The Netherlands: The Polder Method (cont.)

The waitress turns and smiles and asks me, "Would you like to participate?" Before I can refuse, she is speaking loudly in Dutch. Suddenly all I can hear is Paul Simon singing ‘Me and Julio’ in the background as many eyes feast in my direction.

It seemed an extraordinary moment, everyone waiting silently for my opinion, as if what a foreigner had to say was imperative to everyone’s understanding of the situation. I was too stunned to speak. Eventually, I fumbled through a few points, and then the debate was raging again, this time in English for my benefit.

It was an incredible scene: men and women, young and old, voicing their opinions and failing to acknowledge that they were total strangers. The antiquated café had become a public debate house.

I have been told it is simply the Dutch way. Everyone has a voice and nothing can be final until all legitimate opinions have been heard. It is known as the polder-model, referring to the reclaiming of land from the sea (a polder), whereby everyone was expected to take part for the group’s benefit. (An axiom of this is a favorite Dutch saying that goes: ‘God created Earth, but the Dutch created Holland.’)

Opinions aren’t just a privilege here, they’re a responsibility, and everyone is expected to cultivate his or hers on a bewildering variety of subjects, from American hegemony to inflation via the Euro to the state of your neighbour’s garden. The Dutch believe it’s what you say that matters, and not how you say it, meaning you’ll find out very quickly and honestly if your attempt at gardening isn’t up to snuff.

The downside of this attitude is that it has led to the verzuiling, or ‘pillarisation’, of Dutch society, the maxim of which is the idea that each should be allowed to live their life as they choose, even if it burdens society in some way. It has bred a society of tolerance, and in some cases it has been a success. Despite the liberalization of drug laws, hard drug addicts make up a mere one tenth of a percent of society; and violent crime is incredibly low for a city the size of Amsterdam. However, in a society of tolerance, it also means that one person’s right to smoke can infringe on another person’s right to breathe clean air.

Overall, the polder model has a mixed legacy. On one hand, it can lead to endless deliberation and make government planning exasperatingly slow; on the other, it ensures that the process is wholly democratic. The irony of the situation was not lost on me, considering I was in the Netherlands, a tiny nation with very little official say in world politics, and discussing the role of America, the supposed home of democracy, in the reconstruction of Iraq.

The outcome of the debate was inconclusive; but everyone participated, and in that respect, it was an unqualified success. The café became quiet and the mood contemplative as breakfasts and opinions were quietly digested. Paul Simon was offering to be called Al, and I sipped my coffee verkeerd feeling oddly satisfied, knowing such an obliquely open society exists.

Now if they could just do something about all the cigarette smoke in here. So much for clearing the air.

Page 2 of 2   Previous Page

All contents copyright ©2005 Pology Magazine. Unauthorized use of any content is strictly prohibited.