Pim Fortuyn in translation

Right wing politicians and their right wing followers often praise Pim Fortuyn. At the same time they want tougher penalties for criminals, especially for pedosexuals. They usually don't care about privacy issues. They don't care about basic human rights et cetera. But Pim Fortuyn thought totally different than many of his followers. Now the city of Den Haag (The Hague) voted in favor to name a street after Pim Fortuyn. So they want to honor Pim Fortuyn with a street, someone that openly advocated for pedosexual relationships. They ignore all the things Pim Fortuyn stood for. How sick. So I decided to translate some of Pim's texts into the English language because many people outside The Netherlands don't know much about Pim Fortuyn and his views. And because I'm not very good in English and Google translate is more or less as good as me - or better - I decided to use their translation website.

[Google translations of Pim Fortuyn writings:]

A persistent misunderstanding has nestled in our kind of societies. Widespread is the idea that education must be given to transfer knowledge. [...] Education should primarily be education. Experience that teaches us lifelong learning. What one learns in the first twenty years of his life largely determines its course, mentally, culturally, socially and economically. This training takes place in the interpersonal relationship. The most important is undoubtedly that between teacher and student. That can of course also be women and girls.

In education, from high to low, that relationship between teacher and student is destroyed. If she is still there, it is simply because there are always teachers who, against the current, are and remain teachers.

Fighting crime results in a call for more and more cells and powers for the police and the judiciary. The tacit assumption is that they will make good use of it, without violating the interests of citizens. In practice, this often turns out to be wholly or partly untrue. There is insufficient supervision of the police and the judiciary, or at least effective supervision. The judiciary has somewhat agreed with this by stretching the law. That is an extremely dangerous development. After all, in our legal order it is the judge who, irrespective of police and justice, makes a judgment. He is the shield and the trust of the suspect citizen.

source: 'The Orphaned Society' [De verweesde samenleving] by Pim Fortuyn; Karakter Uitgevers; 2002; First edition 1995

–

No, when I think of new fascism, I think of the diligently working technocrats, [...] who open our garbage bags to determine whether we are violating environmental cues, who philosophize about the possibilities that computer science offers when checking on the behavior of the citizen, to PTTs who use the telephone - even if it is on hook - as eavesdropping equipment, to technicians who want to link all sorts of information files together for charities such as combating tax and support fraud and illegal country, to police commissioners who take every opportunity to call for more powers and cells .... The new fascism will creep in on stocking feet, on waves of technological possibilities and will take the form of an anonymous bureaucracy led by equally anonymous bureaucrats and politicized politicians. [...]

The latter is just about the worst thing that can happen to a young person, not belong to it. [...] On the one hand, top individuals, relatively assertive and socially competent in their contacts, often very well aware on which side their sandwich is spread, and on the other hand that irritating conformism. You do not want to distinguish yourself, but within the group, but not if this has the consequence of being outside of it. [...]

It is this minister who is calling for more and more money and cells and powers, it is this minister who wants to criminalize preparations for a crime with all the possibilities of manipulation that entails, it is this minister who refuses to take action against legally unauthorized persons eavesdropping practices, it is this minister who calls for an unconditional identification obligation [...]. In Hirsch Ballin we have the most repressive minister of justice since the Second World War [...].

Of all European countries the extermination of the Jews was the best organized and the most effective here. [...] I say this, because this can make us feel a little milder about our eastern neighbors and because it can really happen again tomorrow. We probably won't even recognize it immediately, because history rarely repeats itself integrally and in the same form. [...]

Communities of teachers, pupils and parents have become anonymous learning factories where semi-criminal behavior finds a good breeding ground. The cry for attention from the student in education has perhaps never been as great as it is today.

source: Pim Fortuyn in his book 'To the people of the Netherlands' [Aan het volk van Nederland]; Publisher Contact Amsterdam / Antwerp; Fourth edition 1993

–

With every incident, as a sort of Pavlov reaction, there is a call for more blue in the street and stricter punishments. A majority of the population is even in favor of the reintroduction of the death penalty. The rioting in the Groningen Oosterparkbuurt in Groningen once again demonstrated that there is a lot wrong with the effective deployment of the police and the judiciary. Homes and interiors were transformed into complete messes, while the police present watched. Too scared to compete with a club of ten agents against around sixty rioters. Ridiculous. A few shots in the air and the followers ran away, after which the hard core could be tackled effectively. However, the police are a good reflection of the neighborhood population. [...]

However, the question is whether even more agents and even harsher penalties will help. We have plenty of agents, but they are rarely available when they are needed because of those horrible rosters defending their trade unions. [...] People do not get better from prison, worldwide research has shown that they are sad. The longer the prison sentence, the worse people get out of it and the harder it is to build a non-criminal life. The death penalty helps us get rid of the perpetrator, but does not prevent new violent crimes. [...]

The call for more powers for these authorities [police and justice] is unceasing and politicians are increasingly giving way. We now have the dubious reputation of the country with the most extensive eavesdropping practice in the world. [...] That these powers are not only used against criminals can be seen from the so-called stock market scandal and the arrest of demonstrators at the time of the Euro Summit in Amsterdam. With the help of the infamous Article 140, which criminalises membership of a criminal organization, many people are taken into preventive detention. Our criminal law is based on the principle that justice must prove guilt and not the suspect is innocence. All of these preventively arrested people may in the meantime prove in prison that they are not members of a criminal organization within the meaning of Article 140. ...

A properly functioning rule of law requires good judicial and police resources and effective deployment of these, as well as from law enforcement organizations. On the other hand, there must be good democratic and judicial control, as well as proportionality of the deployment of resources and organizations. The call for more powers and even harsher penalties does not contribute to this and is unworthy of a civilized rule of law. With all this, remember that you too can be arrested once, even if you are completely innocent.

source: Pim Fortuyn in his column 'Shaky rule of law' [Wankele rechtsstaat]; From the booklet His best columns for Carros [Zijn beste columns voor Carros]; Readershouse / Hearst; 2002; Previously published in the magazine Carros; 5th volume no. 1; March / April 1998

–

Babyboomers [Fortuyn's autobiography] shows that Fortuyn's childhood has been steeped in secret homosexual desires and adventures. No doubt he will have told Dr. Rens [Rens Hoekstra, in which Fortuyn has been in psychotherapy] of his first sexual experience that he experienced as a little boy with a "big blonde" soldier. "The Dutch soldier asks if I want to see his tent. I want that. We crawl into his sleeping bag together." Fortuyn is "nice and warm against him". The soldier "moves against my back. I find it exciting." Fortuyn's obsession with war is born. According to him, war is "exciting". "Then you can do all sorts of fun things that you are not allowed to do now. Then no one is in control of you anymore. Then you are only with boys in a tent and then I go with Arie (the soldier - jvc) in a sleeping bag lying in an army tent." After the experience with Arie a second homosexual experience follows. "A young guy was sitting on the couch. I remained curious, he said goodbye and took his penis out of his pants and started playing with it. The kid asked me if I wanted to pull his penis. I wanted that and I pulled and "snot" all came out." Fortuyn describes these experiences as "an enrichment". "Today, an experience like the one I experienced in the little park near our house could easily lead to a complaint from the parents to the police for pedophilia, and the young man in question would be very sour. Why did he hurt me? , on the contrary, he made me see and feel something incomprehensibly exciting, but today we are ready to intervene with entire teams." This program item from the Lijst Fortuyn has probably escaped the furious Rotterdam voters of last week.

source: Article 'A very annoying case - Fortuyn on the couch' [Een heel vervelend geval - Fortuyn op de divan] by Joris van Casteren; www.groene.nl/artikel/a-ver-vervelend- case; The Green Amsterdammer; 16 March 2002

–

"Unchastity only exists between the ears. As long as people do things that they themselves enjoy, or in interaction with others, that subject is dealt with as far as I'm concerned. You are mainly unchaste if you only look at yourself, pursue your own pleasure and do not take the other person into account. Yet for a long time, just about everything related to sex was labeled unchaste. You were not allowed to deduct because then hell and damnation were your part. And it could make you sick too." [...]

"I never had sex that was loaded with guilt. Of course I do know the feeling of guilt - it has also been forced on me - but it has never rooted in me. Let me not say goodbye: in a religious perspective, the dark rooms that I frequent still do not match Sodom and Gomorrah. The Church is happy with that, but I oppose the assumption that it would be a normal gang. One of the most important codes in such "free" sexuality is that you respect the other. That you do not do something that someone else does not want. People can all be naked, but that doesn't mean you can misbehave. It is a large playroom, but in that room some norms are much sharper than outside, where everyone has their clothes on. A rape does not take place in a dark room, I can tell you that. Maybe in a wedding bed." [...]

"Isn't it strange that having certain thoughts must already be rejected? There is already such a lack of affection in the world." [...]

"But this boy's partner states that they belong to each other for one hundred percent. As if it's about cars. Or houses. Nobody belongs to anyone. Monogamy is a situation that is, not a situation that you can enforce. And what if someone has a big heart? Is there then only one other person in his life? Should I suppress my desire because someone else does not know how to deal with jealousy?"

source: Pim Fortuyn in 'I'm still immensely' [Ik ben nog altijd even mateloos]; Interview by Arjan Visser; From the book "The Ten Commandments"; Rainbow Pocketbooks; Maarten Muntinga bv publisher; September 2003; Edition in collaboration with Dagblad Trouw; The interview took place in April 1999

–

[Pim Fortuyn:] I have a look at a very nice young, who is that? The one with the black hair. [...] Twenty, is he an adult? [Pim Fortuyn:] Thomas R. [edit], and how old is it? [...]

Hi Thomas, how old are you? [Thomas:] 23. [Pim Fortuyn:] 23, then it's not forbidden boy. I think that is under eighteen, I shouldn't have that [Fortuyn laughs].

source: 'Interview Pim Fortuyn'; Radio 3FM; Presentation: Ruud de Wild; 6 May 2002

–

But DJ Ruud de Wild apparently is doing well, although he doesn't even recognize a Michael Jackson song. 'Scary man, all that wrenching body, his nose falling off. If you can't be who you want to be, can't experience your sexuality, that's terrible, sir. I also fought for that you must be accepted at the core of your existence."

source: Quote from Pim Fortuyn from the radio interview just before his death. "An eyewitness account of the dismay after the assassination attempt" by Henri Beunders; "The Fortuyn phenomenon"; de Volkskrant & J.M. Meulenhoff e.g. Amsterdam 2002

–

I am five years old [...] The Dutch soldier asks if I want to see his tent. I'd like that. [...] His name is Arie and he asks if I like that name. Yes, I think that is a nice name and I lie nice and warm against him. Arie is very quiet and moves against my back. I find it exciting. Then Arie stops moving and sighs and tells me to play outside. Can I come back tomorrow? Yes, tomorrow I can come back from Arie. [...] And they are very sweet soldiers!

Then we lie warmly against each other and Arie starts moving against me again so nice and exciting. Yes, I wish it was war!

It is the municipal gardener who always does our house next to the park. She [Pim's sister] calls him her friend's husband and is allowed to sit on his lap and as a summit of glory on the saddle of his cargo bike, while he slowly pushes it to the next perk in the park to be done. [...] Nowadays, parents would look for something and the friends would run the risk of being charged with pedophilia. [...]

A young guy sat on the couch. I remained curious, he said goodbye and took his penis out of his pants and started playing with it. What a great big thing, say! I asked if my penis would grow to be that big later. Yes, if I grew well, he would grow up too. The kid asked if I wanted to pull his dick. I wanted to do that and I pulled and all the snot came out and I was startled and ran away hard, home, to my mother. [...] Yes, that was at least exciting, more fun than those stupid teachers and my friends.

One day my friends and I saw it happen before our eyes. A motorcyclist with a duo passenger tried to avoid the bus, which just didn't work. Their heads rolled down the street and the engine with their decapitated bodies drove on for a while. We had to laugh about it. Nowadays, all this is supervised by teaching staff and trauma teams, preferably at the slightest or smallest.

source: 'Autobiography of a baby boomer' [Autobiografie van een babyboomer] by Pim Fortuyn; Karakter Uitgevers; 2002; First edition 1998

–

"In many ways there is no rule of law anymore. People just do something. The average agent does not even know what the rule of law entails. That terrible article of law about criminal organizations is being abused up to and including publicity law in the Netherlands. People are being arrested and you as a journalist are being tipped to be there Are you completely mad about justice, but what do we do with the awareness of justice Ergo: the independence of the judge is threatened by justice".

"I recently had dinner. Next to me was a thirteen-year-old girl giggling. She told me to do homework. About the Enlightenment. She just understood that it wasn't about the lamp above our heads. I asked the master once told a story No, it didn't, then I gave a lecture about the Enlightenment I told about Spinoza The whole company was hanging on my lips A story told to a 13-year-old girl was intense for me luck."

source: Pim Fortuyn in Elsevier; 31 August 2001

–

The world of the young child is almost completely colonized by the adults. Through education, the parents and not least through commerce. The child has the right to an own space that he or she learns to share with peers. So away with those pick-up and drop-off mothers with cars, away with those fathers who interfere with their son's football, away with the excessive interest of parents, teachers and googles in the sexual development of the child and the confrontation with issues of life and death. The entire trauma processing by children monopolized by the 'gogen' industry only works as a trauma, rather than as a trauma. Children are able to process a lot more and better than many well-intentioned and better-knowing adults think. Much of that help has been thought from an adult world view, while the child's world view is and should be different; small, more wonderful and more adventurous, not yet sadder but wiser, but curious and not very well formed. Let children have that space, in fact, give them the space that children had in the fifties and sixties!

The second dam is more difficult in nature and requires steady maintenance. The point is then that democracy is not half plus one, that is the majority, but a generous majority, which moreover shows respect for the interests and views of minorities.

By politically correct thinking I mean: the assumption of the political and cultural elite in the European countries that they and they only have the right to set the political agenda, that is, the subjects that are susceptible to political and cultural debate, and that they too can determine which facts should and which facts should not play a role in the debate on the topics on the political agenda. In other words, politically correct thinking is a form of spiritual dictatorship that presents itself as enlightened thinking. In reality, it is enforcing conformism to the prevailing political thinking of a political-cultural elite. They present themselves as wolves in sheep's clothing.

source: Pim Fortuyn in his book 'The third revolution! How information technology turns everything upside down' [De derde revolutie! Hoe de informatietechnologie alles op zijn kop zet]; A.W. Bruna Uitgevers B.V. Utrecht; 1999

–

The topic of pedophilia cannot be ignored from the newspaper pages. After Dutroux in Belgium, the Netherlands has its own affairs, ripe and green. From murder to the mutual sexual abuse of children.

When I was young, the latter fell under the chapter 'playing doctor'. No mother who made a word of it. We had a big house with an attic and went to play with friends and girlfriends, and it naturally degenerated into playing a doctor. When it became too quiet, my mother came quickly with a tray full of glass of ranja. She then pretended to see nothing. Our play was naturally transferred to something else.

Since the colonization of the child's world by adults, such simple solutions are rarely available. It immediately falls under the chapter of unauthorized and unwanted intimacy, and before the children realize it, there is a procession of googles that take care of them. As a result, something that was not a problem - discovering the world of the opposite sex - suddenly becomes a life-size problem. And if those children could become traumatized by something, it is because of this ridiculous attention and concern for nothing.

In the meantime, the prime minister is also dealing with this important issue, although not on his own initiative, but still. And then it is mainly about pedosex: sexual attention of an adult for and actions with a child, boy or girl. Soon justice is involved there nowadays, and if it can be proven, the adult in question disappears for a while in the lick.

Pedophilia is just like straight or homosexuality. It is something that is in genes, so you can do little or nothing about it, you are who you are. The social context hardly matters, sooner or later the tendency will be irresistible. It is no more than cure for straight or homosexuality. The chance of recurrence is therefore present in life. That's exactly where the shoe pinches. During and after the stay in the lick the pedophile is pointed out that this is not possible and that he or she must be able to control it, but yes they are people like you and me. So 100 percent certainty that the pedophile will not repeat itself cannot be given.

In America, they have found something on it, as so often. After the return to society, the name of the perpetrator is announced in the area where he is going to live so that the parents are warned and they can keep their offspring away from this possible repeat offender. Barbaric states, of course, but it works, and in America they do not turn their hands around the criminal prosecution of an 11-year-old boy who has pulled down his sister's pants and pressed his clothed crotch against her bare buttock. All this based on a testimony from a neighbor, shame!

In the meantime, it is no longer necessary for the authorities to disclose the name of the perpetrator to the neighborhood, the internet proves its modern services, the parents can do it themselves. In the event of the perpetrator's relocation, that job is also done over the internet. A good example does follow well, so there is now also a citizen initiative in the Netherlands to put convicted pedophiles on the internet. A modern pillory!

In response to a number of out of control affairs, the Minister of Justice is now considering possible forms of guidance for pedophiles who have served their sentence. Consider the involvement of the local police officer and mandatory guidance through the probation service. But yes, the minister sees the demands for more money already on his plate, and so nothing will happen. The fact that the country has only a few convicted pedophiles will make little impression on the police and probation service, they cannot possibly do this task in the same way, that's how it goes here.

In the meantime, the prime minister is strongly opposing the public scandal of the internet, but first of all he cannot do anything about it - the medium is rightly free - and secondly he is left empty handed, since there can be no question of counseling the punished pedophile regarding the costs. Common sense will prevail and the residents will solve it themselves through this public reporting system. Terrible, but true!

The philosopher of law and pedophile Brongersma, who has been a PvdA senator for many years, has spent his entire life fighting for understanding of pedophile fellow human beings. He started this fearlessly after serving a prison sentence for sexual harassment with a minor. The relevant minor had not found it undesirable at all, but the judiciary ruled differently in the 1950s.

In the sixties and seventies, Brongersma slowly but surely gained a foothold. After the invention of the pill there was the liberation of sex. Homosex was accepted, and why would - under the strict condition that the child wants it and that it is not forced - pedosex be allowed? This enlightened position has since been abandoned and under the influence of the googles the child has been put down as a whole free from sexual appetite, at least towards adults.

We are far removed from the concept that Brongersma tried to cultivate, to the detriment of ourselves, because everything that can be discussed is, in principle, also manageable, you may think!

source: Pim Fortuyn; from the column "The Modern Pillory" [De moderne schandpaal]; www.pimfortuyn.com/pim-fortuyn/archive-columns/166-the-modern-schandpaal; Elsevier; 30 October 1999

[A quote about Pim Fortuyn:] –

Authenticity and honesty were at the basis of the electoral success of Pim Fortuyn. Five years after the murder of him, most politicians lack the courage. The fear of fatal missteps is paralyzing. [...] Fear has reigned in The Hague since the historic elections of that year. The motto, in particular, is not to offend the voter. It breeds leaders who shrink from having an opinion and meanwhile give the impression that they themselves do not know it completely. [...]

Fortuyn was an extroverted poseur, but one who remained true to himself at all times. Fortuyn also did not talk to anyone in debates and interviews, not even voters [better translation would be: he kept his own views even when opponents held different ones]. His opinion was his opinion. Point.

source: Article 'Cramp most important legacy of Fortuyn' [Kramp belangrijkste erfenis van Fortuyn] by Paul van der Steen (political editor of Dagblad De Limburger / Limburgs Dagblad); Leidsch Dagblad; 12 May 2007

[End of quotes] –

Was everything positive about Pim Fortuyn? Apart from all his right wing followers, there were some concerns. One of them was animal rights. Our parliament wanted stricter laws concerning the fur farming business and Fortuyn said he would rollback these laws. Maybe this is why Folkert van der Graaf murdered him. De Graaf - an animal rights activist - gave only as explanation that he stood up for the weaklings in society.

The other main issue that Fortuyn brought to the attention were the problems with immigration and immigrants, especially those from Muslim countries. But he never wanted to get rid of Muslims in our society and never wanted to send a Dutch citizen ‘back'. Also did he never plead to close mosques, which right wing politicians do. He feared for the decline of homosexual rights with the rise of intolerance from the Muslim community. Not that he ever said that all Muslims were anti-homosexuality. The truth is that in some areas in The Netherlands Jews and homosexuals are more and more the scapegoat and they leave these areas. Fortuyn wanted to address these issues which were non debatable because when you did you were a new Hitler.

So, Fortuyn was no intolerant right wing politician. If Fortuyn would not have been killed, I'm sure Martijn Association would still exist. I'm also positive that he would not be a threat for migrants and people with different religions. But the people that claim his legacy usually are a threat to basic human rights.