uproar after student gets perfect marks for thesis that calls Wilders a fascist

[Sasha]

Here it is, share it before it gets taken down:
https://www.indymedia.nl/indyfiles/BA-Thesis%20Henk%20Bovekerk.pdf

[Os Cangaceiros]

Is it against the law to characterize someone as a fascist or something

[VirgJans12]

Is it against the law to characterize someone as a fascist or something

No, but our media are horny for this kind of stuff around Wilders. But I don't think he's a fascist or anything near that. Although he wants to stop mass immigration, he didn't want to raise our retirement age like other parties wanted, wants toleration for non-islamic religious groups such as the Jews and see our elders well taken care of. It's more like he wants to go back to 30 years ago or something like that.

Basically the thing is he wants to ban islamic people. Which is what the fuss is all about.

[Sasha]

No, that's why this will get interesting. Until now the scientific field has been dead scared to touch the subject. Esp after the successful sabotage by the state of the racism persecution of wilders.
If the university out of fear downgrades the thesis the scientific community will be forced to take a stand.

[VirgJans12]

Here's the piece it's about.


3.1 Paxton’s Stage One & Riemen’s Prototype

Rob Riemen claims that Geert Wilders and his movement are the prototype
of contemporary fascism. What is a prototype? A prototype is “a first or
preliminary model of something” (New Oxford American Dictionary).
Preliminary means that a prototype precedes “something fuller or more
important” (Ibid.). Therefore the phrase ‘the prototype of contemporary
fascism’ means ‘the first or preliminary model of contemporary fascism’.
There is a correspondence here between Riemen’s notion of “prototype” and Paxton’s notion of “Stage One”. Stage One is the stage in which the first model of the fascist movement is created and in many historical cases this model has preceded something fuller and more important –– i.e. fascist movements in further stages. In other words: fascist movements in Stage One are prototypes of fascism. Therefore, in order to answer the question whether the PVV is the prototype of contemporary fascism, we can examine whether the PVV is a fascist movement in Stage One.

In doing so, we should remember that Paxton writes that “fascism
exists at the level of Stage One within all democratic countries” (p. 220) and that therefore we shouldn’t be hesitant –– as some of Riemen’s critics are –– to employ the term ‘fascism’ regarding contemporary politics. Prototypical fascist movements are not identical to fascist dictatorships. Fascism in Stage One is different from fascism in Stage Four and Five. Being a prototypical fascist is not the same as being Hitler or Mussolini.

Is the PVV a fascistic movement in Stage One? If the PVV is the
prototype of contemporary fascism, the PVV should correspond to the
following description, based on Paxton’s description of Stage One of
fascism: Driven by nationalism and racism, and several other mobilizing
passions, the PVV divides the world along Manichean lines: it is ‘us’ versus
‘them’. The PVV warns that the Netherlands and the West at large are
collapsing because of enemy threats: ‘we’ will collapse because of ‘them’. It
promises to solve this crisis by exclusionary policies against the “alien and
the impure” (Paxton, 2004, p. 32), of which ‘we’ are a victim. The PVV sees
the “internationalist, socialist Left as the enemy and the liberals as the
enemies’ accomplice” (p. 19). The PVV is a party more of the gut than of
the brain and it has no philosophical underpinnings (pp. 16, 42). By lack of
rational arguments and by avoiding intellectual political debate, it
transforms politics into aesthetics.

It is my thesis that this description is accurate, and therefore that
the PVV is a fascist movement in Stage One. As such, the PVV is the
prototype of contemporary fascism. I will demonstrate this in three parts.
Firstly I focus on the PVV’s idea that ‘we’ are collapsing because of ‘them’
and on the exclusionary policies that the PVV proposes to battle this threat.
Secondly I discuss the PVV’s anti-Leftism. And thirdly I demonstrate that
the PVV is a party more of the gut than of the brain, that it avoids
intellectual political debate and that it transforms politics into aesthetics.
Along the way I refer to the “mobilizing passions” that according to Paxton
form “the emotional lava which sets fascism’s foundations” (p. 41).

[Sasha]

No, but our media are horny for this kind of stuff around Wilders. But I don't think he's a fascist or anything near that. Although he wants to stop mass immigration, he didn't want to raise our retirement age like other parties wanted, wants toleration for non-islamic religious groups such as the Jews and see our elders well taken care of. It's more like he wants to go back to 30 years ago or something like that.

Basically the thing is he wants to ban islamic people. Which is what the fuss is all about.

you should consider reading the thesis, social protectionism for the "own" is a core tennent of fascism.
Now do I agree that the PVV is fascist? I would say that is stretch still but its damn close to proto-fascism for sure

[VirgJans12]

you should consider reading the thesis, social protectionism for the "own" is a core tennent of fascism.
Now do I agree that the PVV is fascist? I would say that is stretch still but its damn close to proto-fascism for sure

I'm reading it as we speak. Though I see protecting your own as nationalism, and not necessarily fascism. Even though the two terms align very well.