De Schaepdrijver: "België splitsen is niet moedig - la scission de la Belgique n'est pas courageuse"

De historica Sophie De Schaepdrijver zegt het goed in deze Britse krant. L'historienne le dit bien dans ce journal britannique.

Ze legt de nadruk op de geheimzinnigheid van het Vlaams-nationale discours omtrent Brussel. Elle met l'accent sur la lacune dans le discours des flamingants à propos de Bruxelles.

THE GUARDIAN

* Sophie De Schaepdrijver
* guardian.co.uk, Monday 21 June 2010 17.00 BST
* Article history

Nothing plucky about breaking up Belgium

Simon Jenkins defines the success of Flemish nationalists in Belgian elections as a bold step forward. It is anything but

New Flemish Alliance The strategy of the New Flemish Alliance is to consign the Belgian state to 'evolutionary evaporation'. Photograph: Georges Gobet/AFP/Getty Images

The largest party to come out of the 13 June elections in Belgium is the New Flemish Alliance, which wants to get rid of Belgium. Its strategy, in the words of its leader, Bart De Wever, is to consign the Belgian state to "evolutionary evaporation". This matters to all of Europe, wrote Simon Jenkins. As the headline puts it: "Plucky Belgium is leading the way. Today Flanders, tomorrow Scotland." Across the continent, "the craving for lower tier self-government refuses to die". And, as state-wide solidarity between regions dwindles, so may Europe-wide solidarity.

Jenkins's piece questions the pious truths of "euregionalism". He has a point. Did anyone, even in the dewy-eyed days of Freddy Heineken's 2002 "Eurotopia", really think rich regions would extricate themselves from states only to get re-embroiled in the EU? If Flemings stop bailing out Walloons, why would they rush to assist Greeks?

Jenkins's Euroscepticism leads him to define all of this as a bold step forward. It is, of course, anything but. As the great Tony Judt argued more than a decade ago in his essay "Is There A Belgium?", the slow implosion of the Belgian state is indeed indicative of what happens on the wider European stage. But Judt did not define this as a good thing. The division of Belgium happened against the backdrop of the larger crisis of the state, and that was nothing to wax gleeful about: "In progressively dismantling and disabling the unitary state in order to buy off its internal critics, Belgians may have made a Faustian bargain," he wrote, warning that citizenries cast aside "a sense of cohesion and common purpose" at their own peril.

One may argue that regions offer a more genuine sense of common purpose than do states, and are therefore better able to protect their citizens. That is certainly De Wever's claim: strengthened Flemish governance will, he states, more decisively defend the prosperity and culture of "our 6 million people on that little patch of soil that is Flanders".

But does fiscal egotism create communities other than the gated kind? Will a rhetoric of prosperous retrenchment accommodate future calls for sacrifice? This remains an open question. In 2009, the New Flemish Alliance issued campaign posters showing a motorway exit sign with the reassuring slogan "Exit to Flanders – Way Out Of The Recession". The ubiquity of today's financial meltdown precludes such hubris. Yet the notion that inhabitants of a more autonomous Flanders will somehow be spared the vexing issues of the day remains strong. De Wever's secret strength lies in the fact that he is a genuine Flemish nationalist – he would choose Flanders over prosperity if he had to. But he is careful not to tell his electorate.

There are other things De Wever remains silent about, such as the fate of Brussels in a divided Belgium. The New Flemish Alliance has grown strong on the campaign to detach the northern exurbs of Brussels, which are technically Flemish territory, from the capital's electoral district. For an outsider, it is hard to grasp the fierce emotions generated by this issue, until one understands that its parochialism is precisely its point: in Flemish nationalist rhetoric, Brussels – French-speaking, ever more foreign – is an "oil spill" to be dammed in.

Meanwhile, few Flemish autonomists want to get rid of Brussels altogether. Likewise, splitting the Belgian state down the middle is no option. So – whither? One could think of strengthening the regions while defining a new role for Belgium, a polity that predated Flanders and Wallonia, after all (Jenkins's brief account of Belgian history since 1830 is deplorably inaccurate.) One could stop taking the division of public culture as a given – see the opinions voiced on the discussion forum "Rethinking Belgium", by among others, De Wever's elder brother, Bruno, a professor of history, or if you know Dutch, the most recent comment on Flanders and Belgium by the brilliant Flemish writer Tom Lanoye.

Alas, the road more commonly taken by too many politicians, Flemings and Walloons alike, is that of passive aggression – a stance that, in a delirium of irresponsibility, hollows out all remaining sense of common purpose. They have a term for it in Belgium: in French "la stratégie du pourrissement","verrottingsstrategie" in Dutch. There really is nothing "plucky" about it, unless, of course, one wishes to see the entire EU succumb to pourrissement.


*
Leopold1904 Leopold1904

21 Jun 2010, 5:08PM

Simon Jenkins defines the success of Flemish nationalists in Belgian elections as a bold step forward. It is anything but.

Agree - the Jenkins piece was his wackiest ever i felt.

Good piece this - depressing but realistic.
*
*
Fomalhaut88 Fomalhaut88

21 Jun 2010, 5:11PM

Divided, and bankrupt.

Just what the great European Dream needs.

It isn't much of an advert for European unity, is it?

And it is the headquarters of the EU.
*
*
shalone shalone

21 Jun 2010, 5:20PM

I wish the breakup was that easy. EU headquarters are in Brussels and the whole idea of EU might tumble down. As always the problem zone is where there is mixed localities. Perhaps a very broad confederation is better than this current status quo. Things are that bad that once when two tennis players were playing against each other (Kleister and Hennin), they did not talk to each other on the ground.
*
*
Slovr Slovr

21 Jun 2010, 5:29PM

Well done. Simon Jenkins is a bit of a fool to be honest. As a Brussels resident I find the potential breakup of Belgium terribly shortsighted. Unlike Irish nationalism which I feel was born and sustained by fundamental injustice and systematic discrimination, the current manifestation of Flemish nationalism (not that which was present while there was still discrimination against the Flemish) is strange. There is no systematic discrimination against the Flemish. I do however have sympathy with the fact that there seems to be a lack of appreciation of Flemish as a language by their French speaking counterparts. But unfortunately the NVA and the fascist Vlaams Belang and to a lesser extent the other Flemish parties have played up to the stereotype regarding the comparative superiority of the Flemish people over their French speaking Belgians. It is of course an illusion. The Flemish economy is not as great nor as independent as they would like you to believe. There are huge amount of Flemish who commute from the Brussels's hinterland to work in the city everyday. They've a rapidly aging population. They're much more dependent then they'd like you to believe.
*


21 Jun 2010, 5:33PM

What exactly will this mean for chocolate, wheat beer and moules et frites?
Catastrophic!


21 Jun 2010, 5:36PM

Also this will really screw with future German invasion plans
*
*
necroflange necroflange

21 Jun 2010, 5:51PM

A good argument against Flemish separation is becoming known as 'The Flems'.
*
*
Brusselsexpats Brusselsexpats

21 Jun 2010, 5:58PM

Let's see if the new regime gets the economy right first. If they don't the Belgians will vote with their wallets and hand the mandate back to the usual suspects - separatism be blowed.

I'm taking bets with myself on how long the new government will last.

De lezersreactie die niet op de BUB-website werd geciteerd!

Rustigjongens
21 Jun 2010, 8:47PM
I want to share some information on Belgium which the author has ignored:

In 2006, the Université Catholique de Louvain, the country's largest French-speaking university, published a report with the introduction (here translated): "This issue of Regards économiques is devoted to the demand for knowledge of languages in Belgium and in its three regions (Brussels, Flanders, Wallonia). The surveys show that Flanders is clearly more multilingual, which is without doubt a well known fact, but the difference is considerable : whereas 59% and 53% of the Flemings know French or English respectively, only 19% and 17% of the Walloons know Dutch or English. The measures advocated by the Marshall Plan go towards the proper directiAlthough the use of languages by the authorities is determined, as well as the use of languages by the administration and the army, the courts, and in the field of education and businesses, the constitutional freedom of language remains absolutely intact for instance in the living room and at the press shop.

freedom of languages and linguistic coercion

In this field, at present, there are still tensions concerning Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde and about the fact that municipalities with language facilities in the French-speaking language area very often, if not mostly, do not respect the language freedom of their Dutch-speaking inhabitants

The author is trying to turn the demands of the Flemish majority (60% - 40%) into some form of nationalist uprising, this is dishonest and easy to disprove as shown above, where it is in fact the active discrimination against Dutch speakers in the French speaking areas of Belgium which is causing political tension.

As for the author claiming that the Flemish are flocking to a nationalist coalition what about the Francophone political coalition?.

The New Flemish Alliance, led by Bart De Wever, emerged as the plurality party with 27 seats, just one more than the francophone Socialist Party, led by Elio Di Rupo, which was the largest party in the Wallonia region and Brussels.

Articles such as the one penned by De Schaepdrijver are dishonest, and such articles do not reflect well on the Guardian by allowing such distorted claims to be published in what is supposed to be a liberal newspaper.

Quote :

If Flemings stop bailing out Walloons, why would they rush to assist Greeks?

Omdat daar een einde aan komt. Iedere lidstat bepaalt in overleg met anderen hoeveel ze ophoesten, en wat de voorwaarden zijn die daaraan gebonden zijn. Transparantie troef !
Wat gebeurt er nu met dat geld ? We kunnen he niet controleren laat staan bijsturen.

De Transfers naar Wallonië helpen hen niet structureel en ze zijn niet transparant.
Daarom moet aan die transfers een halt toegeroepen worden, maar geen halt aan solidariteit.

De Schaepdrijver is één van de beste historici van België. Ze doceert sedert een aantal jaren in de VSA. Het is goed dat ze een unitaristische tegenstem laat klinken.

Let op de mooie nuances in haar tekst: "the northern exurbs of Brussels, which are technically Flemish territory".

Brilliant.

Noot: Exurb = a region or settlement that lies outside a city and usually beyond its suburbs and that often is inhabited chiefly by well-to-do families

VikingMaekel wrote:

De Transfers naar Wallonië helpen hen niet structureel en ze zijn niet transparant.
Daarom moet aan die transfers een halt toegeroepen worden, maar geen halt aan solidariteit.

Solidariteit houdt ipso facto transfers in.

Wat is niet transparant? Alle cijfers zijn bekend. Uw gissingen zijn voor uw rekening en uw wil om de realiteit te verdoezelen ook. Kent u overigens de exacte transfers naar Limburg of West-Vlaanderen? Nee, en het interesseert u ook niet want u bent een taalnationalist.

Denkt u dat uw nationalistisch rookgordijn nog lang kan stand houden? Denkt u echt dat de Belgen zo dom zijn?

De mening van die "historica" is niet meer waard dan de mening van de bakker uit mijn straat.

Belgica wrote:

Let op de mooie nuances in haar tekst: "the northern exurbs of Brussels, which are technically Flemish territory".

Brilliant.

Noot: Exurb = a region or settlement that lies outside a city and usually beyond its suburbs and that often is inhabited chiefly by well-to-do families

Briljant, zo vinden de taalracisten die geen Nederlands WILLEN kennen uiteraard die formulering. Burgers die de democratisch tot stand gekomen wetten en en de Belgische grondwet respecteren vinden die term misleidend. En in een publicatie van een "historica" is de term gewoon interllectueel oneerlijk.

Van historici mag je eisen dat ze een historisch geg roeide situatie beschrijven en verduidelijken, niet dat ze uit politieke overwegingen een constitutionele situatie verdoegzelen.

Het staat mevrouw De Schaepdrijver uiteraard vrij aan politiek te doen, maar het getuigt van gebrek aan intellectueel niveau zich daarbij te beroepen op haar titel van "historica, terwijl ze zich opstelt als een belgicistische "hysterica".

Belgica wrote:

VikingMaekel wrote:

De Transfers naar Wallonië helpen hen niet structureel en ze zijn niet transparant.
Daarom moet aan die transfers een halt toegeroepen worden, maar geen halt aan solidariteit.

Solidariteit houdt ipso facto transfers in.

Wat is niet transparant? Alle cijfers zijn bekend. Uw gissingen zijn voor uw rekening en uw wil om de realiteit te verdoezelen ook. Kent u overigens de exacte transfers naar Limburg of West-Vlaanderen? Nee, en het interesseert u ook niet want u bent een taalnationalist.

Denkt u dat uw nationalistisch rookgordijn nog lang kan stand houden? Denkt u echt dat de Belgen zo dom zijn?

Alle cijfers zijn bekend? Komaan zeg. Ze zijn allesbehalve transparant en zelfs niet eens volledig gekend.

Denkt u dat uw dictotariale belgicistische attitude werkelijk de oplossing is? Bent u echt zo hardhorig voor wat er onder de Vlamingen leeft? Of blijft u liever in uw Brusselse ivoren toren?

Qua hysterich gedrag moeten de flaminganten zeker niet onderdoen voor de unitaristen. Dat hebben we in de BHV-saga goed gezien. En dat zien we nog altijd, want die saga gaat maar verder. Een mooi staaltje van door de Vlaams-nationale media gecreëerde collectieve waanzin in de trand van Orson Wells of George Orwell.