{"id":69506,"date":"2017-04-14T09:19:30","date_gmt":"2017-04-14T07:19:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/?p=69506\/"},"modified":"2026-02-10T17:06:55","modified_gmt":"2026-02-10T16:06:55","slug":"onze-landverrader-des-vaderlands-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2017\/04\/14\/onze-landverrader-des-vaderlands-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Our National Thinker Traitor"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tRonald van den Heerik<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>

Deep down I hope to be a different person by the time I have completed this exercise,\u201d writes Marli Huijer, a professor of public philosophy holding an endowed chair at EUR, in her latest book, entitled (in translation) Long Live Public Philosophy! A National Thinker\u2019s Experiences<\/em>. In this book she describes her view on public philosophy, a type of philosophy which seeks to make it accessible to as many people as possible. By her own account, she has definitely become a different person now that she has almost completed her term as the National Thinker.<\/p>\n

In the last two years she has given over one hundred lectures, and has been invited everywhere (including the Palace on Dam Square) to ponder the state of things in the Netherlands. On 21 April she will be succeeded as National Thinker by Ren\u00e9 ten Bos, a Professor of Philosophy at Nijmegen Radboud University.<\/p>\n

'I wish to keep talking'<\/h3>

Huijer has only just begun to realise what it means to be the National Thinker. \u201cThe original title of my new book was Philosopher without a Nation. I liked how provocative it sounded,\u201d she says. \u201cIt was not until I wrote the book that I discovered how important the Dutch context is to a public philosopher. The book turned into a plea for philosophers to be truly involved in the political and social debates that are taking place here.\u201d<\/p>\n

Looking back on her term as the National Thinker, Huijer says she wanted to \u2018think in between the lines\u2019: \u201cI want to hear and use the many voices of the\u00a0Dutch people.\u201d This was not always easy. Especially when, in a manifesto, she argued in favour of an open-minded and pragmatic attitude to sheltering refugees. \u201cIf you read all the negative things people say about you, you run the risk of becoming too fearful to talk. I don\u2019t want that. I wish to keep talking.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/figure>

Your new book reads like advice to any\nphilosopher who wishes to step outside\nthe ivory tower. Is that what you had in\nmind?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cPartially, yes. Books that dispense supposedly philosophical pearls of wisdom sell well. It is quite tempting to write such a book, but you run the risk of dumbing things down and presenting nothing but aphorisms. That\u2019s not what philosophy is about. I actually hope that public philosophers will continue to seek a connection with academic philosophy, so as to ensure that the subject is not dumbed down.\u201d<\/p>\n

What could academic philosophers\nlearn from public philosophers?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cWhat the great societal issues of the age are. Where philosophy is required. It is useful if such questions make their way to academia somehow. We live in a highly secularised country with a great need for in-depth knowledge and meaning.\u201d<\/p>\n

Where is this need for in-depth knowledge\nand meaning coming from?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cIn a world where there are fewer and fewer religious authorities telling us what to do, we are more and more dependent on the very democratic Dutch way of making decisions. But what are the various points of view involved in these decisions? Philosophy is very useful in this regard. It is always on the look-out for other points of view.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t
\n\t\t\u2018We live in a highly secularised country with a great need for in-depth knowledge and meaning\u2019\n\t<\/blockquote>\n\n\t<\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

Are you saying that the National Thinker\nis a new kind of authority?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cHe or she is mainly someone who is given two years to encourage thoughtful consideration, increase people\u2019s love of philosophy and ensure that there is a public debate, preferably a high-quality one.\u201d<\/p>\n

The title \u201cNational Thinker\u201d suggests\nthat you consider things on behalf of the\nentire nation.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cYes, isn\u2019t that wonderfully ironic? Of course there is not a single philosopher who can consider things on behalf of \u2018the nation\u2019. It is a title, but\u00a0one which is sometimes taken very seriously indeed by the public, despite the irony. Every time you speak your mind, your inbox will be full of e-mails by livid people who ask where the hell you get off thinking such things, being the National Thinker and all that.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cAs the National Thinker, you can\u2019t just present your own point of view. I found that a hard position to be in, because it is very hard to turn off your own ideas. The National Thinker must take into account the wide range of opinions and ideas held by Dutch people. To that end, you must be willing to look at things from a less popular perspective, and to think in terms of what unites us.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/figure>

There was a moment when you did find\nit necessary to speak your mind. A year\nago, you and Martin van Hees published\na manifesto in Trouw, calling for a pragmatic\napproach to refugees. The manifesto\nwas supported by nearly two hundred\nprofessors, philosophers, writers\nand artists. Why did you feel the need to\nwrite that manifesto?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cAt the time I was talking to a lot of people who felt we, philosophers, had to say something about the way in which we were treating refugees. Several European countries closed their borders, thus preventing Syrian refugees from penetrating further into Europe. This resulted in the deal between the EU and Turkey, which many philosophers were feeling uncomfortable with. You see, philosophy is pervaded with cosmopolitanism. As Diogenes said ages ago, useful ideas can be found all over the world.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t
\n\t\t\u2018The threats were such that I actually went to the police\u2019\n\t<\/blockquote>\n\n\t<\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

What were you hoping to achieve with\nthe manifesto?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cIt was a plea for an open-minded attitude and a pragmatic approach to refugees. On a global level, the percentage of people that moves to another country is about 3 percent. Whenever there is a famine or war, that number will rise. And these numbers can be accommodated. But after the 1990s we closed the asylum seekers\u2019 centres we had established for refugees from the former Yugoslavia. As a result, we were not prepared for sheltering so many people.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe public unrest was mainly caused by the fact that no European leader had prepared for the arrival of such large numbers of refugees. Now Erdogan keeps threatening to open the borders. We must prepare for that eventuality. If not, there will definitely be great social unrest again.\u201d<\/p>\n

Three days after the publication of the\nmanifesto, your son rang you and said,\n\u201cI\u2019m super proud of you, Mum. Did you\nhave any idea, though, of the kind of reactions you were going to get?\u201d What\nkind of reactions were they?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cThankfully, I received a lot of positive comments, but I also received a lot of angry e-mails saying I was a traitor.\u201d She says with a smile, \u201cNot the National Thinker, but the National Traitor.\u201d Naturally, it\u2019s no fun hearing people hurl abusive language at you. As long as there are no threats, I think it\u2019s part of the game. But when\u00a0all the abuse turns threatening, you will start to feel uneasy. There was a moment when I made a habit of checking out the street before leaving the house. The threats were such that I actually went to the police. But identifying the person who is threatening you is a huge hassle. In addition, you run the risk of giving someone the very attention he craves. So in the end I decided not to press charges.\u201d<\/p>\n

How did you respond to the threats?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cInitially, I I felt afraid. I asked the people around me to keep an eye out for people, so that I would know if I needed to protect myself. But I was originally trained to be a doctor, so I\u2019m a pragmatic kind of person. I\u2019m fully aware that my life can end just like that. As a result, I found myself thinking in that situation: if anyone does anything to me, I\u2019ll take it as it comes.\u201d<\/p>\n

That is very pragmatic indeed.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cI think that\u2019s because my parents died at a relatively young age, when I was 35. So I got accustomed to the idea that I would be the next generation to die.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>

Did you expect that speaking your mind\ncould have such a result?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cI knew it is getting more and more common for people to threaten others on line. I armed myself by not reading Twitter or the comments left under online newspaper articles. If you read all the negative things people say about you, you run the risk of becoming too fearful to talk. I don\u2019t want that. I wish to keep talking.\u201d<\/p>\n

You invited several people who had written\nangry letters to you about the manifesto\nto come and talk to you. Why did\nthat matter so much to you?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cWhen you are sitting opposite someone, it is much harder to say, \u2018I\u2019m going to bash your head in.\u2019 Physical presence means there are corrective mechanisms in place that force you to listen to the other person and to present them with well-structured arguments. I wanted to have a conversation about refugees that actually involved valid arguments.\u201d<\/p>\n

Did you manage to do that?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cYes. One participant was a bit of a complicated case. She still sends me angry e-mails. But the participants were infinitely more\u00a0willing to arrive at a shared position than I had expected. In the end, everyone admitted that something had to be done with the refugees. That you can\u2019t just send them back to a war zone or allow them to drown in the Mediterranean.\u201d<\/p>\n

Do you understand the anger of the\nlady who is still sending you e-mails a\nlittle better now?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cThat\u2019s a hard one. For instance, she will send me images of a mosque where imams are saying seriously homophobic things. In such cases, I cannot but reply, \u2018This is a terrible thing to see, and I think it\u2019s obvious that this subject must be raised.\u2019 But this does not mean that every Muslim is dangerous or that we must close our borders to all people with a Muslim background.<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t
\n\t\tShe will send me images of a mosque where imams are saying seriously homophobic things\u2019\n\t<\/blockquote>\n\n\t<\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

\u201cIn a way, it\u2019s a good thing that I have someone who keeps on nagging like that. Because her e-mails keep popping up in my inbox, I realise that this really is an issue in the Netherlands. This anger forces me to keep reflecting on my own way of thinking. What does it mean to my theory that a person like that is right? That\u2019s why I love it when, at the end of a lecture, an angry person will come and see me.\u201d<\/p>\n

Really? Do explain.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cAt the end of a debate, an irate man once came to see me. He worked in a disadvantaged neighbourhood here in Rotterdam and said, \u2018In my school class, I can see the failure of our multi-cultural society at work every single day.\u2019 Unfortunately, he was too angry to engage in a real conversation, but reactions like that remind me that there is a serious problem in this society.<\/p>\n

\u201cOn that same evening, a lady told me she had welcomed a refugee into her home in the 1990s. Now that she is in need of some help herself, the refugee\u2019s family is supporting her. It also demonstrates the enormous contrast in our society. You will see this polarisation again and again when you speak out on a subject like refugees.\u201d<\/p>\n

Is this polarisation the recurrent theme\nof the last two years?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cI had only just been appointed the National Thinker when the large numbers of refugees started making their way to Europe. It caused a divide in society. It is inherent in philosophy that you try to consider views that make you feel very uneasy.\u201d<\/p>\n\t

\n\t\t

\" Curriculum Vitae
\n<\/strong>Marli Huijer, 62, is a professor of public philosophy at the Faculty of Philosophy holding an endowed chair, as well as a leader of a philosophy research group at The Hague University of Applied Sciences. In the 1980s she read medicine in Amsterdam and worked as a drug addiction doctor. Later she read philosophy and was awarded a doctoral degree for a thesis on Michel Foucault\u2019s work. Huijer wrote several books on the impact organisation and technology have on our lives. She is a columnist for publications such as Filosofie Magazine and is a member of Trouw\u2019s Philosophical Team. Her book entitled Leve de Publieksfilosofie! Belevenissen van een Denker des Vaderlands was released on 6 April.<\/p>\n\n\t<\/div>\n\n\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

De redactie<\/h2>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t