Why I am voting for Volt
Founder
The fourth coalition led by Jan Pieter Balkenende (2007-2010) - centre-left - was supposed to bring good times after bad but then all the banks collapsed thanks to American subprime mortgages.
The first Rutte coalition was supposed to pull the economy out of the banking doldrums and then all hell broke loose in the eurozone because of Greek debts.
The second Rutte coalition was supposed to put immigration affairs in order and then suddenly there were 1.2 million refugees on Europe’s borders.
The third Rutte coalition was supposed to bring light at the end of the tunnel and then a bat from Wuhan brought the whole world to a standstill.
We wonder what the plans are now.
The waning relevance of the nation state
Of course, the point of the examples is not that governments break promises - that is of course logical.
No, the point is that governments are no longer a national affair.
You can promise every Dutch citizen a thousand euros, fewer refugees or cheaper health care, but if an American system bank, a Syrian dictator or a Chinese food market stands in the way, it is worth nothing. Add to that climate change, disappearing biodiversity, cybercrime, tax evasion and the next virus outbreak and you understand that our future is not made in The Hague.
Political parties are, of course, aware of this. In fact, their response to globalisation is one of the most important fault lines in contemporary politics.
On one side you see the national nostalgic types. Those who promise a return to the glorious days when happiness was still counted in guilders, Muslims still lived in Morocco and Europe was a cosy club of coal and steel lovers. Abroad, that’s where we go on holiday. And what should stay out of our country.
On the other side are the globalisation TINAs. There Is No Alternative - those who see globalisation as inevitable and reluctantly argue the case for international cooperation in the national interest. Standing up for Dutch interests in Brussels and on the G-whatever, in the guise of acting together where necessary, left alone where possible. Abroad, that is where we venture with our trade missions. And they are supposed to benefit our national interests.
What is left, in a lonely corner of the political spectrum, is the globalisation optimists. Those don’t just think that internationalisation is inevitable but even desirable and see cross-border cooperation as not only necessary but also useful. Abroad, that is where our future lies. And what will eventually become our homeland.
Many parties do not belong to that school - D66 comes close - but in this election, there is a newcomer on the scene who is really striking: Volt.
That’s the party I’ll be voting for this time.
Europe, much more than pretty important
If you had to summarise Volt's election programme in one sentence, it would be this: without Europe, we are nowhere.
The party was founded in 2017 and is called Volt Europa - a 'pan-European movement'. Its largest electoral success so far: gaining 1 seat in the European Parliament via elections in Germany.
But Volt does not only participate in European elections, it also has national parties in twelve European countries, none of which has yet managed to get through to the national parliament.
The Netherlands may therefore have a first, when Volt is the first to be voted into the Dutch parliament on 17 March. A first similar to the one in 2006, when it was the first country in the world to give a seat to the “Party for Animals”.
Volt is turning the logic of politics upside down for the first time since the start of NATO in 1949
And the parallel with the Party for the Animals does not end there. Like the PvdD, Volt represents a radical philosophical break with the political status quo. Whereas the PvdD was the first to say goodbye to 'humans' as the centre of politics, Volt does this with the nation-state. Just as the PvdD merges humans into ecology, Volt merges the country into the continent.
This philosophical change goes much further than 'Europe, pretty important'. In fact, for the first time since NATO began in 1949, Volt has turned the logic of politics upside down. Instead of nationalising international politics, Volt internationalises national politics. Whether it is about climate, taxes or defence: almost all its policy proposals are European policy proposals.
Not surprising, when you consider that, say, one European rule for energy-efficient hoovers saves as much CO2 emission as a quarter of the entire Dutch climate agreement.
The European Union determines how you vacuum (and that is a good thing), wrote Jesse Frederik.
If you include all the European regulations on household appliances, then that can save ten times the Dutch climate agreement in CO2 emissions.
Europe can be quite effective.
No other party is as aware of this as Volt. D66, GroenLinks and BIJ1 are all in favour of more Europe - so a vote for them is not a waste of time. But what makes Volt so interesting is that it has the explicit ambition of making politics itself as cross-border as the problems it has to solve.
Wildly progressive and refreshingly pragmatic: idealism without taboos
This radical philosophical change is exactly what we need and therefore a good reason in itself to vote for Volt. But it is certainly not the only one.
The party may often be portrayed in the media as a "youth party" (indeed, its supporters are young), but its party programme is remarkably mature. Its 217-page political manifesto is so well conceived that it seems as if the party has been around for decades.
Here you can find a list of all Volt's European plans
And its 64-page election programme for the Netherlands is also not exactly scribbled on the back of a beer mat with the usual political platitudes.
Here you can find Volt's election programme for the Netherlands.
Of course, you may think that an integrated European tax system, a European public transport network, a digital European passport, a European diploma system, a European Green New Deal and an interconnection of all national energy networks in Europe is just a cliché.
If you draw a line through all the party policies, then two characteristics come to mind: wildly progressive and refreshingly pragmatic.
Free money for every European: Volt dares to dream of it. But it is not idle chatter with an ideological bent
A good example: the climate paragraph. Volt wants the whole of Europe to be climate-neutral by 2040 (five years earlier than GroenLinks) and pulls out all the stops to achieve this - think of a European CO2 tax, expansion of European emission trading, the abolition of fossil subsidies (two hundred billion a year), a compulsory energy-saving standard of 40%.
At the same time, unlike most progressive parties, it does not rule out nuclear power as a means of transition. Now, I am no fan of nuclear power plants, but by now it is a serious question whether we will make the leap to CO2 neutrality in time with only sun, wind and hydrogen. The fact that Volt, contrary to the left-wing mainstream, is not dogmatic on this point, shows political courage and independence of spirit.
Arnout Jaspers writes here why we need nuclear power now (and probably not in fifty years' time)
Another example: basic income. It doesn't get much more utopian than wanting to give free cash to every European - and Volt dares to dream out loud about it. But at the same time, it is not idle chatter of the ideological kind: "Before we can take that big step, we need to investigate and assess the financial feasibility and all possible consequences," the party writes.
It proposes large-scale basic income experiments lasting at least five years with at least ten thousand participants in several European countries. The aim: a gradual replacement of the bureaucratic and often degrading social safety net (Does anyone else want a repeat of the Dutch benefits scandal?) by an unconditional minimum income for all.
Best secondary catch: "Unpaid voluntary work, such as informal care or work for social organisations, is no less valuable for our society than paid work. A basic income can be a way of re-evaluating people's contribution to society.”
And so it is.
Better well imported than poorly conceived
Not that it is all big, bigger, biggest at Volt. The election programme is full of progressive goodies of the better kind. And here, too, the party's internationalism shines through. The best plans are all inspired by successful policies abroad.
The abolition of primary-school exams using the Finnish model, for example, so that a school career is not chiselled in marble at the age of twelve (excellent plan). Free school meals on the Swedish model, so that all children have a healthy diet (do it). Controlled decriminalisation of soft drugs, based on the Portuguese system, so that the police can worry about real criminals (better late than never).
Instead of gas, you can also simply import good ideas
But also: the introduction of citizens' budgets after the Brazilian example, so that people get more influence on local policy (good idea). The setting up of citizens' councils for climate policy, following the French example, so that the support base increases (worth a try). Car-free city centres after Danish and Spanish model, so that bicycles really get some space (yes, I say even as an avid car driver).
Rutger Bregman previously wrote about the rise of citizen budgets in, among others, Brazil.
Jelmer Mommers previously wrote about citizens' councils to increase support for climate policy.
Instead of importing gas, just import good ideas.
And there is more common sense to be found among all the grand plans. Abolishing the rental charge to encourage the building of new houses, for example (endorsed from left to right). Free contraception for women of all ages instead of up to 21 (logical). A tax on sugar, one of the world's biggest silent killer (a no-brainer).
I wrote this column earlier about the negative effects of sugar consumption on our society.
Thirty weeks maternity leave for both parents so that the burden of care does not only lie on the mother's shoulders (proven effective).
Paternity leave: this is how you get men behind the kitchen sink, Rutger Bregman once wrote.
The establishment of a Ministry of Digital Affairs, so that the government no longer strays from one IT disaster to the next (preferably starting right now).
The Netherlands can be a progressive country again
Of course, every party programme has its faults, as Volt's does too. Like the fashionable touches of Silicon Valley in some of the plans.
The party occasionally indulges in a good deal of techno-optimistic solutionism, as Belarusian thinker Evgeny Morozov calls it - the idea that a technological solution exists for many social problems (aka: 'There's an app for that.'). No wonder tech millionaires are remarkably enthusiastic about the party.
Take the European hyperloop, for example - digging thousands of kilometres of vacuum tunnel or laying a tube to keep a Maglev train out of the wind. Elon Musk will love it, but it sounds like a Fyra train wreck waiting to happen.
Or blockchain to drive the 'digital revolution': very TED-talk-proof, but in reality mainly a very expensive word for spreadsheet.
Blockchain: an easy answer, Jesse Frederik previously wrote about this technology hype.
And the 'circular' economy may be the cuddly plan of the sustainable left, but no party really makes clear how this is to be achieved - not even Volt. Less pollution and waste, more recycling and sustainability, these are all good ideas, but they are not yet 'circular'.
Most 'circular' solutions are not 'circular', notes Jan van Poppel.
These are comments that do not fundamentally alter the conclusion that Volt has an inspiringly ambitious, well-founded and philosophically distinctive answer to the greatest challenges of our time - and will therefore get my vote.
It is far from being a strategic vote. With one or two seats, Volt will not end up at the negotiating table. And one or two MPs with forty portfolios to keep track of is not ideal either. But the status quo has never been changed by voting for the incumbent.
And who knows what this debut in a national parliament could lead to. Neoliberalism, too, was once a marginal philosophy.
In this essay, Rutger Bregman describes the rise (and fall) of neoliberalism.
With the first transnational party in the Lower House, the Netherlands can once again be a progressive guiding light.
There is even a hint of Dutch glory in it too.