No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2014
IN THE MID 1960S, HANS DAALDER CONTRIBUTED A CLASSIC survey of the dynamics of the Dutch party system to Dahl's major anthology on opposition. His study was entitled ‘Opposition in a Segmented Society’. The focus upon opposition however was dictated less by the nature of Dutch politics than by the requirements of a comparative study. Thus the emphasis of the account was upon the essentially non-oppositional character of organized national politics in the Netherlands, for reasons which he showed to be both historical and practical.
1 Dahl, R. A. (ed.), Political Opposition in Western Democracies, Yale University Press, 1966, Chap. 6.Google Scholar
2 See: van Schendelen, M. P. C. M. (ed.), Consociationalism, pillarization and conflict‐management in the Low Countries, Amsterdam, Acta Politica XIX, 01 1984.Google Scholar
3 Derived from Table 1, ‘The 1982 Netherlands Election’, Gladdish, Ken, West European Politics, Vol. 6, No. 3, 07 1983 Google Scholar.
4 For a comprehensive bibliography of Verzuiling, see: Schendelen, van, op. cit. Accessible texts in English include: Bakvis, H., Catholic Power in the Netherlnnds, Montreal, McGill University Press, 1981 Google Scholar; Dutter, L., ‘The Netherlands as a plural society’, Comparative Political Studies, 1978 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lijphart, A., The Politics of Accommodation, Berkeley, University of California, 1968 & 1975.Google Scholar
5 See: Kieve, R., ‘Pillars of Sand, a marxist critique of consociational democracy in the Netherlands’, Comparative Politics, 1981;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Scholten, I., ‘Does Consociationalism Exist? A Critique of the Dutch Experience’, in Rose, R. (ed.), Electoral Participation, London, Sage, 1980.Google Scholar
6 A useful bibliography of Dutch corporatism is contained in Wolinetz, S., ‘Wage Regulation in the Netherlands’, Washington DC, Council for European Studies, 10 1983 Google Scholar. Valuable texts are: Windmuller, J. P., Labour Relations in the Netherlands, Cornell University Press, 1969 Google Scholar; Griffiths, R. (ed.), The Economy and Politics of the Netherlands since 1945, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1980 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 For the consequences for economic management of the decline of corporatism, see: Gladdish, Ken, ‘Coalition Government and Policy Outputs in the Netherlands’ in Bogdanor, V. (ed.), Coalition Government in Western Europe, London, Heinemann, 1983.Google Scholar
8 Op. cit., p. 422.
9 Op. cit., p. 135 (1975).
10 See: Andeweg, R. B., van der Tak, Th. & Dittrich, K., ‘Government Formation’ in Griffiths, op. cit.;Google Scholar Vis, J., ‘Coalition Government in a Constitutional Monarchy’ in Bogdanor, op. cit.Google Scholar
11 Op. cit., p. 135 (1975).
12 Amply illustrated by J. A. W. Burger, former chairman of the PvdA parliamentary group, in an interview with the author, April 1971.
13 Op. cit., p. 422.
14 See Andeweg, et al, op. cit., and de Swaan, A., Coalition Theories and Cabinet Formations, Amsterdam, 1973.Google Scholar
15 On a strict construction only two cabinets have served a full parliamentary term during this period without any periods of demission due to crises, i.e. those of de Jong (1967–71) and of van Agt (1977–81).
16 See: Wolinetz, S., ‘The Dutch Labour Party’ in Patterson, W. & Thomas, A. (eds), Social Democratic Parties in Western Europe, London, Croom Helm, 1977.Google Scholar
17 Interview with Geertsema, W. J., then chairman of the VVD parliamentary group, 04 1971.Google Scholar
18 The heading of the English text of the founding letter from the D’66 Initiating Committee, 15 September 1966.
19 A proposal submitted to the Cals‐Donner Committee on Constitutional Reform, set up in 1967. For a summary of the committee’s origins and outcome see Daalder, H., ‘Extreme P.R.—The Dutch Experience’ in Finer, S. E. (ed.), Adversary Politics and Electoral Reform, London, Anthony Wigram, 1975.Google Scholar
20 Interview with Hans van Mierlo, then chairman of the D’66 parliamentary group, June 1971. Other D℉66 notables who were interviewed at this point were perhaps less visionary but certainly sought a fresh basis on which national politics might be conducted.
21 Accounts of this process in English were presented at the ECPR workshops in Salzburg, April 1984, by Hans J. G. A. van Mierlo, and by Bert Pijnenburg and Jan de Jong.
22 Formed in 1968 by former members of the KVP.
23 See Andeweg, R. B., Dutch Voters Adrift. On Explanations of Electoral Change, Leiden University, 1982.Google Scholar
24 Formed in 1970 as a breakaway from the PvdA in reaction to the New Left influence. It was wound up in 1981 after its support had dwindled to below the threshold for parliamentary representation.
25 For figures for small party representation overall see Ken Gladdish, ‘The Netherlands’, p. 148, in Bogdanor, V. (ed.), Representatives of the People? Parliamentarians and Constituents in Western Democracies, Aldershot, Gower, 1985.Google Scholar
26 ‘Main points from the Manifesto of the Liberal Party’, English summary, p. 6.
27 The coalition took office in September 1981 and finally collapsed in May 1982 when the PvdA members resigned over proposed public expenditure cuts. See Gladdish, Ken, ‘The 1982 Netherlands Election’, op. cit.Google Scholar
28 A view strongly advanced by the audience at a lecture by the author at Erasmus University, Rotterdam, November 1982.
29 Attested by interviews with senior politicians in both parties in 1984 and 1985.
30 Schuil, Robert, reporting in The Times from Amsterdam, 5 11 1985 .Google Scholar
31 Recent research for this article was undertaken with the assistance of a grant from the British Academy.