Thierry Baudet responds to Arnon Grunberg's "it could have been worse": "Yes, FVD could have won too yes!"

This weekend Arnon Grünberg stopped by NPO to talk about the election results. Like the entire left-wing globalist Netherlands, Grunberg thought it was terrible that the PVV had become the largest. But, he added, it could have been even worse: FVD could also have won. That, in his eyes, would have been really bad. Thierry Baudet agreed: "The differences between FVD and PVV are significant.

"Can you shine another hopeful light on 2024," presenter Twan Huys asked Grunberg. The latter responded - in the eyes of himself and those of left-wing propagandists in general - very "witty. "Certainly, you can also point out that everything could have been much worse. Instead of Wilders, Baudet could have had 37 seats. That would have been even worse."

Baudet: "Agreed!

Thierry Baudet himself responded. The content of his response will no doubt surprise some people. Indeed, he completely agrees with Grunberg - and does not give the radical leftist propagandist a hard kick. Baudet is very factual and calm.

Of course Baudet doesn't think it worse if FVD gets 37 seats. No. His response is that if FVD had 37 seats, this would indeed have been worse for the cartel than the 37 seats for PVV. Because although PVV and FVD get along well, there are significant differences between them.

Agreements

"First of all, as is well known, there are several similarities between the PVV and FVD," aldus Baudet said. "We both want to stop immigration, we don't believe in the climate story and love fossil fuels."

"We also want to get out of the European Union and stop the hopeless euro currency that is evaporating our pensions and causing endless inflation making life unaffordable. Wilders and I are on friendly terms. And when Martin Bosma was elected speaker of the House, Gideon, Freek and I were cheering as loudly as Gidi Markuszower and Alexander Kops."

Differences FVD - PVV

"Yet there are fundamental differences between our parties: at least two. One takes place at the ideological level, the other at the social level," the FVD'er continued.

"Unlike the PVV, Forum for Democracy views the three policy areas mentioned - immigration, climate policy and the erosion of our sovereignty by the European Union - as symptoms rather than as stand-alone phenomena," Baudet explained in response.

"In our view, they are symptoms of a larger agenda - a broader, globalist movement that is indeed also focused on permanent repopulation (via mass migration), on gaining total control over all human activity and the entire economy (by problematizing CO2 emissions), and on eroding state sovereignty (which disables democracy and allows policies to be implemented against the will of the people). However, this diabolical agenda does not manifest itself only through these three policies," he goes on to state.

This is also how FVD looks at the corona crisis, the war with Russia, "the unconditional support for Israel," and "more and more rules around 'healthy' living." FVD sees through that, PVV does not.

New Column

Socially, there is also a big difference. "Where the PVV is an exclusively parliamentary movement, without members, without meetings in the country, without discussion and debate, Forum for Democracy, on the contrary, tries to be as broad a social movement as possible," Baudet said. "We believe that the crisis we are in now ultimately has its origin in a mindset that has eaten into the capillaries of our society."

This is why FVD is very much engaged in creating an alternative society, a kind of traditional column. PVV does not do that at all.

"THAT is why we have our ForumApp with thousands of companies, services, entrepreneurs, plasterers, plumbers, tax advisers, internships, vacancies, offers and vacation homes," Baudet said. "THAT is why we have our school, our scientific office, our international network. All of them, to eventually form a whole generation that can either start replacing the current elites, or form a new, parallel society so we don't have to care about those miserable people anymore."

The rightness of Grunberg

"I think Grunberg understands that. I think he sees that the power of the current elites is much better entrenched than you might think at first glance. And that he sees that true power has relatively little to fear from a single electoral victory 'on the right.' Voter favorability comes and goes, policy can be slowed down in the short term - as long as the train races on, however, there is in fact little to worry about for the powers that be," Baudet goes on to explain.

"Fundamentally different it becomes, when an actual social power block is formed. When people start trading among themselves, when they start organizing their own food supply, their own schools, creating their own socio-economic mesh. THAT is why the AIVD also identified the 'parallel society' as the greatest threat to the current order."

(Article continues below this call) At DDS, we are working HARD to create a new SOUL for ón us; an alternative society of like-minded people who cast Woke, Left, and Globalism far away. But to do that, as a news website, we need money.... Big Tech boycotts us. But YOU can help us. Support DDS. Donate to DDS via BackMe and help us build an alternative world for ourselves.

And that, of course, is exactly why a) Grunberg fears PVV more than PVV and b) why it is so important that FVD continues to build this column. "Grunberg was absolutely right: the disaster for him and his would have been much greater if not PVV but FVD had won the election," Baudet rightly concludes.

"By the way, he also implied that it could have just been done. We agree with that just as much. It could have happened just like that, and it can still happen! Indeed: we are going for it! So wish us all a wonderful 2024! And support our movement! Member HonestEating, support AmsterdamBooks, join the ForumApp and come to our events."