What has woken up? – Yep


reading time 8 minutes



The concept awakened is like a big bag at the Leiden October 3 fair. Grab, in wake-a-ton, and with a bit of luck the hobbyhorse will appear that fits perfectly with your speech. That’s what you get with the kind of Zeitgeist loan terms translated 1 to 1 to the Dutch cultural reality. On Radio 1, former correspondent Stijntje Blankendaal used the phrase “woke agenda” when talking about the drastic reforms of the Brazilian social system under President Lula’s previous rule. What is a “wake agenda”? Economic policy? Poverty alleviation?

The Minister of Justice, Dilan Yeşilgöz-Zegerius, also fumbled in the wake-a-ton for her HJ Schoo lecture and found in the barrel the perfect hanger to hang his speech on: To sow fear. She described “vigilance” as a dangerous trend and a threat to the rule of law of, specifically, movements aimed at the exclusion and exclusion of opinions, people and opinions. According to this reading, the vigilante agenda is responsible for canceling culture, gagging and maintaining political correctness.

Is there such a thing as a waking agenda? An agenda used by the wakeness movement to demand more rights for the oppressed, marginalized groups? Or is vigilantism an anti-leftist movement that undermines freedoms and rights and as such is potent enough to threaten the rule of law?

Wake as a concept was born in 1930s America. The word was first used in a lyric by Huddie Ledbetter-Scottsboro Boys – and in that context meant to be awake, to be aware, to know what is going on in society, not to be fooled by the system, spiritual enlightenment, the Amazing Grace of non-denominational black Americans (I was once lost, but now I am found…was blind, but now I see). In the 1970s, the term wake became associated with the radical left-wing ideas of black power. At the beginning of this century, it was Erykah Badu’s Master Teacher who elevated the term “Woke”/wook/WOHK to pop culture. And in that slipstream came the Black Lives Matter movement (BLM), which is awakening as concept linked to civil rights. BLM spread their concept all over the world, but it especially inspired black northern Europeans to fight against discrimination and exclusion.

Is “vigilante” a threat to the rule of law because people have become more aware of their rights? That people are finally realizing that institutional racism is a big problem? Is vigilantism a danger to democracy because people report transgressive behavior more often? TVOH that was canceled after reports of sexual abuse? #Me too? Are the anonymous reports of officials against Khadija Arib’s alleged abuse of power also part of the vigilance? Or is it something else again?

Most Dutch people see discrimination as a problem for black people from the Randstad, who scream “discrimination” at every little treat. The Dutch who say discrimination is shit forget that it is door bitch who she turned down at the hip club because they were too ugly, too slow or whatever, also discriminated. White people who were once told they weren’t eligible for a glamor job as an on-air coffee person – because size 44 is too big – have also been discriminated against. The people of Groningen are also treated unequally, who are constantly fooled by NAM and all sorts of vague authorities, and who still live in their homes that are falling apart. The same applies to disabled people who can hardly hold their pee in the train stations because the toilet is only accessible to fit and able-bodied people. Henny Stoel from the 8-news, who got her leave because she was considered too old by a couple of Hilversum bosses, was also discriminated against. Fat white people who are told by their GP not to eat so much, to lose weight before they can be referred to a specialist: discrimination.

Discrimination is therefore not specifically linked to being black. Inequality is a social phenomenon. The 40-year-old white man who thinks he is invincible also risks being treated unequally in his life.

But while some opinion makers place vigilantism as the plaything of Akwasis and Bij1, there is Mark Rutte who traveled to Suriname to speak about the past of slavery and the 8th of December. There was obviously no more to discuss. How bizarre and shocking that visit was. In my opinion, this is the perfect example of the vigilante agenda: bending the narrative in such a way that people forget to fact-check and act against the absurdity. Because anyone who opens the archives knows that slavery’s past goes much further than slavery itself. After slavery, a terrible period began for most of the freed. The period of state supervision: 10 years of unpaid work as a horse under the guise of an internship. The planters demanded and received compensation from the Dutch government for each freed. But they thought it was too thin and lashed out. Free people had to become Dutch by the Dutch government. That winti-pley dancing was forbidden by law, as was communicating in one’s own language. Compulsory education was introduced in Suriname even before the Netherlands. Paternalism, forced conversions, coercion, but above all suffocating poverty was the fate of many blacks at the beginning of the last century. People lived in terrible conditions in shacks on the outskirts of Paramaribo. Mr. Rutte does not want that Free Man Gron gone… Some cabins are still there.

The Dutch Black Lives Matter movement deliberately does not deal with that part of the slavery past, because then they receive 0 cents in grants. Then all the money goes to the people who have worked on the plantations as involuntary philanthropists. But anyone who dares to discuss this aspect will be silenced because people would rather you keep your mouth shut on such controversial issues.

But with dot on 1 of the “awakened agenda” is the story that Anton de Kom is said to have liberated Suriname; that he would be responsible for the liberation of black people. When? When he spent barely a month in Suriname, somewhere, in the early 1930s? Don’t people know that this narrative was created by Marxist revolutionaries during the Bouterse era? And that this group is still prominent? In the Netherlands and in Suriname?

It was scientists from the University of Suriname who spoke against iconisation and hero worship and stated that De Kom’s role as an emancipator should first be thoroughly investigated. And some of them paid for that “contradiction” with death. The old university was closed forever by the regime. Desi Bouterse said during the opening that the new university, which was named Anton de Kom University, should become a university with its feet firmly on the street. For many Surinamese, the name “Anton de Kom” is still synonymous with lack of freedom and censorship today. But that cannot be said.

Prime Minister Rutte also visited Fort Zeelandia to remember the victims on 8 December. Fifteen victims who died on December 8, 1982. News flash: More than 1000 people died during Bouterse’s reign from 1980-1992 (that’s a conservative estimate). IKON regularly reported on disappearances and murders, but the Dutch government did nothing at all because it wanted to remain in dialogue with the new regime. Arbitrary ill-treatment and torture of innocent civilians. Round up and imprison opponents without trial. These people are not named (some were Dutch citizens). The Organization of American States has investigated various situations and has repeatedly ordered the Surinamese government to conduct an investigation. The French government received more than 30,000 refugees during the civil war (1986-1992). Many still live in refugee camps in French Guiana. The Netherlands received only a fraction of the refugees (there has been research on this).

The Netherlands has archives that can teach us about Holland’s involvement in the 1980 Sergeant’s coup. It is also said that Dutch officials played a role in the December 1982 murders. The government refuses to release the documents, so it continues to guess and guess at the true ones facts. What do they really have to hide? Meanwhile, Prime Minister Rutte shakes hands with convicted drug lord (and possible war criminal) Ronny Brunswijk. So, dear Minister of Justice, look into your own kitchen when it comes to gag orders and gagging and freedom of speech.

Yes of course. If Mrs. Yesilgöz-Zegerius says that the woke culture silences people, then you can safely say that she and her party, the VVD, collaborate just as hard.

No one can deny that there are indeed people in the Dutch wake movement who want to silence others. At BIJ1 it rumbles and thunders. Party members tell the newspapers about toxic cultures and discrimination in that club. Karin Amatmoekrim got tons of crap when her novel Een man van Veel – about Anton de Kom’s spiritual struggles – was published in 2013. Family and friends of Anton de Kom were not amused and just used the b-word (blasphemy). of.

Where has artistic freedom gone? Where has the freedom gone to discuss and debate without others feeling their little dicks kicked? Nor should there be too much criticism of the role of Pim Fortuyn. The discussion about his contribution to the hardening of the political landscape quickly turned into howls and whines “that the bullet came from the left”. You must also not say anything about Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s dubious role and her lies to obtain Dutch citizenship. The fight against radical Islam was more important than personal integrity. De Telegraaf, leading the smear campaign against Meghan Markle in the Netherlands: a warning of what happens when one of the king’s daughters dares to marry a dark man.

Then fear and loathing. And then we wander on.

Wakeness is a thoroughly American phenomenon. No matter how you look at it. Vigilance as a contemporary phenomenon says something about the blacks who are alert, walking around with their cameras at the ready, ready to film possible murders by the police of their own people. They are protesting the bias of the American justice system that repeatedly acquitted the white officers. However, the same vigilante movement has failed to generate enough political influence to force the federal government to reform the police force from within. I am afraid that the awakening movement will not lead to skyrocketing social changes in the Netherlands either. The vigilante has created a black elite. Akwasi makes films with state support through Omroep Zwart and Sylvana Simons is in the audience.

The European awakening movements are very nihilistic. They shun discourse and divide society into camps, pro or anti. But it can also be said about the Forum for Democracy, PVV, wappies, conspiracy idiots, Willem Engel and Virus Truth, the nitrogen farmers with their inverted flags and last but not least, the radical Islam that grows and flourishes in big cities. The great common denominator of all these aforementioned groups is their resistance to nomenclature. And there is nothing wrong with that, wrote the political scientists Stein Rokkan and Seymour Martin Lipset in the late 1960s. After all, a democracy is not a monolithic stronghold. If the system is strong enough, it can easily absorb that kind of anti-system forces. The question is therefore whether the system in the Netherlands is strong enough.

Leave a Comment