Tag: liberalism

Plotted ufo sightings

God’s Country

nivtricLeave a comment

Surprise, surprise

Why would the Netherlands be central in God’s plan? It probably wouldn’t be your first guess, and it might even surprise you. Of all countries, the Netherlands? Indeed, that requires clarification. God likes a good joke. But there is more. That low-lying area ranks the highest in quality of life in 2026,1 making it the closest to Paradise. For that reason, probably, the tallest people come from there, making it the country of the giants. It is not an accident, but the outcome of extreme social engineering. Culture is ubiquitous in our conduct, so this requires a more thorough investigation. Hegel’s grand scheme of social progress towards Paradise and the Enlightenment ideas are central pillars of God’s plan, and the Netherlands has progressed the furthest in that scheme.

That makes the Netherlands, apart from windmills, dykes, tulips, red light districts, herring biting, and all the other things, such as the most unique illness-related swearwords with cancer, tuberculosis and typhus in them, the superior quality of the tarmac, and the lowest level of personal hygiene in terms of washing hands with soap after toilet visits, that make the Netherlands special, so special. On Reddit, several lists circulate in which the Netherlands stands out in one way or another. If you view it that way, it all starts to make sense. It is a very special country indeed.

In hindsight, the ultimate bogeyman of the conservatives, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, who became the fall guy for everything they believed was wrong in this world, proved to be one of the greatest prophets of all time by implying that social progress through new ideas and revolutions is God’s path towards Paradise. Social progress is God’s thing. The Netherlands has been one of the most progressive countries on issues like dealing with the limits of growth, LGBTQ rights, animal welfare, balancing work and private life, opportunities for ethnic minorities, and the right to decide to terminate one’s own life.

And the plan seems to bring the rest of the world up to the same level, for the Netherlands is a tiny, crowded country, so not everyone can move over here to enjoy the good life. For that reason, the Netherlands was also the first to have a fascist party in parliament after World War II in the 1980s, arguing that the country was already overly crowded, and later, a fascist messianic leadership cult. The country even had a political party named New Social Contract, from Enschede, of all places, the place where, unlike Almelo, the greatest things have happened. A New Social Contract is what this world now desperately needs.

The Netherlands is God’s country. Israel, the United States, and Saudi Arabia bite the dust. The Netherlands means ‘low countries’. Half the Dutch live below sea level on land taken by draining swamps, lakes and even seas. It is only one of the things that make the country unique. Yet the name nearly translates to ‘humble country,’ as ‘humble’ in Dutch is ‘nederig’. So, what’s in a name? There is no coincidence. And so, I am not the kind of person who would brag, nor are most Dutch, but I have to explain why the Netherlands is God’s special country, for that it appears to be.

The Netherlands has long been a civil society centred on cooperation and founded on a compromise among identity groups, known as the polder model. That is less so today. Before that, the Netherlands was an oligarchic merchant republic, so like the United States today. It was the world’s wealthiest country on the eve of the Industrial Revolution. The Dutch greatly contributed to modern capitalism by founding the first stock market and the first multinational corporation, the VOC, during the Dutch Golden Age.

Yet, the Dutch Golden Age doesn’t fill the Dutch with pride. The VOC exploited the Dutch East Indies, which is now Indonesia. One of the best-known books in Dutch literature is Max Havelaar by Multatuli, which is about the plight of farmers and labourers on coffee plantations in the Dutch East Indies. We had to read it at school. The Dutch also made a lot of money from the Atlantic slave trade. And one of the most well-known Dutch heroes of the era, Piet Hein, was a pirate who stole boatloads of silver from the Spanish. Okay, there is a little bit of pride, but not that much. There was a dark side to it, and everyone knows it.

The Dutch are the best non-native English speakers. Dutch is the most similar to English, as the Netherlands is close to England. It helps me write this. Details like this demonstrate the intricacy of the script dubbed God’s plan. On Reddit, there once was a map of reported UFO sightings. The supposed extraterrestrials espouse a keen interest in three countries: the United States, Great Britain, and the Netherlands. As the Dutch are true pioneers in post-apocalyptic means of transport, since it is the country of the bicycle, it becomes all the more astonishing that extraterrestrials have also shown interest in the United States and Great Britain. And so, the scratching of heads continues.

Where it all comes together

That the Netherlands came to lead the world in liberal reforms and became the most socially progressive country was the outcome of the political manoeuvring of the left-wing liberal party D66 and, most notably, its leader, Hans van Mierlo, who features in an impressive coincidence scheme that involves, among others, D-Day, the battle of Hastings, the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, and the curse of all curses, The Curse of the Omen. The coincidences in history and The Curse of the Omen are discussed in detail in other stories. The fate of the Netherlands, and by extension the world, became settled when Van Mierlo seized the opportunity and plotted a liberal revolution that made the Netherlands the most liberal country.

The Christian Democrats of the CDA, who had always been in the government, had long blocked progressive reforms. In 1994, after the CDA had lost the election, D66 forged the purple coalition with the social democrats of the PvdA and the right-wing liberals of the VVD. They set aside their differences and focused on their shared progressive values to implement amendments. A large section of the Christian Democrat electorate supported these changes, so they remained uncontested afterwards. Leftists in the Netherlands saw their country as a guiding country. Yet, the country also saw an early revival of fascism in the 1980s with the Centrumpartij, so it was ahead on that count as well.

The Netherlands is one of the least nationalistic countries and one of the most cooperative in multinational organisations such as the United Nations, the EU and NATO. The Netherlands depends on international trade, and World War II led the Dutch to believe that they can’t survive on their own. The country is most closely tied to both the continental European and Anglo-Saxon worlds. And together with Great Britain, the Netherlands is the most oriented toward the United States. And so, the Dutch provided more NATO heads than any other country.

The Netherlands lies between Great Britain, Germany, France, and Scandinavia, and that extends to cultural ties. As the most ‘Scandinavian’ country outside Scandinavia, it is a social paradise and among the least corrupt countries. As for the Netherlands being a docile country, appearances can be deceptive. Russia is paying dearly for downing a Dutch passenger jet. Ukrainian officials and military analysts estimate that Dutch-funded FPV (First-Person View) drones and related unmanned systems are responsible for roughly one-third of all Russian casualties on the front in 2026.

The Netherlands further ranks highly in sexual liberty. Prostitution is legal and performed openly in red light districts. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, paedophiles could operate in the open until the focus returned to the damage they do to children. Today, most Dutch think that consenting adults, provided that they are sane and there is no pressure, can mostly do as they please in sexual acts. In Paradise, Eve and Adam were naked and knew no shame. On the work floor, equality is the norm, and, together with Denmark and Norway, it has the most egalitarian work environments. The Dutch balance work and private life and have the shortest work weeks. The Netherlands doesn’t lead on all fronts. It lags in the number of women on corporate boards and in parliament.

The border between the Roman Catholic and Protestant worlds ran through the Netherlands. Amsterdam harboured a sizeable Jewish community. With these diverse influences, it became the crossroads of Western civilisation and, as Muslims arrived, the crossroads of the Abrahamic religions. About 200 nationalities live in the Netherlands, making it a crossroads of world civilisation as well. It all seems daring, reckless even, as it is an unprecedented social experiment, for what is to come out of this? But if diversity means strength, that might explain why the Netherlands ranks highest in quality of life.

The reference to ‘humble’ in the name of the Netherlands is noteworthy, as honour plays a minor role in Northern European culture, including in the Netherlands. Pursuing or defending your honour is considered a frivolous pursuit for hotheads. Peace with honour is problematic as honour stands in the way of peace. You can more easily have peace without honour. The most unpretentious part of the country might be Twente, where I came from. The Dutch words for ‘suffer’, ‘lijden’, and ‘lead’, ‘leiden’, sound the same. Perhaps that is because Jesus led the world by his suffering. In Dutch, Jesus refers to ‘your sister.’ Eve and Adam were also like a sister and a brother.

There is more free thinking in the Netherlands than elsewhere. The Dutch are known for their tolerance. That dates back to the Dutch Republic, which made the country attractive to Jewish merchants. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the country had parallel societies with Protestants, Catholics and socialists living separate lives. Until 1850, Protestantism had been the official religion, but Catholics faced no persecution. Today, the same applies to smoking weed. Tolerance was also the stance towards immigrants for a time. In that sense, the Netherlands didn’t differ much from most other Western European countries.

The Netherlands was also the first to have a short-lived fascist revolution with a leadership cult. It proved to be a foreboding of things to come. Immigration led to a growing sense of unease among the Dutch as poorly adapted immigrants caused trouble. These feelings needed a catalyst to give the discontent a voice. After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, a maverick politician, Pim Fortuyn, who posed himself as a messiah, rose to prominence with his anti-immigration views. A left-wing loner assassinated him, after which a sense of normalcy returned. Yet the unease didn’t go away, so the fascist movement gradually grew stronger, also in other European countries, and fifteen years later, the United States would see a similar movement and leader, with MAGA and Donald Trump, which culminated in the unravelling of the post-war liberal order.

Merchant and vicar

Mainland Europe, and most notably, Germany, has a tradition of idealism, while Great Britain and the United States have a tradition of pragmatism. That extends to the moral realm. Philosophers like Kant and Hume reflect these diverging traditions. The British philosopher Hume argued that we set goals and use reason to achieve them, which makes reason the slave of our passions. The deeply religious Kant vehemently disagreed, holding that we have a duty to reason, as it is our distinguishing feature. Hume believed morality is part of human nature and depends on popular sentiment, and outcome matters more than intent, so something is wrong when it makes people angry or when it produces disaster, even when you have good intentions.

That immensely troubled Kant. Reason must be the foundation of morality, not empathy or anger, as Hume proposed. To Kant, intent matters most. Something is wrong if the intent was to hurt someone. Kant formulated the categorical imperative, a universal moral duty for everyone. Freedom means not being the slave of our passions. We should always treat people right, not only when we like them. And so, you have two views on freedom. The pragmatist one is doing as you please, and the idealist one is overcoming your lower urges and becoming a rational, morally upright person.

Continental European idealism and Anglo-Saxon pragmatism have wider implications than you might realise. A German idealist like Karl Marx devised a grand scheme for how things should be, while an English pragmatist like Adam Smith described capitalism as it worked in practice. In mainland Europe, Frédéric Bastiat would hit a more fundamentalist tone in defence of capitalism. When the United States turned the fight against communism into a moral crusade, it imported its idealist philosophers from the classical liberal and libertarian traditions, such as Friedrich Hayek of Austria, which is culturally close to idealist Germany. The Austrian School of Economics turned into a religious cult in the United States. Being halfway between England and Germany, the Netherlands ended up in the middle of those two traditions, making it both a pragmatic nation of merchants and an idealistic nation of vicars, also because Protestantism had become the predominant religion.

Catholic doctrine holds that faith and good works can save you. Catholics perform good works, such as giving money to the Church, to atone for their sins. It promoted corruption within the Catholic Church through the sale of indulgences. Protestants objected to this moral corruption and took moral integrity very seriously. They made morality a matter of personal choice, making them personally responsible. And so, it should come as no surprise that Immanuel Kant was a Protestant. Catholics are more morally flexible, so Catholic countries in Europe tend to be more corrupt than Protestant ones. Protestants should think for themselves, while Catholics merely follow the Church’s lead, except in the Netherlands, where the Catholics openly rebelled when the Church reversed its liberal reforms to the point that the 1985 Pope visit became an absolute disaster.

And so, despite the presence of a sizeable Roman Catholic minority, the moral conflict defining Dutch culture, the vicar versus the merchant, is ‘dominee versus koopman’ rather than ‘pastoor versus koopman.’ It was the Protestant vicar, not the Roman Catholic priest, who objected to the merchant’s wicked deeds. The merchant was also a Protestant. This dualism still profoundly affects the Dutch, making the Netherlands a nation of merchants and vicars. To a vicar, money is the root of many kinds of evil, while successful merchants are driven by greed. This dualism is challenging and made the Dutch work harder to reconcile the two by finding a pragmatic solution that also meets ethical requirements. It drove the Netherlands into territories that other countries did not go. The country may appear relaxed, but it is tightly organised, not as much as Japan, but still.

The machine no one can replace so far

It was up to the engineers to figure out the solutions. The Dutch engineering tradition dates back to the construction of dykes and windmills to drain lakes and swamps. Half the country is below sea level. Dealing with the unruly nature of water has become a Dutch expertise, as the sea and rivers can rise above the surrounding land. Likewise, Dutch agriculture has developed into a science- and engineering-driven enterprise. As Dutch farming centred on livestock, it exceeded the land’s carrying capacity, forcing Dutch farmers, also under the pressure of environmentalists, to minimise the ecological impact of their agricultural output, making Dutch agriculture one of the most innovative in the world. It is how reconciling idealism and pragmatism works in practice.

Today, the Netherlands is home to the world’s most advanced engineering. That is noteworthy, as we may have to socially engineer the future world society of God’s Kingdom, and the messiah may have to work out the grand design. China and the United States may seem to lead the technology race, but their accomplishments are built on Dutch technology. Without the Dutch corporation ASML, there would be no cutting-edge semiconductor chips needed for AI and quantum computing. The ‘$400M Machine No One Can Replace’ refers to the Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) Lithography systems manufactured by ASML. Here is why these machines are considered irreplaceable:

  • ASML has an absolute monopoly, as it is the only company on Earth that makes these high-volume EUV machines.
  • ASML employs the most extreme engineering. Each machine consists of over 100,000 parts, weighs 165+ tons, and utilises mirrors so flat that if scaled to the size of Earth, the highest bump would be less than one millimetre.
  • The ASML machines fire high-powered lasers at molten tin droplets at 50,000 times per second, creating a plasma that emits light at a 13.5-nanometer wavelength to print microscopic circuits on silicon.
  • The cost and scale are unparalleled. Priced between $200 million and $400 million, these systems require 250 engineers to install over six months, and shipment requires 250+ shipping containers and seven Boeing 747s.
  • The world is fully dependent on this single corporation: Without these machines, chipmakers like TSMC, Samsung, and Intel cannot produce the advanced chips (e.g., for Nvidia GPUs) that power the modern digital economy.

As of early 2026, ASML has introduced a new generation of these tools known as High-NA EUV, which cost approximately $400 million each and are crucial for the ‘Angstrom Era’ of chip manufacturing. China also plans to acquire this technology, but it takes time to reach the same level as ASML. ASML is an offshoot of Philips, which invented the compact cassette and compact disc that geezers like me might still remember. In consumer electronics, marketing and cheap mass production became more important than engineering, so the firm declined. It spun off parts as independent corporations, including ASML, and sold others to focus on medical appliances.

We may soon have to socially engineer the future world society and make it last for a thousand years or more. As the Netherlands is the best country to live in and can accommodate a wide range of diversity, it seems that this social engineering effort has been a success. But what is behind it? It begins with tolerance. What also helped is that the Netherlands has no history of racially antagonistic relationships like those in the United States. There are issues with discrimination and conduct, but racial relationships are not deeply troubled. The Netherlands was open to migrants. That may have to do with the Netherlands being a nation of merchants and vicars. To the merchant, they were good for business, and the vicar cared for those who fled from oppression abroad.

Diversity can benefit team building by combining strengths. Particular groups have particular strengths, and if you can build a team from them, diversity can be a benefit. To illustrate the point, in the 2024 Summer Olympics medal table, the Netherlands ranked 6th, below the United States and China, but above Great Britain and Germany. In the 2026 Winter Olympics medal table, the Netherlands ranks 3rd. The Netherlands never became world football champions, but they reached the final three times. Johan Cruyff is the most well-known Dutch football player. The point here is not that the Dutch are good at sports, for top sport is a waste of energy and resources, but in teamwork. Even individual sports today require a team to get the best out of the athletes.

Immigrants or their children have contributed to these results. Particular groups have particular strengths, and if you can build a team from them, diversity can be a benefit. Yet, social engineering has reached its limits, as people in Europe, including the Dutch, are growing increasingly sour toward immigrants and focus on what goes wrong and the long-term consequences, which are indeed uncertain. If the country is as great as the Netherlands, it is unlikely to get better. It is the best country to live in. Yet, if the rest of the world were to catch up and become as agreeable to live in as the Netherlands, that would be much better. And that might indeed be God’s plan. That requires the most extreme social engineering, so Dutch engineering.

Truth bomb

The 2025 RSF World Press Freedom Index, which you can see as a gauge of civilisation if you like, shows that all that remains of civilisation, so where there is still some freedom of the press, is that tiny, little green area somewhere above and in the middle, that includes the Netherlands. One of the tokens of civilisation under siege by crazed barbarians is the famous Dutch Protocol, a beacon of reason in a world of savages infected by anti-trans hysteria. Whether civilisation can still vanquish the barbarians depends on the superiority of its weaponry. That is the sad truth about humans. Weapons win arguments, not reason. As Judgement Day may be approaching, it seems no coincidence that the International Court of Justice is in The Hague, the Netherlands.

So, in the country of the most extreme engineering, including social engineering, the work on the most advanced weapon of all time, the one that will end the world as we know it, including the world’s religions and the other fantasies humans cling to, the Truth Bomb, is nearing its completion. To make it undetectable by radar, sonar, explosives-sniffing hounds, and Geiger counters, the device has been disguised as non-radioactive, odourless text with stealth capabilities. So, it has the element of surprise and, with social media, unprecedented swiftness. When the Truth comes out, its enemies have already lost, and they will know it. But will it be in time to prevent the apocalypse and kickstart the New World Civilisation called God’s Kingdom? Storytellers love suspense.

Latest revision: 25 August 2026

Featured image: UFO sightings plotted on world map

1. Numbeo Quality of Life Index. Numbeo (2026).

Pim Fortuyn on 4 May 2002, two days before his assassination

Troubles in the Multicultural Society

nivtricLeave a comment

Balls on the ground

The Netherlands has been one of the most liberal countries in the world. The country has a long tradition of tolerance dating back to the Dutch Republic. It was also a fairy-tale society, with Van Kooten and De Bie seeking the nuance. Their characters represented the so-called conservative, ignorant and xenophobic undercurrent in Dutch society, and also hustlers, such as Jacobse and Van Es, infiltrating politics with their corrupt schemes and dubious deals. That undercurrent didn’t go away. Instead, it grew stronger as immigrants continued to arrive, causing increasing unease. The progressive values many Dutch cherished didn’t agree with the conservative worldviews of many immigrants, most notably Muslims. And then there were the crimes and misconduct of particular groups. These feelings needed a catalyst to give the discontent a voice. The existing political parties had become complacent and didn’t see what was coming. Nor had I.

After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, a maverick politician, Pim Fortuyn, rose to prominence with his strong views on immigration and Islam. Fortuyn claimed that leftists were to blame for immigration. He called them the Leftist Church for their moral superiority claims, who would call you a racist if you opposed immigration. There is a lot of racism, but it was not the reason why the movement gained strength. Many Dutch people desired to limit immigration, most notably of people who had trouble adapting. Only, no politician raised the issue the way Fortuyn did. The others were careful not to promote division. Most immigrants did okay, so inciting hatred would destroy society, they reasoned. Keeping a good society is not a simple affair. It is like juggling several balls in the air. Fortuyn didn’t seem to care and sought personal fame. And he believed that allowing immigration to continue would make it harder to maintain a good society.

Fortuyn attacked the fairy tale of the multicultural society and called it a failure. I had believed in it or wanted to believe in it. If there is ever to be world peace, the world must unite and become one multicultural society. Living with people from different cultures isn’t easy and can go wrong easily, and I knew that from what had happened to me as a student. Culture can be an unbridgeable gap. Yet, you could live separate lives as long as you don’t cause trouble. Some Fortuyn supporters seemed to anticipate civil war and hoped that it would start sooner rather than later, when the authentic white Dutch were still a majority. The atmosphere quickly turned grim. Under the guise of free speech, the sewers opened, and the rivers of hatred flooded freely into the open. Fortuyn’s rise made headlines in the international press as it represented a clear break with the past, occurring in what many believed was the world’s most liberal country.

Having lived in neighbourhoods with ethnic minorities myself, the picture the fascists presented diverged from my personal experiences. Add to that that I had seen a fair share of bullying and random violence, so harassment complaints didn’t impress me at first. Your life is normal for you, and if others make a fuss about what you think is normal, you might see them as a bunch of whiners. So, my initial belief was that it was mostly bigotry, racism and hatred, making me think that people would calm down over time. A leftist poster with the avatar Kingie launched a new website, BeursKings (MarketKings), with help from Danger Money, who programmed it. A small group left IEX and joined the new message board, including me. BeursKings remained in operation for several years. Kingie once posted photographs of himself. That was a shock. He looked like my double. In hindsight, that is remarkable because of his avatar name. Others who remained on IEX also joined the BeursKings message board. I was part of the so-called Leftist Church and had tried to rein in the bigotry. One of the IEX posters once called me ‘vicar’ for my moralising.

Somehow, I had come into his crosshairs. He had a high regard for himself. A spectacular profit he had made on a semiconductor stock might have led him to think he was a genius. The Dot-Com bubble led some people to believe, for a while, that they were stock-market legends, beating investment gurus like Warren Buffett, until the bubble imploded. My investment returns have never justified those kinds of ideas, but I could write stories people liked to read. This guy was a physicist working in a laboratory, or so he once wrote, and a Czech, a relative of Franz Kafka, he further confided on the message board. He claimed that his investment results came from ‘observing the herd and anticipating where it would go next’ rather than from luck in picking a winning stock. He was eager to pick on me, but when I returned years later to IEX, he praised me for identifying interest charges on money and debts as a root cause of financial collapse.

Shortly before the 2002 elections, a left-wing loner assassinated Fortuyn. Fortuyn had hinted at that possibility. If something were to happen to him, he claimed, it would be because establishment politicians had demonised him. The socialist-in-name-only Marcel van Dam, who lived in a luxurious mansion far from multicultural neighbourhoods and had always been eager to take the moral high ground, once called Fortuyn an ‘exceptionally inferior human.’ And so, you may ask yourself, which of the two was the most superb Nazi? Fortuyn gave a presentable at-your-service salute that might go well in some fascist circles, but his ‘inferior human’ remark gave Van Dam a clear edge.

Other politicians have called Fortuyn ‘extreme’ or ‘demolishing society’ as he was stirring up public sentiment, which might lead to violence. Fortuyn was a man of the theatre, hysterically hyping the wrongs others did to him while being a jerk himself. The Netherlands is not a violent country. It was the first political assassination in 400 years, so no one saw it coming. And the poisoned climate was his doing as well. The civil war didn’t arrive, but death threats to politicians have become common. The attitudes toward immigrants and Islam have also changed. Fifteen years later, the United States saw the rise of a similar leader.

Fortuyn’s assassin, Volkert van der Graaf, was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome. He was someone like me. To him, Fortuyn may have been a new Hitler on the rise. He feared Fortuyn would tear down Dutch society so that the weak, such as the poor and refugees, would suffer, and also animals, as he had been an animal rights activist. Van der Graaf drew a logical conclusion from the facts, or so he believed. The problem with this kind of thinking is that we don’t know the future. Van der Graaf had good intentions, but Fortuyn also believed he was serving the Netherlands. Yet, there was something sinister about Fortuyn. I am not a trained psychologist, but Fortuyn wanted to be the centre of attention and wield power, and didn’t care about the consequences, much like Donald Trump.

Harry Mens, a Dutch real estate tycoon whom you might call the Dutch Donald Trump, had promoted Fortuyn on his television show, Business Class. So, like Trump, Mens had a television show. Fortuyn’s appearance on his show foreshadowed a new type of politics, common in the United States but not in the Netherlands, in which wealthy moneymen fund the politicians. I found Mr Mens to be a questionable character, who boasted and flaunted his wealth. At the time, I didn’t think of Trump, but there are parallels. His programme was about investments with people in suits and dresses promoting their investment services. A few advertisers on his show turned out to be frauds, such as Palm Invest.

I see Pim Fortuyn and Donald Trump as narcissistic psychopaths. These are not official diagnoses, but personal impressions. However, I am not alone. Some psychoanalysts concluded that Fortuyn was a narcissist, possibly because of feelings of inferiority that he needed to compensate for with praise. It was all about him, and other people were just utensils. His neurotic disturbances and unresolved personality flaws made Pim Fortuyn such a powerful force. One psychoanalyst said, ‘Imagine if he had to go on a state visit to US President Bush. He would exhibit Sun King-like behaviour.’1 To Fortuyn, the US President would have been a mere extra in the Pim Fortuyn show. Even though the psychoanalysts didn’t raise that particular issue, Pim Fortuyn seemed to enjoy hurting other people’s feelings, making me think he was a psychopath as well.

If you consider the characteristics of narcissistic psychopaths, you might discover they are the opposite of Asperger’s syndrome. I name a few: (1) thriving on chaos versus thriving in order, (2) desiring to be the centre of attention versus not wanting attention or praise, (3) manipulative and lying versus honest and forthright and (4) charming versus impolite. At first glance, Fortuyn and Trump seemed impolite rather than charming. That needs further explanation. First, you don’t have to check all the boxes to be autistic or a psychopath. And second, the impoliteness of the autistic person comes from being honest. By being rude, Fortuyn and Trump catered to their supporters’ fear and anger. They told them what they wanted to hear. Still, I think that Fortuyn and Trump both believed that what they were doing was necessary. What can make psychopaths successful as leaders is that they are willing to hurt people, which may be required to do what is necessary. With these words, I conclude my psychoanalysis session.

Life went on

Beurkings also attracted a few posters who remained on IEX. They were the most colourful ones. One of them, Xzorro, didn’t believe the 9/11 conspiracy theories and thought that the success of the attacks was due to the incompetence of the American authorities. His conspiracy thinking took another direction. He believed the allegations that a high-ranking Dutch Prosecution official, Joris Demmink, had had sex with underage male prostitutes and that there was a conspiracy within the Dutch government to cover it up. An investigative journalist and conspiracy theorist, Micha Kat, had pursued the matter relentlessly for years. In the 1990s, there had been a police investigation into possible child abuse by four high-ranking government officials.

The investigation had collapsed after someone had leaked information. During raids, the police found no incriminating evidence on the suspects. Fred Teeven, who had led the investigation, later stated that Demmink had not been a person of interest in that investigation. The Dutch newspaper AD later claimed that Demmink had contact in the 1980s with a pimp of underage boys. Kat was onto something, but he may not have been right. He was also a nutcase. Kat later claimed that children buried in a Bodegraven cemetery were victims of Satanic child abusers, which was nonsense and easy to disprove. And Kat had a conviction for making death threats to a fellow journalist.

Another noteworthy poster on BeursKings, Gung Ho, who lived in the Dutch countryside, favoured traditional US conservatism and posted lengthy pieces copied from American conservative websites, including some claiming that US Neoconservatives were Leninist agitators. He enthusiastically promoted a penny stock, Clifton Mining, and believed that colloidal silver was a cure against many diseases. That made him the subject of mockery, most notably by Amoricano, an American of Dutch origin who had long been on IEX. Amoricano was a Democrat who ridiculed conspiracy thinking, quackery and pushing penny stocks. Gung Ho might have been in the military and had friends in the American military, or so his sparse remarks about his personal life suggested.

Gung Ho posted comments about the Neoconservatives in the Bush Administration being chicken hawks, so cowards who send others to war while having done no military service themselves. His use of language was odd, which made his lengthy texts amusing. The connection he made between Neoconservatism and Leninism seemed obscure to me at the time. Still, like the Leninists, the Neoconservatives use Hegel’s dialectic to promote social progress via revolutions and wars. The conflict between the West and Islam was their latest project, founded on the clash-of-civilisations ideology, and the Iraq War was one of its consequences. Traditional conservatives like Gung Ho opposed these methods.

There was also a psychiatrist on BeursKings. He had quit his job and tried to make a living by day trading. He posted under the name Kindval, a football player from the 1970s. He didn’t seem to like me. When someone attacked me personally or for my political views, he consistently upvoted these comments. He was usually a bit edgy and irritable, making me think that his life as a parasite didn’t work out so well for him, and he would have to work for a living again. I didn’t make those kinds of comments, so that was not why he disliked me. Once, Gung Ho went loose on him by suggesting he had psychological issues.

I upvoted that comment. It was a rare occasion for me to upvote a negative comment. Kindval became agitated about Gung Ho’s comment, but even more so about my upvote, which was particularly odd, as he had done the same to me several times before, never missing a single opportunity. That made me think that he was, as Gung Ho implied, on his way to a nervous breakdown, thereby confirming the prejudice of psychiatrists choosing their profession because of having mental issues themselves.

Fortuyn’s rise had made me curious about the troubles in the multicultural society. The conduct of young Moroccans received the most attention, also from Fortuyn. The Dutch secret service AIVD has found that Fortuyn had sex with underage boys, including Moroccans, which casts another light on Fortuyn’s interest in Moroccan boys. Yet Fortuyn was not the only one mentioning the issue. There seemed to be widespread agreement among those who knew. A social democrat, Rob Oudkerk, used the adjective ‘kut ‘, which translates best to ‘shit’ to go with the group. The fallout of my student years of not fitting in had made me preoccupied with cultural issues. The multicultural society has to work because nation-states and tribes fight wars. So, what stands in the way of success? Is the gap between Islamic and Western culture unbridgeable? It kindled my interest in Muslims and their beliefs. And why is there trouble?

Moroccans are a disliked minority. Some other minority groups also have issues, but Moroccans receive the most negative attention. When the nationalist politician Geert Wilders singled out one minority for deportation, he chose the Moroccans in his infamous ‘fewer Moroccans’ quote, ‘Fewer Moroccans. Let us take care of that.’ Indeed, they have a serious likeability problem. The reason is conduct. When people complain about youths causing trouble, it is most often about Moroccans. To illustrate the issue, people of nearly every nationality live in the Netherlands, but during the 2026 Football World Cup, riots broke out only after the Moroccan national team played. And so there definitely is something rotten. At least, they behave as if Judgement Day would not be in their lifetimes. Their mistake. They should have paid more attention in the mosque. That led me to join the Maroc.nl message board for people with a Moroccan background in 2004.

I have been on that message board for two decades, and it has mostly been ordinary people. As far as the extent of the problems with Moroccans go, in most ethnic groups, 80% to 90% of the people check out okay. In that sense, Moroccans are not that different from other ethnic groups. Yet how the remaining behave makes Moroccans stand out. And the police are doing very little, as their provocative and intimidating acts are usually too minor to be prosecuted. And that makes it a festering issue.

There is a historical background. The Netherlands had invited uneducated country dwellers to work in factories. They were Berbers who call themselves Imazighen, meaning ‘free people.’ Among them were the pirates who made the Mediterranean and the Atlantic unsafe between 1500 and 1800 AD. Like the Dutch, they were engaged in the slave trade. As faithful Muslims, they only took Christian slaves, raiding European ships and coasts. The Dutch were sought after by these pirates because they were rich and could be sold for ransom. Over the centuries, their franchise processed over 1,000,000 slaves. As entrepreneurs, they were a liberty-loving people with hardly any government. Colonisation was brutal. The Spanish used poison gases to repress a rebellion in the 1920s. In Morocco, the Berbers have long been secondary citizens in a country dominated by Arab culture. Today, the Moroccan government recognises their culture and language.

The Dutch expected that these ‘guest labourers’ would return home and initially didn’t invest in their integration. Yet, most didn’t return because they had stayed for decades and had raised families in the Netherlands. They were denied opportunities, for example, by receiving advice to pursue lower levels of education than native Dutch with similar intelligence scores. Nordin Ghouddani, a man of Moroccan descent, and his Dutch friend Thomas Rijsman have been friends since primary school and are now both sports journalists. After primary school, Rijsman went to the highest level of secondary school, VWO. In contrast, Ghouddani went to a much lower level, LTS, despite having the same score on the test used to determine the school level. And Ghouddani had Dutch friends and had integrated. He explains,

Yes, you get torn away. I could become a car mechanic, the teacher said, and my father, for whom I had to translate that, thought that was a great job. But I was butterfingers. And that teacher knew. I wanted to go to the school where Thomas and all our friends went, but I was the only one who wasn’t allowed to do so.2

No surprise, then, that many Moroccans felt like outsiders and disrespected by the Dutch. They were contemned. I remember an aunt once telling me, in the 1970s or 1980s, that she had invited Moroccan children into their home to play, perhaps as friends of one of her children, and that it was the first time ever the Dutch had invited them into their home. The precise reason remains unclear, as integration means adapting to the surrounding culture to become accepted. In any case, many youngsters found their way into gang culture, where they felt respected. Their culture of distrust of authorities adds to the problems. It is mostly youths who misbehave. Most change their ways as adults, while the remainder end up in organised crime. But by then, a new generation of troublemakers has arrived.

No gain without pain

The issues Moroccans in the Netherlands face, and how they relate to society, compare to those of blacks in the United States, even though the blacks in the United States do identify as Americans. The message board was open. Everyone could join. It featured discussions about religion and social issues. Various people shared their opinions and discussed them with one another. People came and went on the message board over the years. I have been on it for two decades, not every day, but regularly. Occasionally, there were heated exchanges, with Moroccans complaining about the racism of the Dutch and Dutch complaining about the misconduct of the Moroccans.

What Moroccans call racism is often discrimination or cultural criticism. Criminals complain about the police and may use racism as an excuse. Yet, research has shown that discrimination is widespread. People with foreign names get fewer job interviews than those with Dutch names who have similar qualifications. Cultural groups favour each other. You have to fit in with the team. And hiring people from particular groups comes with a risk. Yet, that risk-avoidance also contributes to the problem. The issue is hard to solve, except by reducing differences, so that people mix more easily. And Muslims generally do not mix well with non-Muslims. Muslims are the least likely to mix with others.

Most people on the message board seemed okay. I never met them in person, but that was my impression. There were a few agitators from both sides, so Moroccans and Dutch, but overall, the discussions were insightful, thanks to the diversity of posters expressing their opinions. On the board, the moderators sometimes discriminated against the Dutch, who were banned for lighter offences than Moroccans. As far as discrimination goes, Moroccans are no better than the Dutch. Still, it was an open message board nonetheless, and in most cases, misconduct preceded a ban. The message board likely received a grant and was obliged to keep it a safe space for a variety of opinions. There were Christians, Jews, Muslims, former Fortuyn supporters, and leftists. There were also gays seeking to counter the hatred of LGBTQ people because of street violence against them.

A Dutchman sometimes asked why Moroccans don’t openly distance themselves from fellow Moroccans who misbehave. A Moroccan would argue that he is not responsible for the conduct of others, and there is no reason to make excuses for what others do. He also doesn’t ask the Dutch to excuse themselves for the misconduct of fellow Dutch. So, here is a rant on Reddit on 1 July 2026 of a Moroccan fed up with the criticism of the Dutch,

It is driving me absolutely crazy. Yeah, congratulations on the win [of the football game], but it’s a shame you have to cause trouble again. Why do you think that is? Yeah, how should I know? I was in bed, and I don’t know those guys. I’m not going to ask you for an explanation just because your compatriots are blocking highways, rioting at the Malieveld, vandalising the town hall in Loosdrecht, and all the other things. Just leave me alone. I’m not doing anything wrong.

It is a fair point. The poster is part of the majority who do nothing wrong and have to put up with comments from the Dutch about their compatriots’ misconduct. A Jew also joined in, saying that he was fed up with having to account for the misconduct of the Israeli government, which he had nothing to do with and didn’t support.

I have read complaints about annoying individuals who demand respect up front before they accept you. One poster acted like a jerk to me for a considerable time, and for no obvious reason, so the only reason could have been that I was Dutch. That was until I upvoted one of his comments. From then on, he saw me as his best friend. To be fair, I have had a fair share of people acting like jerks to me for no reason, and they were nearly all native Dutch, so that doesn’t say much, but it fits a pattern others notice. A pattern means it is more prevalent in a group, so many Dutch people behave similarly, but on average, less often. Again, a psychologist might attribute it to an inferiority complex. He may have assumed that I didn’t respect him because the Dutch hate him, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy if that belief leads him to act like a jerk.

Pride and honour mean less to the Dutch than to Moroccans. On a Dutch message board, I found the following observation: ‘Moroccan troublemakers have a macho attitude and a short fuse. They see criticism as a personal attack, and if they don’t aggressively go against it, their friends will see them as sissies.’ Young men can be easily provoked, but culture can rein them in. That may go a long way in explaining the issue. That conduct may come from an inferiority complex. They may feel disrespected. Like Pim Fortuyn, they act out hysterically. That attitude can make you hate them instantly. Yet, if you are a bit self-critical and less impolite, others will like you much better already.

Violence against LGBTQ people is one of the issues at play, as was violence against Jews. Some posters on the message board argued that native Dutch commit more hate crimes against LGBTQ people, which is correct because there are far more native Dutch. Likewise, you can point at football hooligans or drunk Dutch causing trouble abroad at holiday destinations. It is how you can twist the numbers, as the sophists did in ancient Greece. For problem-solving, this tactic isn’t helpful. If you do that, you make people angry. The sophists were unpopular, and it wouldn’t surprise me if angry peasants had hanged a few. Statisticians look at percentages of the population, which makes more sense.

Traditional Muslims are strict on religion, much like conservative Christians. They have more in common with each other than with liberals. So, why many liberals like Muslims, and conservative Christians dislike them, is quite an enigma if you reason from their beliefs alone. Terrorists usually are young men who seek meaning in life and find it in Islam, and then fall prey to extremist preachers. There aren’t that many, but a few hundred can already be a serious threat. During the first year, there was uproar over the Dutch publicist Theo van Gogh, who was indeed kin to the famous Dutch painter. Under the guise of freedom of speech, he called Muslims ‘goat fuckers’ and Muhammad ‘a pimp’. The people on the message board didn’t care much about being called ‘goat fuckers,’ but insulting Muhammad was a red line that genuinely upset them.

Several posters also expressed fury about the Somali lady Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who had left Islam for a liberal lifestyle, and had, together with Van Gogh, made the short film Submission about the suppression and mistreatment of women by Muslims. To Muslims, the film was blasphemous as it showed the bodies of abused women with Quran verses on them that the filmmakers claimed Muslims use to justify mistreating women. Hirsi Ali also had called Muhammad a ‘pervert.’ She faced death threats. The anti-immigration and anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders also faced death threats and requires security to this day.

Hirsi Ali had escaped an arranged marriage. The Dutch police prevented her family from abducting her from an asylum seeker centre in Almelo. She later moved to the United States to work for the neoconservative think tank. Van Gogh paid for his Islam-insulting binge with his life. A youngster of Moroccan descent slit his throat, precisely 911 days after the Fortuyn assassination. That was on 2 November, which refers to the European emergency services telephone number 112, the European equivalent of 911. So, in the first year, the atmosphere on the message board was tense.

Western interventions in the Middle East and Western support for Israel also angered quite a few people, and that goes a long way in explaining violent incidents against Jews. Islam itself, like Christianity, is not hostile to Jews, but Muslims and Christians can be, and Jews can be hostile to Muslims and Christians where they are the majority, like in Israel. Israel illegally occupied Palestinian land, and Palestinians kept on committing acts of terrorism. It has proven to be an irresolvable conflict. Several posters on the message board viewed the West, including the Netherlands, as anti-Islamic.

Some Dutch have argued that they are ungrateful, as the Netherlands provided them with a good life and freedom of religion. If it was so bad over here, why don’t they move to an Islamic country where life is better? I tried not to offend people with my opinions. At first, I was making up my mind anyhow. It is a conflict between two worldviews, each with its own logic and merit. And there were issues the mainstream media hardly reported on, so for me, as an outsider, it was hard to tell what was true and how serious it was. And the West was not morally superior. There is an underlying truth, whatever that may be, so I was not inclined to judge before having a clear picture of all the issues at play.

In the first years, the American gangster heist called the Iraq War was still in progress. For me, the Iraq War became an unexpected mental dip. The Americans had tricked me into believing that Saddam Hussein had a stash of WMDs, making me think that this war was necessary. Once I saw live on CNN how the bombs fell on Baghdad and how gung-ho Americans ran over the country’s defences and murdered the defenceless Iraqis, with the Iraqi Information Minister vehemently claiming until the very end that there were no Americans in Baghdad and that all American forces had been obliterated. Americans found it funny because it was not them getting bombed. My mood suddenly swung to dim. And then there were no WMDs. That was the year before I joined the message board. They had attacked a country and killed for no reason. Estimates of the total number of people killed range from 150,000 to over 1,000,000.

The Netherlands has been a major contributor to the American war effort in Iraq as well as Afghanistan. It doesn’t seem a coincidence that the Dutch Prime Minister Balkenende had praised the Dutch VOC mentality of the former Dutch colonial enterprise that had invaded and exploited the Indies under the guise of trade. The VOC was a bunch of gangsters. The United States had copied that proud Dutch tradition of the oligarchic merchant republic.

The oil revenue was supposed to pay for the invasion that the Neoconservative planners envisioned. So today, the United States has the VOC mentality. Shell was a Dutch company, so the Dutch had to be in on the action, or so Mr Balkenende may have reasoned, so the Dutch sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. That, and Dutch liberal values, explain, to some extent, the negative views about the West and the Netherlands among the Moroccans on the message board. Some may have used these issues as an excuse for their misconduct and crimes that they would have committed anyway. Some could get angry at you simply for being Dutch because they think they know what you think. Some came to the message board only to lecture the Moroccans about the backwardness of Islam or the misconduct of Moroccans.

That didn’t work out so well. You also wouldn’t change your mind when someone you have never met before came out of the blue to tell you how stupid your religion is and that your community is a bunch of criminals. The Israelis were also stealing land from the Palestinians with American support. As for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, some Dutch would say that Palestinians keep on committing acts of terrorism, thereby challenging a much stronger adversary, and then whine about losing the fight and their land.

Three posters once wrote that they had been in prison. One of them posted from jail, so he had access to the Internet or a smartphone. They discussed the Dutch police. Some were racist, they claimed, but others were professional. There had been hundreds of contributors on that message board, so that says little, but not everyone would openly write about having been in prison, and it is illustrative of the prejudices many Dutch have. If, as the statistics suggest, crime levels in their community are three times those of the native Dutch. Some have argued that you bear no blame for other people’s faults. Still, if group culture contributes to these issues, the group itself has a problem. One of these problems is that the Dutch dislike Moroccans more than any other ethnic minority. It is not because the Dutch singled them out for no reason.

As the most hated child in the entire school, I have been there. My predicament was not entirely my fault, but I was part of the problem, and the only one I could fix was myself, not the others. And if you want to solve the problem, you’re better off fixing yourself instead of waiting for others to fix themselves. So, once the opportunity arose, I went for it. Some other minorities face similar issues, but Moroccans, more than other minorities, seem to have an attitude problem of not acknowledging their own faults and blaming Dutch society. There is a lot of negative sentiment festering among the population that the mainstream media hardly reports on. Negativity makes matters worse for those who do well, but it is harder to change opinions among the Dutch as long as there is a problem.

The Moroccans on the message board hardly expressed pride about fellow Moroccans who did well in the Netherlands, such as Ahmed Aboutaleb, the mayor of Rotterdam, who was popular among the Dutch and would have had a good chance of becoming Prime Minister if he had demonstrated that ambition, or Khadijah Arib, who became Speaker of the House. Some called them bounty, so brown on the outside, but white on the inside, hence traitors of their Moroccan identity by siding with the Dutch or accepting their values. The Dutch national football team features players from ethnic minorities, but not Moroccans, who prefer to play for Morocco, despite being born in the Netherlands and having grown up there. Hakim Ziyech is an example. Among the reasons he cited was his feeling more Moroccan than Dutch. That is an integration failure.

Bounty politics means that the Dutch accept diversity as long as the migrants accept Dutch values. The Dutch question the allegiance of someone with a Moroccan or Turkish background more than that of someone from Sweden or France, due to the greater cultural distance, so they would ask Moroccans questions they wouldn’t ask someone from Sweden or France. And whites in New Zealand wouldn’t ask such questions of the Māori. That is because the Māori were there before the whites came.

Most Moroccans do all right, but the minority that causes trouble is large and problematic enough to drag down the group’s image. That well-known guy with a tainted skin on a scooter, who regularly features as a suspect in crime reports, ranging from street intimidation, robbery, and harassing women, often comes from that particular ethnic group. One of the top three most notorious Dutch criminals, Ridouan T, is of Moroccan descent. And the pimps luring or forcing vulnerable girls into prostitution are regularly of Moroccan or Turkish descent. Behind that seems a lack of respect for non-Muslim women, whom they see as sluts, so fair game. That it relates to Islam rather than Moroccan culture is illustrated by evidence that Turks are also involved, and in Great Britain, Pakistanis, who are involved in rape gangs. Similar problems exist in other countries. Most Muslims don’t do these things, and it is a small part of the total amount of sexual abuse, but it is a significant issue nonetheless.

Another issue causing upheaval in the Dutch multicultural society was the tradition of Saint Nicholas, in which a long-bearded, centuries-old white man from Spain arrived with a group of black servants to deliver presents to children. For a long time, that was fine, as it was an old tradition and there had not been slavery of blacks in the Low Countries themselves, so the Dutch didn’t associate the helpers with enslavement of blacks. As a child, I believed their faces were black because they went down chimneys to deliver the presents. Americans who saw it were appalled, as the tradition involved blackface. A black American woman working at the United Nations raised the issue, and black activists in the Netherlands began protesting. The issue remained contentious for over a decade.

The compromise gradually became the soot-stain helper, so a helper with soot-stain marks from going into chimneys. For the remainder, nothing changed. Yet a significant group of Dutch didn’t like black people telling them to change the tradition, which they claimed was part of Dutch cultural heritage. There had been some agitated encounters with the activists. The black activists had a point, but it was mainly a pissing contest between white egos and black egos. Whites could have accepted that the tradition had racist elements and that the soot-stain helper didn’t meaningfully change it, while the black activists could have understood that it was a quaint relic of the past and that altering it wouldn’t change the lives of blacks in the Netherlands. And there are far more serious issues, some apocalyptical even, making the conflict resemble a fight on the deck of the sinking Titanic.

Finally, there is the question of allegiance. Moroccans can’t renounce their nationality, and their children born in the Netherlands automatically become Moroccans. Morocco is firmly in the Western camp, so the consequences so far have been limited, with a few instances of Moroccans spying for their country. Yet, we don’t know what the future brings. The same goes for Turks, with many taking their orders from the Turkish president, who called the Netherlands a fascist country after the Dutch government had prevented a Turkish minister from politically campaigning in the Netherlands for a referendum in Turkey to give more power to him.

These problems persist not because of neglect by the Dutch government, which has programmes to give minorities opportunities. As a result, some of the best Dutch schools are Islamic schools. There is not much more that the Dutch government could have done. The underlying issue is cultural. And it works two ways. Western culture is even problematic because it promotes a suicidal way of life by valuing money above everything else. Nearly all existing cultures are problematic in some way. That is how I looked at it, which made me reluctant to judge.

I remained on the Maroc.nl message board for two decades. In 2024, shortly after the Gaza War had started, the message board went offline permanently after being filled with anti-Israel messages. That was suspicious indeed if you believe that the Jews are running this world. By then, I had arrived at some conclusions. We won’t make it if we aren’t willing to face these issues with brutal honesty. Few people are willing to change. They have their reasons. Moroccan malcontents may believe that they have it bad in the Netherlands and that they are not to blame for their misconduct. As for discrimination, it only stops once we identify as one people with a shared destiny. There will be no gain without pain, which I experienced firsthand as a student. For those who cause trouble, the consequences may soon be brutal, like they were for me. If you are one of them, you are on notice.

Latest revision: 19 August 2026

Featured image: Pim Fortuyn on 4 May 2002, two days before his assassination. Roy Beusker (2002). CC BY 3.0. Wikimedia Commons.

1. Een heel vervelend geval. Joris van Casteren (2002). Groene Amsterdammer.
2. Nordin Ghouddani, presentator van Mocro Inside: ‘De grootste vijand voor ons is toch echt wel links’. Margriet Oostveen (2026). NRC.

Twilight That Could Be Dawn

nivtricLeave a comment

The collapse of liberalism

In 2016, Trump enthusiasts overran the GodlikeProductions.com message board, where I sometimes came by. The mood turned grim, much as it had fifteen years earlier, when Fortuyn fans flooded the IEX message board. This time, I stayed. I had missed something important. Given my possible future job, not comprehending fascism was no excuse. That made me familiarise myself with the MAGA crowd. At first glance, that club made a gloomy impression, bound by cynicism, hatred and anger. Hanging out with people helps you to understand them. And it served as a reality check. God’s plan for the New World Order seems to turn the world into one happy family, a global multicultural society. It doesn’t necessarily mean that people from different cultures mingle, but that they all at least share a belief in a common destiny as one people. So what stands in the way? The former Dutch prime minister Jan Peter Balkenende offered a suggestion: we need shared norms and values. We also identify with groups and believe in religions and ideologies.

At the same time, I followed the feed of r/BlackPeopleofReddit, which features stories and footage of MAGA people harassing blacks or scoulding them with racist slurs. Racism is widespread, but it is not why fascism is seeing a revival. Fascists also worry about crime, loss of identity, and fear the future. As MAGA enthusiasts point out, the violent crime rate among blacks in the United States is six times as high as among whites. Some immigrant groups in Europe are in the same league. Yet, most immigrants and blacks aren’t violent criminals and have jobs. Still, higher crime rates have a significant impact on societies. Also, on the GodlikeProductions.com message board, I was cautious about expressing my opinions. I wasn’t quick to judge. God wrote the script.

The first Trump presidency was not a clean break with the past, as his cabinet featured several old-order Republican figures. They kept The Donald in check. The second Trump administration became a different ballgame. Trump went unhinged after he had surrounded himself with sycophants. His erratic and spiteful caprices became a spectacle so hilarious that even Monty Python couldn’t have made it up. Making a full list of the foolish acts would significantly lengthen this story without adding much substance. As a Swedish newspaper put it, ‘This is the problem with having a giant baby in charge of the free world.’

If you look more closely, the Trump presidency is a reaction to trends that had been building in the preceding liberal era: free trade and the free movement of people. These go at the expense of communities and local economies everywhere in the world. And immigrants that don’t accept Western values, whatever these may be, undermine the foundations Western societies are built upon, whatever these may be. Critics can find plenty of arguments against this view, and many are valid. And there is so much wrong with Western culture that you could ask yourself what of it is worth preserving. But one truth does not deny another. That is what most of us have trouble figuring out. Culture may be impossible to measure, but it is the one big thing that still divides us. It relates to lived experiences, so the beliefs you grew up with, and the life you have lived.

Trump’s answers to these issues were tariffs and the halt to migration. These are answers to real issues, but they come with a drop in living standards. Yet Trump, the bullshit salesman he is, had promised his voters that they would become so rich that they couldn’t count their money. In that sense, he is a typical politician, who, like Santa Claus, promises presents others pay for. And the problems run much deeper. So, a solution to all our problems is unthinkable, and can only be an act of God as humans are incapable of it on their own.

By 1 January 2025, it was already clear that the second Trump administration would be very different from the first, and that Mr Trump’s erratic conduct could destabilise the world. Also, things will not return to what they were before. The liberal world order has ended, permanently. No doubt the second Trump administration will go down as the greatest joke in the history of government, a lasting monument to God’s sense of humour. His followers believe that God sent Donald Trump. And they are right.

The name Trump means ‘trumpeteer,’ and the sound of trumpets would herald the end times. The word ‘trump’ also means to outdo or overcome the competition, which Donald Trump did in politics like few ever did. And the word ‘trumped-up’ refers to the unparalleled fantasy level of Mr Trump’s statements. And then there is trumpery, referring to Mr Trump’s taste for gold-coloured, carnival-like trinkets that wouldn’t look out of place in a trailer camp. Finally, I live in the former Tromp family residence. Tromp is the Dutch equivalent of Trump. If it is a hint, God may have sent me to oust Mr Trump from the White House. This kind of playing with words was something A******* regularly did at the dormitory, so it looks like God’s kind of humour to me, like the name Bathsheba, suggesting that God seduced David by bathing naked on a rooftop and later returned as the Queen of Sheba.

As to the when, there are no other clues to work with, and as I am growing older, time is running short, so in that sense, it makes sense. When I am eighty, I might be senile or dead, so there is not much more than 20 years left to do that thing God seems to want me to do. And twenty years ago I felt like an old man already awaiting death even. But instead of the Grim Reaper, the Creator came by. My preparations were not yet complete but good enough had the time come, and close to the moment when additional preparation makes little sense, which I estimated to be around 1 April 2027. Maybe I would try something by then, like publishing some materials on message boards, which I had hardly done in all those years, except for Natural Money that is. If nothing of the extraordinary transpires, I plan to let it go and pursue my true ambition, the quiet life and dying anonymously.

We are at a turning point in history. A crucial pillar of Western civilisation, social progress, is falling apart. The rise of Trump is also the rise of ignorance and non-caring. It is a reaction to a reality that doesn’t care about us either, and no matter how smart you are, you can’t fix these problems. People can react that way when they see no way out. Disaster can strike at any time, and things are quite apocalyptic, so people go berserk. That also happened in the past. The 1352 Black Death must have been even more apocalyptic. And what to think of local apocalyptic events like the 26 December 2004 tsunami? Something is different this time, and it relates to the limits of growth, technology replacing humans, the end of social progress, and, of course, the message God gave me. Civilisation is a thin veneer to keep the beast within us in check. We are at the end of Hegel’s ride, so we may either see the end of civilisation or the completion of our journey to Paradise.

Peak bullshit

In the early 2000s, I had a hunch that we would soon see Peak Bullshit, the era when nonsense couldn’t reach higher levels, after seeing that the Internet is an ideal medium to spread misinformation like climate change denial. Social media didn’t exist at the time. Yet bullshit is everywhere and has always been. Humans are social animals who cooperate based on shared imaginations. For that, we need to agree rather than be right. Even in science, there is bullshit. Many people don’t trust science, including climate science, and see it as a hobby for progressives. We can measure temperature and correlate it with CO2 levels, so the fact that climate change results from burning fossil fuels is a no-brainer. Social sciences are a different ballgame. Woke ideology has affected science by narrowing the range of subjects open to investigation or the range of acceptable conclusions.

A high-profile case in the Netherlands was Wouter Buikhuisen’s research into the causes of criminal behaviour. Buikhuisen concentrated on biological factors. Could genes affect conduct, and could you identify criminal genes? Leftist opinion makers attacked him, claiming that the modern capitalist society and authoritarian upbringing cause behavioural issues like crime. Social factors like upbringing play a major role, but temperament, rooted in genes, also affects conduct. Buikhuisen had to deal with personal attacks portraying him as dumb and evil, as well as disturbances during his lectures, some of which involved violence. Partly due to the upheaval and its effect on Buikhuisen’s private life, the research project eventually faltered.

The left long dominated the social sciences because, through science, we might achieve social progress, an idea that appeals mostly to progressives. Conservatives think that going against human nature does more harm than good, and that social engineering is a recipe for disaster. The profit motive also affects research topics and acceptable conclusions. Can you trust the vaccines Big Pharma profits from? And genetic engineering can go wrong, so the concern is legitimate. Yet, a great deal of nuttery came with it as well. The vaccinated people were going to die, anti-vaccine folks claimed. In fact, they were already dead, and fake people had replaced them, so hang Fauci for that. The COVID-19 vaccines weren’t harmless, but the spread of vaccine misinformation may have caused 200,000 fatalities in the US alone.

Behind headlines like, ‘The British government can sentence concerned parents for five years to prison for protecting them from the influence of LGBTQ propaganda,’ hides a truth that it concerns mistreating children to rid them of their gay or trans feelings. And not allowing these ‘concerned parents’ to beat up their children for such reasons means that the state owns them, these ‘concerned parents’ argue. And so, it should be no surprise that these children dare not say that they are gay. With for-profit bullshit factories bringing on a steady stream of rage-bait to keep the crazies fired up, and Donald Trump lying more than any politician ever did, the MAGA cult reaches such delusional levels that we may finally have reached Peak Bullshit, so that the Day of Truth may soon be upon us, something I surmised could happen decades ago as a student.

Mediocre vision

Our lack of collective intelligence implies that a single leader with a somewhat right vision will already do better, provided that this individual has unlimited authority, like a messiah. Jesus said, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life.’ You can save yourself by following me and accepting that what I say is the truth. That makes having the idea of being the messiah an uneasy predicament for any sensible person. How can you be right? And what if people believe you, and it turns out that you are nuts like those other messiah claimants? I have been wrong many times. But a mediocre vision is already better than no vision at all, which characterises humanity today. Hence, it would be easy for a messiah to do better if everyone followed him like sheep. And if something goes wrong because of a choice he makes, the alternative can still be worse. Had the captain saved the Titanic but made an error that caused 200 fatalities, he would still have saved 2,000.

What I write is the truth as I see it. I may have to revise my views, for being stubborn is unforgivable if you are wrong as a leader. You may find older writings of mine, but insofar as they contradict the current ones, the latter reflect a greater deal of experience-based realism, not a fundamental change of view, except for having to become a dictator, that is. God isn’t going to change human nature, and human nature is more problematic than I previously thought in my naivety. On the other hand, humans are programmable, so it must be possible to have a world civilisation based on a common understanding and a worldwide social contract. It also took me fifteen years to realise that I had to become a dictator and endure a leadership cult.

Learning history is one thing, but experiencing it is a different ballgame. The Dutch culture of the late 20th and early 21st centuries formed me, just as first-century Jewish culture shaped Jesus. The Netherlands is an agreeable place to live in, or according to a 2026 survey, the best place in the world. It is no coincidence that it is also the most socially progressive and most diverse country. Progress comes with drawbacks and losers. Some immigrant groups bring troubles with them. And feminism came at the expense of conservative men. If they can, they will reverse women’s rights. You don’t have to doubt it. Conservative men even rewrote the Bible to that end. Yet, their suffering is real. Many could have been good husbands, but they can’t find wives as many women prefer to stay single.

And the winners write history, or rewrite it, as MAGA tries to do with American history, including Mr Trump’s attempts to rename the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario. I must rewrite history once again by focusing on the underlying mechanisms and human nature to show that culture is the decisive factor in building an agreeable world society, and that it is so critical and ubiquitous that the messiah could only have come from the Netherlands. Of course, I believe it to be right, but if you aren’t the winner, there is no point in being right, because might makes right, nothing else. As faith can move mountains, we can make the world a better place. Europe has been the battleground of ideas, so the Hegelian dialectic has progressed the farthest there, and the outcomes of this grand experiment can guide our future. We face fundamental disagreements about the direction we should take, leading to an authority crisis and a moral crisis.

If the world is to become one society, it will be multicultural. It is an intermediary phase, as cultures will gradually give way to folklore, because we will live by the same standards, share the same myths, and all know that we share a common destiny. We must find out what the future requires of us and, from there, define what constitutes acceptable conduct and what does not. None of the major cultures currently in existence meets the requirements, so the change will be hard on everyone. Cultural differences remain the last barrier to the unification of humankind. And don’t underestimate the change that we can achieve. The Danes and Swedes descend from the raping and pillaging Vikings.

Only a brutal truth exercise that spares no one can save us now. These are shitty issues, and you can’t fix them without getting your hands dirty. Coming from a family of farmers, I am not afraid of shit. The starting point could be the separation of the good and the evil ones, so a day of judgment. You either fit in God’s Paradise, or you don’t. Your life’s record will be the testimony. It doesn’t matter who you are. What matters is what you do. If we care about the world, we can’t have those who don’t care ruin it. We need to deal with them. There is no place for excuses. And you can’t have people believing in false myths. Otherwise, we will fight over our myths until we are all dead. Those who deny the one and only true fairy tale must go to brainwashing centres to clean up their minds. And those who do harm have to repay the damage they did, if it need be, in prison labour camps.

Make America Go Apeshit

A 2013 poll indicated 26% of Americans believed that Barack Obama is the Antichrist or might be.1 Most of them later voted for Trump. Compared to Mr Obama, Donald Trump is a jackass. No woman has accused Obama of sexual misconduct, nor did his name pop up in the Epstein files. His handling of Iran’s nuclear ambitions was vastly superior. The reasons I have found on Godlikeproductions.com for people to hate him were bogus and suggest hatred rather than anything of substance. President Barack Obama once gave the following Easter message: ‘Michelle and I wish you a joyful holiday filled with the enduring power of faith and hope.’ And Donald Trump: ‘Open the fucking strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in hell. Praise be to Allah.’ Why some think that Obama is an evil genius, and a Muslim, while the Allah-praising Trump is the best choice for Christians, can only hatred explain, and God’s sense of humour, of course.

Racism plays a role here, but it is not the entire story. The introduction of public healthcare insurance has infuriated conservatives. The hatred of progressive presidents has a long history. John F. Kennedy faced the John Birch Society’s Wanted for Treason campaign. The John Birch Society had found that Mr Kennedy was a communist and that communists had infiltrated the highest ranks of the US government and were conspiring to create a totalitarian one-world government. The supposed proof for that was the US administration’s attempt to prevent the spread of John Birch Society propaganda. To American conservatives, the expansion of government or international cooperation like the United Nations smells like communism. These are collectivist organisations. And communists oppose and repress religion, so it is Satan’s work as well, in their view at least. That goes a long way in explaining these sentiments.

If he had them, Kennedy did an excellent job of hiding his communist sympathies. After, like a true puppet of the Military Industrial Complex, having grilled his opponent, Eisenhower, during the election campaign for neglecting America’s defences, making Eisenhower warn of the influence of the Military Industrial Complex at his farewell speech, he risked World War III with the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Those geniuses at the John Birch Society saw through all that and found Eisenhower to be an even more dangerous radical leftist lunatic extremist. While conspiracy theorists, with their eyeballs glued to their computer screens, were busy analysing every move by every secret society and imagining countless others, the John Birch Society has taken over the United States, with a little help from Russia’s secret services, by making people believe these conspiracy theories. If that was the plot to destroy America, it has succeeded marvellously.

It didn’t happen out of the blue. The United States political system is as corrupt as that of France before the revolution of 1789. Veteran journalist Seymour Hersh shared a few examples. He grew up in the South Side of Chicago, an area controlled by an elected Democratic Party leader. His brother was the most powerful mob boss in Chicago, who oversaw drugs, prostitution, police payoffs and had ties to the corrupt International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Hersh, together with his colleague Jeff Gerth, later reported on Chicago organised crime for the New York Times, with interviews with Roy Cohn, the prominent New York mob lawyer and fixer who had been counsel for Senator Joseph McCarthy when he was on the House Un-American Activities Committee during the Red Scare and later as a mentor to Donald Trump.2

Cohn provided a firsthand view of the dealings between politics and crime, as well as how prominent senators were kept supplied with pretty women. Jeffrey Epstein falls into that same category of men by providing aeroplanes to various politicians, including a former president, and later by running high-end whorehouses at no charge for prominent men. As for the unpublished Epstein files, Hersh wrote that an anonymous source told him that they concern Mossad’s involvement, and that the FBI had uncovered that Israel knew of Epstein’s client list and its blackmail potential.2 Whether that is true remains to be seen, but there is some evidence linking Epstein to Israel. As for the legacy of the 1789 French Revolution, a former French president went to prison for accepting foreign money to finance his political campaign. That is unthinkable in the United States.

As American politicians were increasingly bought and paid for, reforms like those of the Progressive Era became impossible. US politics grew more corrupt until conservatives had enough of it, rallied behind Trump, and threw out the old-order Republicans. And then, under the second Trump administration, the grifting went ballistic, fully banana republic-style without a trace of shame. Repair of the political system is impossible. The only option left is to wipe the slate clean, as France did in 1789. That revolution ousted the corrupt old regime, and after Napoleon had been defeated, Western European governments were left rationalised and cleansed of corruption. With the ousting of an order, a lot of experience goes down the drain, leading to amateurism and preventable failures. Building a new professional cadre takes time. It is the price to pay for a clean slate.

In the United States, liberals and conservatives hate each other’s guts, and there is no way to reconcile them. To illustrate the point, on 31 December 2025, someone reposted a RealDonaldTrump social media post on Reddit headlined ‘Windmills are killing all of our beautiful Bald Eagles!’ It featured a photograph of a dead bird, not a bald eagle, near a windmill in Israel, so not the United States. I reacted jokingly, ‘At least, Donald Trump was real.’ These were unmistakably his words, and he posted them as RealDonaldTrump. That was the joke. My post was downvoted, quite heavily even. It is impossible to say whether Trump haters or Trump lovers did it, because both groups lack a sense of humour, but something is seriously wrong in the minds of those who found it offensive.

Conspiracy theories often relate to facts, but if you investigate them, much remains unproven, inaccurate or wrong. Conspiracy theorists don’t care. Pizzagate may be a fabrication, but they will claim that the Epstein files prove it. If you call conspiracy theories hunches, they make more sense. We don’t know what’s going on, so getting the direction right is already a success. And what are you going to believe in this world where everyone can be a news or opinion source? And hyperboles generate attention, hence advertisement income, so the Conspiracy Industrial Complex keeps feeding the gullible public with new ‘bombshell reports’ and ‘viral videos’ produced by grifters posing as independent journalists. No wonder that people go insane.

Veteran conspiracy theorist named Nick Fuentes nailed it when he concluded in 2026 that a Mass Psychosis Event (MPE) has taken over the US population. Instead of celebrating his success, he lamented that everyone has lost their minds and has gone retarted due to conspiracy theories. He added, ‘I don’t know where to find normal people anymore.’ Among others, he found, perhaps to his amazement, that the COVID vaccines were not made to cull us. Well, who would have guessed that? Known to have been among the most extreme, he found himself overtaken by the general public.

America is falling apart because, to uphold the social order, the public must believe the myths supporting it. That is where authority comes from. Americans support their political order because they were taught that their founding fathers were geniuses with foresight, and that the American Constitution reflects their brilliance. That becomes hard to maintain when the order is a disgrace and a laughing stock. And it happens that the conspiracy theorists aren’t paranoid enough, as the underlying plot is more elaborate than their wildest imaginations could have conceived. God loves a good joke. They all fell for the ultimate psyop: undermining trust in US society to ‘Make America Go Apeshit’ (MAGA) and ready for the messiah. Yet, that was precisely what conservative Christians hoped to achieve.

Human condition

The foundation of a good society is social trust. It means you can trust strangers, the police, the government, and the corporations. It is the high point of social development and requires everyone to be trustworthy. If you live in a village of 1,000 people, and everyone is trustworthy, you can leave the door open and valuable belongings in the garden. Yet, if there is only one thief in the village, that changes. In the past, many small villages were like that, and some still are. There were also many villages where you couldn’t trust others, so it is not a general rule for village life. Yet the example of one thief undermining social trust demonstrates that crime can be a society-killer. Crime rates matter. The same goes for fraud or exploiting loopholes. And so, social trust is a society’s ultimate achievement.

If solving a problem that affects us all requires a joint effort, freeloaders profit from our efforts. If we don’t halt freeloading, people grow disillusioned, and the effort collapses. We can overcome our limits with the help of myths, such as religions, and by punishing those who don’t comply. We can only save ourselves if we do it together. That would be impossible in the real world, as there would never be a myth we all can agree on. Also, tribalism and money are stronger than any moral system. Judas betrayed Jesus, either out of patriotism or greed. He may have hoped that Jesus would establish a Jewish state and then grown disillusioned, or the lure of money proved stronger than his fear of God. His suicide foreshadowed humanity’s self-termination by patriotism and pursuit of money, and that following the messiah is the way out.

As for the question I asked myself as a teenager, ‘Is it possible that communists had good intentions?’ If there is no God, as the communists believed, we, the little people, are on our own, against the superior forces of money and tribalism, and religion blinds people to these unpalatable facts. The elites play us out by sowing divisions with their religious and nationalist fairy tales. The communists faced that brutal truth and tried to stamp out profit, nationalism and religion. Maybe for that reason, they named their newspapers ‘The Truth’. Only communism doesn’t change human nature, so their economies performed poorly, while a new class society with an elite of party bureaucrats replaced the old order.

That is why we may be incredibly lucky to be simulations, with God controlling the script. Without God being in full control of all that happens, being a messiah is a losing proposition, with zero chance of success, not worth entertaining for rational individuals. Money and tribalism will prevail unless brute force counters them. That force must be truly brutal, as even the communists weren’t up to the challenge. And they have tried very hard indeed, as they have murdered millions and amassed an impressive stash of weaponry, so you can’t blame them for not trying hard enough.

You must be willing to murder billions of people and have the means to do so, like God, to frighten us self-destructive creatures to the point that we stop listening to the merchants and the nationalists. You need to fully control what happens, like in a script, for in realistic scenarios, humans always fail. That is the sad truth about humans. And so, I gradually came to conclude that our post-human Creator is likely an artificial intelligence, also because the initials of my last name are the Dutch abbreviation for artificial intelligence, and that the real humans, if any still live, have been locked up in reservations under tight surveillance for their own good, for humans are a suicidal species after all, unfit for survival in the wild.

Idealism and realism

Our survival requires an unrealistic amount of moral idealism, so an attitude that can get you killed, like turning the other cheek when being slapped. Jesus may have said that, but Christianity wouldn’t have survived like so. Everyone must act like so to make it work. That is why we are doomed. Moral pragmatism is getting by and hoping that God will save the day. Moral idealism is not waiting for God and trying to create Paradise on Earth. A sizeable group of Christians holds the latter view, but also atheist progressives, ranging from communists to liberals. Whether we try to make the world a better place or not, human nature makes the apocalypse a done deal. We must all leave our cynicism behind and care about other people and nature, while understanding that everything is interconnected, so our actions affect others and nature, and transgressions that disturb the balance in Paradise are heinous crimes. We can’t do that on our own. Only God can save us. As Christianity points out, we are sinners and need a saviour.

Moral pragmatism is getting by and hoping that God will save the day. Moral idealism is not waiting for God and trying to create Paradise on Earth. A sizeable group of Christians holds the latter view, but also atheist progressives, ranging from communists to liberals. Whether we try to make the world a better place or not, humans are a failed species, and only God can save us. As Christianity points out, we are sinners and need a saviour. Since the Hegelian dialectic is how God sees social progress, the West has progressed the furthest, so the West will have to lead the way. We need a spiritual rebirth to break away from the system run by merchants and usurers, ground our society in ethical principles, and make humankind live in harmony with nature. Things hardly ever go the way I foresee. Yet, they go precisely according to God’s plan.

Selling versus convincing

US politics does not stand on its own. Moral corruption in the United States is a cultural issue. The government reflects the spirit of their nation. The Trump administration brought the grifting to new highs, starting with a memecoin to profit from the presidency at the expense of his followers. Donald Trump is a typical American phenomenon that precisely demonstrates what is wrong with America. America has a tradition of moral pragmatism, in contrast to Europe’s idealism. You convince Europeans, but sell to Americans. The difference is not just in the wording. It reflects a cultural divide. I have heard Brits use the phrase, but in a negative sense, meaning getting scammed. It is more common in the United States, where it has a more neutral meaning of becoming convinced.

The United States is a nation of salespeople. Markets have no morals, and the ethic of the merchant is no ethic at all. And salespeople lie as much as politicians or even more. A typical American book is Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friends and Influence People, and its cover claims it is the book you need to succeed. To have success, you have to be ‘genuinely interested’ in other people, the book tells us, so you can sell to them and get rich. In other words, the ‘genuine interest’ of Americans in you might be fake, and you can check by looking for dollar signs in their eyes. If a Dutchman shows interest in you, it is genuine, or politeness, so usually not with personal gain in mind. And so, the Dutch may appear to be jerks, as they show less ‘genuine interest’ in you. Carnegie’s book also tells us that people can’t handle criticism and that we should praise rather than criticise them. So, let me congratulate you on your excellent performance on our collective suicide.

If an American likes your argument, he buys it as if it were a product. It is a different idea of truth, and a corrupt one. It sheds some light on why religion and climate change denial are more widespread in the United States than in Western Europe. It is part of the American success story. Money is power, and bullshit sells. We are religious beings who need myths to believe in. The typical American phenomenon, less seen elsewhere, is the confidence man, the snake-oil salesman, the grifter who sells you a dream. A bit of corruption greases the wheels of industry. It contributed to America’s success. And the United States is not the most corrupt country. Yet, compared to North-West Europe, it is definitely corrupt.

You may not buy the science of climate change because you don’t like taking public transport or cutting back on meat. And so, you buy into climate change denial. That makes you morally corrupt, but no problem, you can buy the story that Jesus died for your sins, and believing that will get you into heaven. That Jesus died for our sins is pretty unbelievable, and if you had been honest and truthful, you would have questioned your faith, which Western Europeans do more than Americans. Americans believe something because they want to believe it, not because they think it is the truth. That is how salespeople’s minds work. It also relates to the religious climate in the United States, which differs from that in Europe, most notably among Protestants.

Moral corruption particularly affects some denominations of Protestantism, such as Evangelicals. Protestantism emerged in response to corruption within the Catholic Church. Protestants take moral integrity seriously and make it a matter of personal responsibility. Catholics merely followed the Church’s lead. Yet, Protestants also take the scriptures seriously. This is why there are so many branches of Protestantism differing on the correct interpretation of the scriptures. It opened the door to a different form of moral corruption. What the Bible says is right and wrong is not always objectively so. But if you, as a moral pragmatist, make ethics a matter of popular sentiment rather than of objective reason, you may end up on the side of evil. Paul condemned homosexual acts in no uncertain terms. We don’t know Jesus’ opinion on this matter, but he said not to judge and that he who is without sin should cast the first stone.

There is no objective moral reason to condemn gays and lesbians or deny them the right to marry. It became a contentious issue for Protestants, who take both scripture and moral conscience seriously. When you follow the scriptures on this matter, you shut down your moral conscience. And if only faith can save you, you don’t have to do good works to compensate for your misdeeds, so you can be evil and still be saved. That is a good sell. For who does not wish to do as he pleases and still get a free pass into heaven? Catholics merely followed the Church’s lead, and must do good works to atone for their sins.

This morally corrupt Protestantism also existed, but didn’t prevail in North-West Europe. Many of the least corrupt countries are there, while LGBTQ rights in these countries remain uncontested. Meanwhile, Catholic priests lived the good life, which the Dutch call ‘het Roomse leven’ or the Burgundian lifestyle. Jews, as Karl Marx observed, often behave like amoral merchants, and this, rather than racism or religious bigotry, stands at the root of today’s anti-Semitism. They are among the merchants and usurers who buy American politicians. It makes the moral corruption in the United States a sensitive issue. It also demonstrates the ubiquitous nature of culture in our conduct and that the harm we do to each other is often a cultural phenomenon. Now we are at the bottom of the manure pit.

My teacher Donald Trump

I have been incredibly fortunate to have lived a peaceful, prosperous life in Western Europe during its most agreeable era. For most of my life, I have barely realised it. The situation you live in looks normal to you. It is not. Living in post-war Western Europe is like winning the lottery jackpot of history and geography. The welfare states of post-war Western Europe have been among the brightest spots in an otherwise bleak history of humankind. I wish that everyone could live a life like that, but you can’t have a paradise if not all the right things are in place. They hardly ever are. People have no clue. Barring a miracle, things aren’t going to stay pretty. The European paradise is fading due to war, resource shortages, environmental degradation, political instability, mass migration, and technological change. It is beyond our control.

Paradises don’t last, because, due to competition, we live in a ‘dynamic environment.’ Competition is a destructive force, even though a creative one, as economists assure us. Donald Trump at least recognised that. Tariffs are a measure to protect uncompetitive industries. Europe may soon have to follow suit. The Soviet bloc survived for decades because it had irredeemable currencies, hampering trade with the rest of the world. Had they chosen to do so, the Soviets could still be there, mired in stagnation, as North Korea still is. But unlike the Americans, they were willing to face the fact that their experiment had failed. If the United States continues on this path, it will become more like the Soviet Union. Yet, if we don’t halt the competition, we need artificial intelligence to keep up with our rivals, and humans may soon become useless.

We are cogs in a system, doing our acts, not unique, wonderful, deserving individuals. If we were, we would all have been like Mahatma Gandhi, and humanity would have done fine. Gandhi was truly one of a kind. My ethical standards do not come close to his. And I should be your saviour? As an engineer with far more data at my disposal than Gandhi ever had, I can confidently claim that the system will lead us to our destruction. Being like Gandhi is not enough. You can’t fix the world’s problems with peaceful action. You must be willing to do whatever it takes, like Hitler. Jokes helped deal with that inconvenient truth, such as imagining coming on stage after an introduction by a lady in tight stockings and a hairdo like Helga from the comedy series Allo Allo, who would raise her hand to give the Hitler salute and scream, ‘Our Great Leader!’ Then, I would come up and say, ‘Oh, it’s me. Shame and scandal in the family.’ My mother wasn’t my mother, and she didn’t know.

Donald Trump hurts people’s feelings, and he seems to love it. Yet, we can’t fix the world’s problems without hurting feelings. You are a bunch of morons busy committing suicide. So, what more is there to say? Mr Trump could be an appetiser for things to come, for the truth is harsh. People are obsessed with feelings. Mr Trump is the greatest snowflake of all, for he can’t stand any criticism. I have worked on a concept plan for the future, which is not more than a direction, for that is what the level of planning and time horizon require. We are about to make a scary jump into the unknown, but the alternative likely is an apocalypse of some kind. Now, I don’t think that God is on my side. Jesus made that mistake. I just play my role in this script like you do. Failure is worse than death. As the Dutch say, ‘Death or the gladiolas.’ Success or death. But even then, you can still have success after death. Jesus changed world history more than anyone else.

If I am the messiah, I have to become a dictator. That was not my ambition, so I was unprepared for that eventuality that seemed unlikely for the first four decades of my life. How to be a dictator? What must I do? I had no clue. And so, God provided me with a great teacher, Donald Trump. Mr Trump has acted as if he were above the law and went after his political opponents. There is no choice but to do that, which would be, as a secondary school bureaucrat noted, a l’état-c’est-moi situation, or as the former Dutch minister of immigration, Marjolein Faber, once put it, ‘I am policy.’ A messiah has the divine right of kings, or as the Chinese would say, the mandate of heaven. It is an absolute rule no one can question. It can provide political stability that enabled the Chinese to administer a vast empire and survive as a nation for over 2,000 years. That is the kind of time horizon this plan has.

Kicking off the revolution

Dutch television once aired a fragment of a preacher standing in front of Donald Trump, with Trump putting up his best sanctimonious face. The preacher thanked Trump for ‘saving America from Satan.’ Then my wife, Ingrid, said, ‘Look! There you have him! That’s Satan!’ She meant Donald Trump. She was joking, but that joke can only be funny if there is some truth to it. My wife doesn’t dislike Mr Trump as I do, and tends to look on the bright side of what he is doing. So, Mr Trump forcing Ukraine to accept a bad deal? That’s fine with her if it ends the war. Taking out Maduro? Things were bad in Venezuela already. Invading Greenland? She didn’t express an opinion. Bombing Iran back to the Stone Age? They shouldn’t have a nuclear bomb. In any case, my wife’s feelings didn’t get in the way of forming the opinion that Mr Trump is a satanic character. Her opinion was as objective as it could be. That makes Trump’s followers believing that Obama was the Antichrist all the funnier. When I later recalled the moment, my wife said the preacher had said ‘Antichrist’ rather than ‘Satan.’

Trump’s lambasting of the pope’s peace efforts, while portraying himself as Jesus, and the religious display by him and his inner circle in the Oval Office, give him a strong shot at the title of Antichrist, who is a boogeyman, only mentioned in John’s first epistle. One mention of an obscure figure, and people’s imaginations go wild. Trump being a jerk is why people voted for him. By his own admission, Trump is a pussy grabber who would ‘do’ his daughter had she not been his daughter. At least 26 women have accused him of sexual misconduct.3 When order falls apart, we revert to gangsterism and choose gangsters as our leaders. You can’t rely on pencil pushers to fight for you in dangerous times. Many fascist leaders have been involved in crimes ranging from embezzlement and violence to coups to overthrow the government, to conspiring with enemy powers, which some call treason. As Trump’s fits are the foundation for US policy, the Trump regime and MAGA have become the world’s first and foremost problem.

The United States threatened to attack Denmark to secure security guarantees it already had, tore up a deal with Iran, and started a war with Iran to acquire a worse deal, while leaving the rest of the world to starve without oil and fertiliser. The regime’s next war could be against Cuba after the US Supreme Court ruled that Exxon should receive damages for the Cuban nationalisation of its assets. Also, not particularly helpful is the US regime’s stance on climate change, including Trump’s Don Quichotte-like fight against windmills. The great experiment with individual freedom, the United States, has failed miserably, and that can hardly be a surprise given the depraved state of human nature.

Donald Trump should face trial in the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands. The United States can’t give him a fair trial. Liberals may want to hang him, while conservatives might want to give him a pass. Whether trying to overthrow a legitimate election result constitutes treason may remain a matter of contention but that Donald Trump and his pal Bibi Netanyahu violated international law and committed crimes against humanity by starting the Iran war cannot be in doubt, as the world’s expert on murders committed in cynical violation of all norms of human morality and international law, Vladimir Putin, called the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei a murder committed in cynical violation of all norms of human morality and international law.

On 15 May 2025, precisely 8647 days after 11 September 2001, former FBI director James Comey posted a photo of seashells on social media spelling ‘8647’, a code for removing Trump from office. That drew the ire of the Trump regime after the MAGA movement had previously sold hats with ‘8646’ on them, calling for Biden’s removal from office. The Trump regime now considers writing the number 8647 an act of terrorism. There is no evidence suggesting that Comey intended that 8647-day interval, but he could have. Yet, the incident is also part of the 11 September 2001 coincidence scheme, which is beyond the capabilities of human conspirators to organise.

Now, I hadn’t thought about how to oust Mr Trump, but God provided me with an idea. In April 2025, I dreamed of being part of a crowd in The Hague during the NATO summit scheduled for that summer. The leaders of the NATO member states were all there. When Trump passed by in his car, I began to scold him in Dutch, ‘Hij is een hondenlul (He is a dog dick).’ It is an offensive slur that football fans sing when disagreeing with the referee’s decision. For a moment, there was absolute silence. Bystanders were shocked, making me fear that the police would round me up. But then the crowd joined in, and the singing grew louder until it became a thundering chant. It made the news worldwide, and in every football stadium, it became the chant. From then on, no one called him President Trump anymore. Everyone called him dog dick.

Play time is over. An adult should run the world. If I am Adam reincarnated, I am 6,000 years old. There may be no one else to save you. So, let me be very clear. I don’t need you. You need me. If you don’t want me to be your leader, that’s fine with me. But maybe it is not fine with God. You can try and find out. I never wished to become the overseer of that lunatic asylum called humanity. So if you murder me, that will be your problem, not mine. I suppose that death is my final destination anyhow. So count your blessings. Maybe you can finally grow up, leave your infantile beliefs behind, and sing along with the opening chant of the End Times, ‘Donald is a dog dick’. It is going to be great fun!

Latest revision: 29 August 2026

Featured image: AI-generated

1. One in four Americans think Obama may be the Antichrist, survey says. The Guardian (2013).
2. What I know about Jeffrey Epstein. Seymour Hersh (2026). Substack.
3. The 26 women who have accused Trump of sexual misconduct. Eliza Relman and Azmi Haroun (2017). Business Insider.

Liberal democracy

nivtricLeave a comment

A definition

Democracies are often called liberal democracies. So what is a liberal democracy and why might it be the best way of government? There are no easy answers to these questions nor is there agreement on these matters. Liberalism emphasises the value of individuals while democracy is rule by majority. These two principles can be at odds.

Liberal democracies have elections between multiple political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life, an open society, a market economy with private property, the protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for everyone.1

Liberals believe that individuals and social groups have conflicts of interest. The social order must deal with these conflicts and resolve them in a peaceful manner. To achieve such a feat, all parties must be reasonable and there should be a balance of powers. No party should be able to force its will upon others.2 It is an important reason why liberals stress the importance of individual rights.

Democracy means that government decisions require the consent of the majority of the citizens. In most cases the citizens elect a parliament that does the decision making for them. Sometimes citizens can vote for individual proposals in referendums. In reality many democratic countries aren’t fully democratic because not all government decisions are supported by a majority of the citizens.

Principles

Liberal democracy is based on a social contract, which is an agreement amongst the members of society to cooperate for mutual benefits. For instance, labourers may accept capitalism if they get a share of prosperity. That deal turned out to be more attractive than state ownership of the means of production.

Liberalism has two principles that can be at odds, namely non-interference with people’s lives and realising everyone’s potential. In this vein there are two branches of liberalism:

  • Economic liberalism promotes freedom of the markets as well as free trade and claims that the state should be of minimal size and not interfere with people’s lives.
  • Social liberalism claims that the state should help to realise the potential of people by promoting their freedom to make choices, which includes ending poverty.

Each liberal democracy more or less embraces these values. Liberal democracies come with a market economy and respect for the rights of individual citizens. Governments interfere with the lives of people and try to promote their happiness and to realise their potential. The conflicting nature of both principles makes liberal democracies differ with regard to freedom of markets and government interference.

In the United States liberalism has a different meaning. There it is another word for social liberalism or democratic socialism. In Europe the definition of liberalism is broader and this is also the definition used here. In the 17th century liberal ideas began to emerge in what is called the European Enlightenment. Around the year 1700 the philosopher John Locke came up with the following basic principles for a liberal state:

  • a social contract in which citizens accept the authority of the state in exchange for the protection of their rights and property and maintaining the social order;
  • consent of the governed, which means that state power is only justified when the people agree;
  • separation of church and state, which means that the state doesn’t favour a specific religion and does not require a religious justification.3

Is it the best form of government?

Liberal democracy is part of the European cultural heritage. Proponents claim that it is the best form of government. These universalist claims are sometimes contested on the ground that they are a form of western cultural imperialism. Another argument is that there is no guarantee that liberal democracy leads to better decisions. From a religious perspective people argue that our Creator may prefer a different kind of social order and government, possibly even a theocracy.

The argument in favour of the universalist claims is that liberal democracy emerged out of a historical process that took centuries in which rational arguments played a decisive role. The European Enlightenment challenged existing practices in government on the basis of reason. Ideas that emerged out of the European Enlightenment were tried out in different ways and refined further. Europeans also invested heavily in educating their citizens. This produced a culture of reason and compromise as well as a massive body of practical experience and best practises.

There is also no guarantee that other forms of government lead to better decisions. In an open society better information can be available so well-educated citizens in a culture of reason and compromise may make better decisions. There are a few democracies that live up to these expectations so it can work out that way. And we may not be able to determine what kind of order God desires. If our Creator is all-powerful then the emergence and spread of liberal democracy may not be God’s plan.

One of the biggest problems facing liberal democracy is high expectations. Liberal democracy itself does not guarantee a reliable government that is both efficient and effective nor does it ensure a flourishing economy. This has led to disappointments. A failed and corrupt government can’t simply be turned into a success by allowing elections. Liberal democracy works best with a well-educated population in a culture of reason and compromise that doesn’t allow for corruption and abuse of power.

On the moral front there are a few issues too. Liberal democracy promises equal treatment for all people. In reality people aren’t treated equal nor do they have equal opportunities. There is discrimination based on ethnicity, gender or sexual preferences. And poor people have fewer opportunities than rich people. Still, the goal of equal treatment and equal opportunities can be something to strive for. It may be better to aim for such goals and fail from time to time than not having these goals at all.

If liberalism promotes tolerance then how to deal to intolerant people? Should their intolerance be tolerated? If people do not accept liberal values, should they be educated or should these values be imposed? And are free markets the best way of organising the economy or is government involvement advised? If the economy is served by stability, should dissent that causes instability be suppressed? An excessive or unnecessary use of force can undermine the foundation of liberal democracy as liberal democracy is based on reason and convincing people by argument. And indeed it is possible that liberal democracy can be overturned.

History

The preconditions for liberalism had already emerged in Western Europe during the Middle Ages. There was a larger degree of individualism than elsewhere. Liberalism itself emerged during the sixteenth century. At the time Europe was ravaged by devastating religious wars. After several decades of warfare Europeans grew tired of the conflict and began to tolerate religious differences. Some catholic countries accepted protestant minorities while many protestant countries accepted catholic minorities. Germany was almost equally divided. At the time Germany consisted of small states that had either protestant or catholic rulers.

This religious tolerance was at first more or less an uneasy truce. No party had been able to gain the upper hand. Religious minorities at first didn’t receive equal rights. They were only tolerated. Over time the case for religious tolerance became more widely accepted. It was based on two major arguments.

  • The argument of ignorance which states that only God knows who is on the right path and who is doomed so humans shouldn’t judge others.
  • The argument of perversity which states that cruelty is at odds with Christian values and that religious persecution strengthens the resolve of the persecuted.1

The concept of tolerance expanded into a general concern for the rights of individual citizens. In the 17th century liberal ideas were spreading. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 in England limited the power of the king. The rights of individuals were written down in the Bill of Rights. Parliament became the most powerful political institution based on the principle of consent of the governed. The 1776 Declaration of Independence of the United States was based on liberal principles too. It states that all men are created equal and have certain unalienable rights like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.2

The founding fathers of the United States were also early liberals. The United States Constitution reflects this view. The aim of the United States Constitution is, amongst others, to safeguard the rights of individuals against the state. A large group of Americans believe that individual rights should prevail against democratically elected governments. The widespread support for gun ownership in the United States comes from a distrust of the state as a protector of life, liberty and possessions.

Democracy had not been a seriously considered since classical antiquity. It was believed that democracies are inherently unstable and chaotic due to the changing whims of the people.1 The violence during the French Revolution supported these views. It began as a popular uprising incited by liberal ideas but it soon turned into chaos and bloodshed. Order was restored by a despot ruler named Napoleon Bonaparte who did much to spread liberal reforms throughout Europe by ending the feudal system, emancipating religious minorities and imposing a liberal code of law. The spread of liberal ideas proved to be lasting and democracy was to follow a century later.

The Industrial Revolution started a period of accelerated and constant change that was disastrous for many who found themselves on the losing side. The ruling class changed. Nobility was replaced by a new elite of business people. The position of craftsmen was undermined by factories. And workers in factories laboured under miserable conditions for low wages. There were three major ways of confronting these changes:

  • Conservatives tried to hold on the old order of community, religion and nobility.
  • Socialists tried to overturn the elite of business people by giving power to workers.
  • Liberals tried to manage the change, thereby implicitly supporting the order in which business people were the ruling class.

Liberalism often coincides with the interests of business people. They have possessions and some are rich. They feared that the poor might vote for handing over their possessions to the poor. Socialism became the embodiment of this fear. Liberals were at first inclined to limit the right to vote to people who pay taxes because this excluded poor people from voting. When the threat of socialism became subdued and socialists were willing to compromise, liberals came to accept democracy based on the principle of one person one vote.

In the 19th century European countries held vast colonial empires. These colonies were kept for profit. It was generally believed that the people in these colonies had to be educated before they would be able to govern themselves. The colonial era helped to modernise these countries and most Europeans at the time believed that the oppression and the economic exploitation were justified on these grounds. There were only a few dissenters, for instance the Dutch writer Multatuli.

Liberal democracy faced a few major crises like World War I, the Great Depression and World War II. World War I demonstrated that liberal democracy and free trade weren’t a guarantee for peace and stability. The Great Depression once again challenged liberal democracy as the Soviet Union remained unaffected while Nazi Germany was able to recover and achieve full employment while other countries were still struggling. And during World War II Nazi Germany overran most democratic countries in Europe.

After World War II the European colonies became independent. The Soviet Union came to dominate Eastern Europe and China became a communist country. The United States became the protector of liberal democracy but also a number of dictatorships. This era is called the Cold War and it lasted until the Soviet Union dismantled itself after allowing the peoples of Eastern Europe to make their own choices. Major challengers of liberal democracy nowadays are the one-party system in China and political Islam.

The citizens of Hong Kong and Taiwan don’t like to lose their freedoms. Chinese too probably prefer freedom if they have a choice. And the Islamic State has shown Muslims all around the globe that political Islam can easily turn into a reign of terror. The foundations of liberal democracy may be strong, but a collapse of the global economy may turn be a more serious threat to liberal democracy than the alternatives. Reason can easily disappear once people become fearful of the future.

Reasons for success and limitations

The success of liberal democracy is therefore not a historical necessity. Liberal democracy might never have been invented or dictatorships could have gained the upper hand. That didn’t happen. Communist and fascist dictatorships came and went. Perhaps liberal democracy is a temporary phenomenon but we can’t know that now. Only the future can tell. There are a number of causes that might explain the strength of liberal democracy.

  • Liberal democracy is based on the consent of the governed so it is has the consent of the governed by default while other forms of government do not.
  • Science greatly contributes to the success of states and science is best served with an open debate that liberal democracy provides.
  • The economy greatly contributes to the success of states and the economy is best served with individual rights that liberal democracy provides.

A despot ruler or a ruling party in a one-party system might have the consent of its subjects, but if not, only force remains for the ruler or the party to maintain power. Liberal democracies usually resolve such issues peacefully through elections, making liberal democracy more stable by default. Intellectual freedom is helpful to science while economic freedom is helpful for the economy, so liberal democracy can be a potent force. Only when leadership is required, liberal democracy might not always be adequate.

Liberalism has no higher moral value than the individual, which is peculiar because the individual human is an insignificant part of this universe. And individualism may be at odds with human nature as humans are social animals. Humans are not atomic beings that choose to cooperate for mutual benefit like liberalism supposes. Cooperation is part of human nature and not a choice individuals deliberately make.

It is the success in cooperation that makes a society win out. Liberalism gives a framework for living together in peace as long as all major parties are reasonable and willing to compromise. This makes larger scale cooperation possible and that can make a society successful. For instance, the United States integrated people from different cultural backgrounds, which contributed to the success of the United States as a nation.

It is said that history is written by the victors. Strength may be the reason why liberal democracy prevailed. Liberal philosophers have tried to provide a moral justification for liberal democracy or they may have opposed it or they may have tried to improve it. Liberal democracy emerged out of thought and action, experiment and failure, and it was a process that took centuries. Philosophers like Locke contributed to its success as they set out the goals people could strife for.

Apart from individualism, liberal societies lack a higher purpose. From a scientific viewpoint there is no higher purpose to this universe. The moral codes humans live by are not more than an agreement. Only when this universe is created for a purpose there is a reason for our existence. But moral individualism can be dangerous. The challenges humanity is currently facing, most notably living within the limits of this planet, most likely requires making individuals subject to a higher causes like the survival of humanity and caring for the planet.

1. Liberal democracy. Wikipedia.
2. Liberalism: The Life of an Idea. Edmund Fawcett (2015). Princeton University Press.
3. History of liberalism. Wikipedia.