Hans van Zijst

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

Professional nerd and grammar nazi, writes in Dutch and English. Can read some German, French and Spanish too. Learning русский.

Location:: Netherlands

Wed, 05 Jan 2022 09:28:53 +0100

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

No surprise there, they have oozles of money to spend.

But, erm, Royal Dutch Shell? They moved to the UK, so I'm not so sure about the "Dutch" anymore...

The Guardian wrote the following post Wed, 05 Jan 2022 09:20:03 +0100

Fossil fuel firms among biggest spenders on Google ads that look like search results

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jan/05/fossil-fuel-firms-among-biggest-spenders-on-google-ads-that-look-like-search-results

#TheGuardian #RSS #News #Bot #RoyalDutchShell #Climatecrisis #GoldmanSachs #Fossilfuels #ExxonMobil #Google #Aramco

show all 24 comments

Wed, 05 Jan 2022 09:56:57 +0100

Wilco Roos

wroos@diasp.org

Also, should no longer be Royal, no longer Dutch means not (dutch) Royal anymore in my book.

Wed, 05 Jan 2022 09:57:29 +0100

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

Indeed.

Wed, 05 Jan 2022 18:39:06 +0100

Andreas Geisler

andreas_geisler@pluspora.com

And all royals belong in oblivion.

Wed, 05 Jan 2022 19:06:10 +0100

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

Hmm, I'm a bit milder there. Royals can play a part, but they should not have any political power. A good king/queen can unite the people in difficult times.

Wed, 05 Jan 2022 20:37:22 +0100

Andreas Geisler

andreas_geisler@pluspora.com

Oblivion doesn't necessary mean 6' under. Just, you know, history. Non-current.

I think it's a sickness to insist that some people are born different, and I think it does make the people more small-minded to live as royal subjects.

A symbolic elected president is just as good as a symbolic royalty, without any of the bad parts.

Wed, 05 Jan 2022 22:28:09 +0100

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

I disagree. I think an elected president is great for leading a parliament, butn presidents tend to change every so many years. A king gives a certain amount of continuity.

Wed, 05 Jan 2022 22:54:27 +0100

Andreas Geisler

andreas_geisler@pluspora.com

Continuity for what? What is it actually needed for?

Here's what I mean:

Swedes, Danes, Dutch, Norwegians, this is as chillaxed as monarchies can be, right? But at least Swedes, Danes and Norwegians also have massive xenophobia problems, and very immature public discourse, very sort of "We've profited from colonialism, but we still think we're holier than the rest, and please don't be too foreign if you come here, but we're totally not racist, because Islam is not a race"

Somewhat exaggerated and obviously not a direct quote, but do you get my drift?

Wed, 05 Jan 2022 23:38:37 +0100

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

I do. But the Dutch have their problems with xenophobia too, believe me. I think most of the world knows Geert Wilders and his "Party for Freedom" by now, but some of the more center wing parties share many of his ideas. They're just a bit more subtle about it. They're so subtle they can sell the idea to "allow 100 refugees from camp Moria into the country" as a good thing. They didn't tell us that 100 others wouldn't be allowed in then, so they basically said "screw them, they're not our problem, let them rot in that hellhole in Greece."

A king isn't needed for anything, but I see him as jewellery for a nation. That is, as long as he has the right ideas about how we as a society should behave. A king could serve as a role model for his people, much more than an elected president, exactly because a king is seen as "more than the average citizen". He isn't, of course, he's in fact not much more than an actor in a state-sponsored soap series. But people (most people) look up to him, and he's going to be there long after the president has served his term and is replaced by the next.

A royal family like the one in the UK sets a bad example for their people, I think. I mean, if you make it a problem that your grand son's skin might be too dark, you should indeed vanish into oblivion. I like to think that our royal family has a healty set of ideas, and they don't act as if they're above us. Our current king, Willem Alexander, acts like the guy next door, which makes it easy to relate to him.

Thu, 06 Jan 2022 02:22:38 +0100

@hans
Do you mean the monarch should act like what the late King Bhumibol did for Thailand? The late King was greatly respected during his life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumibol_Adulyadej

Thu, 13 Jan 2022 23:09:11 +0100

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

Our king is at least aware of the wrongs that the Dutch have done in the past. A few years ago he officially apologised for what we had done in Indonesia, and now he abandons an important tradition:

Dutch king to retire golden coach with slavery images after racism row

King Willem-Alexander will mothball the controversial carriage that glorifies the Netherlands’ colonial past

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:16:41 +0100

Wilco Roos

wroos@diasp.org

True, but he is also willfully blind to the wrongs he is doing now, look at all the 'O Dear' moments from the past years, from his villa adventures, up to his holidays when in lockdown, the hunting crap etc etc. I do hope his daughter takes over soonish, she seems like a more sensible girl.

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:18:15 +0100

Andreas Geisler

andreas_geisler@pluspora.com

Yeah, but let's say the monarchy would have ended in the "season of revolutions" 150 years ago, don't you think the racist chariot ride would have ended sooner, then?

I am just not convinced that these arbitrary traditions, with a real-money cost, have any intrinsic value, rather than just force of habit with a pinch of nostalgia and in-grown nationalism thrown in.

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:32:11 +0100

Wilco Roos

wroos@diasp.org

As long as a (quite big) majority of Dutch people prefer it this way, it will stay, it is part of our heritage, with all wrongs and rights that brings. Courant version of our Monarch is a bit thick headed, and blind to what lives among 'his' people, his mother was better in that way. Willem Alexander still seems to prefer the 'party life' he had when he was a student, and never grew up after that. Even his wife calls him 'a tad dumb'. Still I do prefer it above a chosen president, way WAY to many examples of bad ones. Think Trump, and let it slide....

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 12:05:32 +0100

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

@Andreas Geisler

the racist chariot ride

That's a bit strong. That chariot was built in 1898, in a time where most European countries had their colonies. The picture on it is something that was reality in those days. We all agree that it was wrong, the king even apologised officially for that, but that puts us in the awkward position that a piece of art that has been in our traditions for more than a century is suddenly wrong.

The king is stuck between a rock and a hard place here: painting over it would solve it for one part of the people, but it would destroy a part of our heritage. Continuing to use the chariot with the current picture on it would be offensive to many others. I think "temporarily" not using it is a good options, and typically Dutch too: trying to keep everyone happy by finding some common ground.

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 12:13:52 +0100

Wilco Roos

wroos@diasp.org

Wiping out history because we now feel it's 'not appropriate' solves nothing, falsifies history. How can we learn from it if all that is deemed inappropriate is white washed every single time the view of the time changes? We all agree slavery was bad, we all agree to apologise for it, but this image was created in a different time. Should the piece of history be used as a ride again? Nope, it should be in a museum, with a placard stating the time, place and meaning of the image. A lesson to be learned. If we would start with this, we could also demolish half the canal house facades in Amsterdam and other Dutch formerly harbor cities, as they are sprinkled with bits and pieces of the VOC and other slave trading entities. Just acknowledge it is there, it was wrong, and is just a momento of a different age.

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:59:44 +0100

Andreas Geisler

andreas_geisler@pluspora.com

This is a non-problem. If it is a harmful depiction, either stop using the whole thing, and stick it in a museum somewhere, with an educational plaque explaining the horrors of the period, or just have a team of museum renovators remove that part of the chariot and put THAT in a museum with a plaque explaining the horrors of the period.

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 15:07:57 +0100

Wilco Roos

wroos@diasp.org

At this moment it IS in a museum, with a plaque and everything, it's just our monarch who thinks it is a good idea to keep re-use as an option, where any sane person would shy away..

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 15:10:14 +0100

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

Well, he'd piss of the people who think you can't change anything. This Dutch vlees-noch-vis solution is a good attempt to keep everybody (sort of) happy.

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 15:53:09 +0100

Wilco Roos

wroos@diasp.org

Sigh, true, although better to compromise than burning your country down like in the US with their idiotic Democrats vs Republicans. Where they seem to think (they being Republicans) it is war and not just politics.

Fri, 14 Jan 2022 16:27:18 +0100

Hans van Zijst

hans@social.woefdram.nl

@Andreas Geisler

If it is a harmful depiction

Is it?

The picture itself doesn't harm anyone, I think we can agree on that. If that painting would be presented as an example of how the world should be, you'd have a point. If the king would refer to it in the Troonrede (sort of like the "State of the Union" in America, part of the tradition in which the Gouden Koets is used) as an example of how we should treat other people, it would most certainly be harmful.

But it's a depiction of a part of our national history. We're not proud of that it anymore, but we can't undo it. We could paint over the picture, but that wouldn't change history. Tucking it away wouldn't change anything.

I personally wouldn't mind keeping the Gouden Koets exactly like it is, because for me it's nothing more than a reminder of what once was, a part of our national history. But many people take offense at it, and although I don't really understand it, I do understand very well that I've never been in a position where such a picture could offend me.

Destroying it would -in my eyes- be wrong. We've all watched in horror how the Taliban destroyed those Buddha statues in 2001, and how IS destroyed all kinds of cultural heritage in Palmyra in 2015. You can frown upon things from the past, but destroying them isn't going to help.

So, if both destroying and continued use would be a bad choice, mothballing it seems like a nice middle ground.

Sat, 15 Jan 2022 22:49:19 +0100

Andreas Geisler

andreas_geisler@pluspora.com

Generally speaking, parading something around in or on a golden carriage tends to be viewed as being proud of it or other such endorsement.

Sun, 16 Jan 2022 13:19:00 +0100

Wilco Roos

wroos@diasp.org

Yep, wich is why we wanted it to go to a museum (as it is now) and stay there (and here our dumb king steps his big loafers into it), but as said, it also could be an attempt to apeace a part of our society unfortunately not very sensitive to how decendents of victims of this crime might feel. If so, smart move, trust the subject in limbo, so both sides of the conflict see it as 'as it should be', instead of constant bickering about the damn thing. If not, well that also suits the 'A tad stupid' reputation of our Monarch.

Sun, 16 Jan 2022 18:02:19 +0100

Andreas Geisler

andreas_geisler@pluspora.com

Couldn't they just hire some flautist, to sit on the chariot and play, while leading all the troglodytes out of the cities and into a mountain, never to be seen again?

Like in the good old days?

Sun, 16 Jan 2022 18:07:38 +0100

Wilco Roos

wroos@diasp.org

Well we did have a previous Monarch William, his nickname was 'the Gorilla' and not because he was a very sensitive man 🤣