GroenLinks and the fall of the Labour Party: the rebirth of communism in the Netherlands
The illusion of progressive idealism
For decades, the Dutch left has prided itself on moral superiority. Parties such as GroenLinks have presented themselves as compassionate defenders of equality, sustainability, and justice. Yet behind this image lies an ideology that has hardened into dogma. The merger of GroenLinks with the Labour Party (PvdA) in 2023 did not represent unity, but submission: the absorption of a once social-democratic movement into an increasingly radical, moralizing, and economically destructive agenda. What we are witnessing is not renewal, but regression , the slow rebirth of a form of communism cloaked in the language of climate and equality.
GroenLinks, under the leadership of Jesse Klaver and later the combined figurehead Frans Timmermans, has built its identity on slogans rather than results. While preaching compassion, it imposes restrictive measures on citizens and businesses, claiming it is for the planet or the poor. In practice, their policies raise taxes, burden the middle class, and drive energy poverty. Their vision of “green transition” often mirrors the central planning of old socialist regimes, where ideology comes before practicality, and where dissent is branded as immoral rather than debated.
From social democracy to ideological control
The PvdA once represented pragmatic left-wing politics, grounded in the welfare state and workers’ rights. It sought social balance within a market economy. GroenLinks, however, emerged from a fusion of radical left-wing and pacifist movements in the late 1980s , a mix of former communists, environmental activists, and Christian idealists. The DNA of the party has always been one of moral absolutism rather than practical governance.
By merging with the PvdA, GroenLinks has effectively consumed it. The social-democratic identity has vanished, replaced by an eco-socialist rhetoric that demonizes capitalism and glorifies state control. The combined party now advocates an economy where government dictates consumption, energy use, and even personal lifestyle choices , a hallmark of authoritarian social engineering, not democracy.
According to De Groene illusie (Kok), this merger was less about strengthening the left and more about centralizing control under a single ideological banner. The moral tone of the party has since grown harsher, its rhetoric more punitive. Those who disagree are no longer seen as opponents, but as obstacles to progress.
Economic damage and class betrayal
GroenLinks frequently claims to stand up for the working class. Yet its policies tell another story. Carbon taxes, costly sustainability programs, and heavy energy subsidies for the wealthy have made life increasingly expensive for ordinary citizens. The Dutch manufacturing and agricultural sectors have been suffocated by overregulation, pushing small farmers and businesses to the brink of bankruptcy. The supposed “green revolution” has become a mechanism of wealth transfer , from the middle class to the political elite.
Studies such as Klimaatbeleid en ongelijkheid (CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis) show that low- and middle-income households bear the highest burden of the green transition. Energy bills have risen sharply, while public transport and housing remain unaffordable. GroenLinks responds not with humility, but with new regulations and symbolic gestures, such as bans on domestic flights or mandatory electric heating systems, that primarily hurt those who cannot afford alternatives.
In their crusade against “inequality,” GroenLinks leaders have created a technocratic hierarchy in which only the politically aligned thrive. Subsidized NGOs, green consultancy firms, and EU-funded projects have become the new aristocracy of the Dutch left , all financed by the taxpayers they claim to protect.
The corruption of moral politics
The moral façade of GroenLinks has also concealed several scandals. Municipal mismanagement, failed climate projects, and questionable NGO partnerships reveal a pattern of negligence and opportunism. For example, the Groene Investeringsfonds in Amsterdam, managed under a GroenLinks-led coalition, lost millions in failed “sustainable startups” that never produced results. The public money vanished, but no one was held accountable.
In De klimaatelite (Wouter van Dieren), the author describes how green policy has become a profitable industry for consultants and politicians rather than a tool for ecological improvement. This is emblematic of GroenLinks’ broader hypocrisy: moral posturing as a cover for incompetence and self-enrichment.
Meanwhile, the party’s stance on migration and globalism demonstrates the same disconnect from reality. GroenLinks supports open borders and unlimited asylum reception, yet offers no practical solutions for housing shortages or integration failures. Cities governed by GroenLinks, such as Amsterdam and Nijmegen, face severe homelessness, crime, and unaffordable housing , all while the party continues to push for more immigration in the name of “solidarity.”
Communitarian control and loss of freedom
One of the most dangerous aspects of GroenLinks ideology is its tendency toward control. In the name of climate and equality, it promotes surveillance-like policies and behavioral regulation. Energy usage tracking, emissions limits, and even restrictions on travel are framed as moral imperatives. Citizens are encouraged to “do their part” through digital monitoring systems , a concept disturbingly close to China’s social credit model.
The ideological core of this movement is not liberal progressivism but communitarian collectivism: the belief that the state knows better than the individual. The language has changed, but the essence remains the same as in the 20th-century socialist experiments that devastated economies and silenced dissent.
In Het klimaatkartel (Hans Labohm), this pattern is described as the creation of a “moral monopoly,” where debate is replaced by virtue-signaling and scientific complexity is reduced to propaganda. This is evident in how GroenLinks frames opposition: critics are labeled “climate deniers,” “racists,” or “reactionaries.” Such moral policing erodes democracy, making ideological conformity a condition for participation in public life.
The EU connection and supranational ambitions
GroenLinks’ agenda is deeply intertwined with the European Union’s centralizing ambitions. Figures like Frans Timmermans, now the symbolic leader of the GroenLinks-PvdA merger, have long sought to expand EU influence under the pretext of climate policy. The European Green Deal, which Timmermans helped design, represents a supranational framework of control over national economies, justified by environmental urgency.
In practice, it means that Dutch policy is increasingly dictated from Brussels rather than The Hague. Farmers, homeowners, and small businesses are forced to comply with EU regulations that have little to do with local reality. As The Great Green Technocracy (Rupert Darwall) notes, this is not democracy but governance by bureaucracy , a system in which elected governments merely implement pre-decided plans.
GroenLinks celebrates this loss of sovereignty as progress. But for citizens, it means less control, higher costs, and diminishing national self-determination. The irony is that a party claiming to fight for freedom and justice now actively dismantles both.
Environmental idealism without results
Despite all its rhetoric, GroenLinks has achieved little measurable environmental progress. The Netherlands remains heavily dependent on imported energy, while CO₂ targets continue to be missed.
Reports such as Energie en realiteit (Marcel Crok) show that Dutch climate policy often has negligible global impact but massive domestic cost. The obsession with symbolic gestures , wind turbines, electric vehicles, and urban bans , substitutes genuine innovation with moral exhibitionism. Meanwhile, natural landscapes are covered with wind parks and solar fields that damage biodiversity, contradicting the very ideals they claim to uphold.
GroenLinks treats these failures not as a reason for reflection but as justification for more radical intervention. Every problem becomes an excuse for deeper state intrusion. This feedback loop of failure and control mirrors the logic of historical communist regimes: when the plan fails, the answer is always more planning.
The collapse of credibility
GroenLinks once drew young voters through its message of hope and authenticity. Today, it increasingly resembles a sect of moral bureaucrats, preaching sacrifice while living comfortably off the system they criticize. Its leaders talk of “saving the planet,” yet travel by private jets to climate summits. They call for equality, but represent an elite urban culture disconnected from rural and working-class realities.
The merger with the PvdA may have given GroenLinks access to more institutional power, but it has destroyed what remained of the left’s credibility. Ordinary citizens no longer see idealism but hypocrisy. The moral aura has turned into arrogance, the movement into machinery.
According to Links in crisis (Rik Smits), the left’s downfall lies in its loss of connection to real life. By abandoning workers, farmers, and entrepreneurs in favor of ideological purity, it has created a political vacuum that extremist populism eagerly fills. GroenLinks is not a counterbalance to that danger, but one of its causes.
A costly utopia
The Netherlands is now paying for the utopian dreams of GroenLinks. Energy poverty, housing shortages, agricultural decline, and bureaucratic expansion are the real outcomes of their policies.
This is not the progressive future the Dutch were promised. It is the slow, technocratic reincarnation of communist ideals , collectivism disguised as compassion, control presented as morality. The rebirth of radical communism is not a revolution of the poor against the rich, but of bureaucrats against citizens.
