maar het zou ook via de email kunnen. In dat geval mail ik een stuk of 15 vragen en na uw antwoorden nog 3 extra vragen. Deze drie als reactievragen op enkele van uw antwoorden. Zodat het interview wat levendiger over zal komen op de lezers. Ik publiceer enkel als u akkoord gaat nadat ik u de gehele tekst heb gemaild. Waarschijnlijk zal ik amper iets hoeven te editten, maar u heeft dan toch de tijd om nog eens over uw antwoorden en/of de publicatie ervan na te denken.

Op mijn site zal ik het dan publiceren. En ik zal een link ernaar tweeten. Waarschijnlijk is een bericht aan de media overbodig, ik vermoed dat men het vanzelf wel oppikt.

Een paar jaar terug zouden Ad van den Berg en ik door studenten uitgenodigd worden op de Universiteit van Nijmegen. Echter, toen de leiding van die universiteit er lucht van kreeg ging het niet door. U heeft met soortgelijke censuur te maken, alleen wel met meer media-aandacht hiervoor.

Ik kan verplaatsen en ontvangen (Hengelo, O.). Leiden is een stad waar ik ben geboren en getogen. [edit zin betreffende plaatsnaam familie]

Naar Leiden afreizen is voor mij geen probleem. Maar via email is tijdbesparend (transcripties maken kost veel tijd; heb ik vaker gedaan namelijk). Beide opties hebben voor- en nadelen. Wel zou ik het fijn vinden om een unieke foto te plaatsen bij het interview. Dat u die neemt, of ik, bijvoorbeeld op de heuvel voor de Burcht in Leiden. Of de Leidse bieb; is er naast.

Ik merk wel als u interesse heeft.

Marthijn Uittenbogaard
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 Paul Cliteur wrote:

Ha Marthijn, ik vind het leuk, maar ik wordt platgemaild nu, inderdaad.
Later wil ik het wel een keer doen. In mei of zo. Via de mail kan inderdaad wel het makkelijkste. Maar het zou ook wel meer over mijn eigen werk moeten gaan. Ik heb niet zoveel te zeggen over Rita Verdonk en zo.

Paul Cliteur
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 Marthijn Uittenbogaard wrote:

Ik mail begin mei dan nog wel een keer. Misschien kan het dan 6 mei gepubliceerd worden. Maar dat zien we wel. 6 mei: Fortuyn, laten we waken over de vrijheid van het spreken; was meen ik de tekst op de Fortuyn-vlag.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 Paul Cliteur wrote:


Paul Cliteur
Does the above text accidentally contain a typing, spelling, grammatical or factual error?
Or do you want to react to it? Then I hope you will get in touch.
"Wees eerlijk en laat zien wie je bent."
"Kinderen moeten veel meer zeggenschap krijgen."
"Alle zedenwetten moeten weg."
"Pedohaat heeft niets met seks te maken."
"We gaan verkeerd met seksualiteit om."
"Hoe zinniger wat je zegt, hoe bozer men wordt."
"Zonder pedofilie zou de wereld veel armer zijn."