The Lion’s Claws, or Flemish Nationalism in a European Perspective

“So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause.” It is a sad time indeed. Flanders fell to the claws of populist nationalism, and if Belgian politicians continue their current strategy, so will Belgium in a couple of years. The NVA – “New Flemish Alliance” – won Belgian local elections with a tremendous victory, gaining a massive number of seats in communal councils. Some call this an important turn in history; others would denounce it as nothing more than the temporal success of a populist party. But now that everybody cooled down a little, it’s time to reflect. Although it’s impossible to fully assess Flemish nationalism in a single article, let alone put it in any kind of perspective – it’s quite and ambitious title I’ve got here – I’ll nonetheless try to do several things: to assess the victorious NVA, to assess Flemish nationalist sentiment, to assess the losing parties, and to shed some European light on all this.

As my previous articles (and the title of this article) shows quite clearly, I’m not a fan of populism or nationalism, let alone the combination of the two. Yet that is exactly what the NVA has done. All over Europe, not only in Belgium, we can generally distinguish two types of nationalism. Type A is the “luxury nationalism” version, meaning it lives among a wealthy class who don’t like sharing, not with the poor in their own country and not at all with the poor in another country. Consequently, they want independence, or at least some sort of arrangement in which they can greedily keep their inflating money. Regions like Flanders, but also Catalonia, Lombardy or Baden-Württemberg feel much for a “Europe of the regions”, where they can directly link their own businesses to regional and global actors, without the interference of an inefficient, useless and costly national level. Type B is the populism of the working poor, those who live in impoverished neighbourhoods and are looking for someone to blame for their misery. This group can turn against anyone who would seem an easy target – for some it’s “the rich”, for others its “those foreigners”, for yet others it’s “the system”.

For years the separatist extreme-right in Belgium was contained in one party, the VB, “Vlaams Belang” or “Flemish Interest”. Yet the VB relied heavily on the Type B electorate, with a strong focus on security, migration and anti-Walloon (the French-speaking side of Belgium) slogans. The Type A electorate was scattered, lacking a focal party. But the NVA managed to present itself in such a way that it attracts both Type A and B voters, transforming it into a magnificent electoral machine. And it must be admitted, Bart De Wever, NVA’s big leader who doesn’t like music, is a brilliant politician. Not only did he succeed in massively mobilising right-wing voters, pushing back the anti-democratic and racist VB, but he even did so in a way that, although being the biggest party of the country, the NVA is still considered to be “the victim”. Indeed, the lion’s claws would seem harmless, even stomped by traditional parties.

I don’t know how he did it, but despite very aggressive campaigning by the NVA, now holding several key positions – including Flanders’ largest city Antwerp – a large part of the Flemish still believe that Flemish nationalism – which is now considered not only as harmless but even as common sense – is the victim of an anti-Flemish plot by traditional parties. Yet those parties are in a very difficult position right now. Cooperate with the NVA and they give nationalism a chance to grow, refuse to cooperate and they risk electoral backlash and local absolute majorities for the separatists. Granted, the traditional parties have acted foolishly. First, despite NVA national breakthrough two years ago, they refused to let them in national government, giving them an even stronger position as “victim”. Second, they played the NVA’s game instead of their own. Despite what one might think, the NVA has no local story. They simply copy what the reigning parties have been doing, add some brilliant marketing and sell it of again as “the power of change”. Consequently, during the campaign they focussed heavily on national themes – anti-Walloon and anti-Belgium slogans especially. The other parties, apart from the Greens, played along and forget to tell their own stories.

Furthermore, it is now widely claimed that the NVA has anchored itself locally, but nothing is less true. You cannot anchor a party locally if you don’t have a local story. Let’s face it, where will nationalism be in 2020? I know what liberalism, socialism and even Christian-democracy will be in 2020. But nationalism? Assuming they continue their victory stroke and get into national government in 2014, forcing upon Belgium a confederal structure by 2020, what will the NVA’s next step be? All they’ve got is a complaint, that Belgium doesn’t work properly, that Wallonia is economically inferior to Flanders and should thus be left behind – like animals in the wild. They’ve got no positive story to tell and once they have reached their confederal goals they will only be able to move in one direction: that of full-blown separatism. This is what Belgian and European politicians in general should be afraid of. Today modest nationalism is accepted as common sense; tomorrow they take what’s not theirs and the claws of populism will once again hold Europe in their grip.

Oh yes, they are democratically elected and “the voter is always right”. Well, no. Let’s not forget that Hitler too was elected, Stalin and Mao enjoyed broad popular support for their revolutions. Even today Hugo Chavez, who imprisons political adversaries and basically anyone who doesn’t dance to his music, has been re-elected with massive popular support. The masses are easily swayed. Bart De Wever enjoys throwing in Latin quotes during his speeches, so here is mine, and let it be a warning to all who forget history: “sic transit gloria mundi.”