AMAC Exclusive – By Shane Harris
In scenes reminiscent of the “freedom convoy” trucker protests in Canada earlier this year, in recent weeks, more than 30,000 farmers in the Netherlands have gathered on roadways in their tractors and farm equipment, effectively shutting down traffic across the country in response to stringent new government emissions policies. While recently-appointed Dutch minister for nature and nitrogen policy Christianne van der Wal has argued that the changes are necessary to fight “climate change,” that assertion has received pushback from ordinary Dutch citizens and climate experts on both sides of the political aisle – something which should be a warning sign to liberals eager to implement similar policies elsewhere in the West.
The farmer protests began in earnest in late June after van der Wal announced plans to cut nitrogen and ammonia emissions in half by 2030, ostensibly to protect nature preserves in the country and meet environmental standards set by the European Union. Fertilizers used in crop production and animal waste are by far the largest sources of nitrogen and ammonia emissions in the country, putting Dutch farmers squarely in the crosshairs of the new policy.
Under the new government plans, livestock herds in the country would have to be reduced by more than 30% in the next eight years, while farmers would be able to use only a fraction of the fertilizer they currently use on crops – inevitably leading to a dramatic decline in overall yields. According to one Dutch scientist, some farmers would have to reduce their emissions by up to 70%, meaning drastically lower production and thus lower revenue.
Many of the larger corporate-owned Dutch farms may be able to survive the increased costs imposed by these government demands, but smaller family farms – many of which have been passed down generation to generation for hundreds of years – stand little chance of staying afloat. While calling the move an “unavoidable transition,” a spokesperson for the Dutch government admitted last week that “the honest message … is that not all farmers can continue their business.” Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte has also acknowledged that the plan would hit farmers particularly hard, calling the consequences “enormous” and “terrible.”
But that sympathy is likely of little comfort to Dutch farmers, or to the millions of other people in the Netherlands and around the world affected by the decision. Despite being half the size of Indiana, the Netherlands is the world’s second largest exporter of food behind the United States, meaning that a threatened global food crisis as a result of the war in Ukraine may be set to get even worse.
While the ruling government in The Hague – a coalition that includes the D66 party, which has pushed for more aggressive climate policy – has showed no hesitation in plowing ahead with the plan, even some on the left who normally align with the liberal climate change agenda have questioned if the new policies are really driven by scientific data. Wim de Vries, a professor at Wageningen University who has previously warned about imminent “planetary boundaries,” expressed doubt that the government’s plan was realistic, calling the timeline “very fast.” Michael Shellenberger, a self-described liberal, wrote in an op-ed for the New York Post that “It’s hard not to conclude that politics and green ideology, more than science and reason, are driving the government’s decision.” Even music star Mick Jagger – normally an ally to any liberal cause – gave the farmers a shout out during a recent concert in the Netherlands.
While the Netherlands does produce four times the European average of nitrogen, it does so on a much smaller amount of land – meaning that replacing agricultural production in the Netherlands with production elsewhere would likely be a net negative on the environment in terms of greenhouse gases. “It is not very rational to curb the Dutch agriculture if you realize that they have the highest production per acre in the world and therefore the environmental load per kilogram food is lower than elsewhere,” Simon Rozendaal, a Dutch journalist and chemist, told Fox News.
Nonetheless, many in the media have attempted to slander the Dutch farmers and any who support them as “far-right extremists” and “climate deniers,” with one Salon article saying that the movement had been “adopted” by the alt-right and “grown into something larger and uglier.” However, as people throughout Europe have increasingly voiced their support for the Dutch farmers, the most common response from societal elites and the media has been silence, with the protests receiving relatively little coverage from mainstream outlets given their potential to dramatically impact European politics and the global food supply.
All of this should be a warning to climate change alarmists elsewhere in the West – particularly in the United States – who have pushed for similarly draconian policies. If Democrats like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey – the sponsors of the “Green New Deal” – have their way, U.S. climate policy would be even more severe than it is set to be in the Netherlands. Although the Dutch policy sets a goal of reducing nitrogen and ammonia emissions by 50% by 2030, the Green New Deal demands “net zero” emissions in just 10 years – an even more unrealistic and potentially devastating goal. During the debate over Biden’s “Build Back Better” bill last year, Democrats and liberal activist groups also called for more emissions regulations on farmers and ranchers, something which may well invite a similar response in agriculture-heavy states to what is taking place right now in the Netherlands.
The political fallout from the left’s growing war on agriculture is also beginning to come into focus. Despite the fact that the “Farmer-Citizen Movement,” or BBB party, currently holds just one seat in the Dutch parliament, one recent poll found that, if elections were held today, BBB would win 20 seats – vaulting it over D66 and placing it in contention with the dominant VVD party for control of the government. Already, Democrats in the United States are likely to face major losses in November’s midterm elections due in large part to the disastrous effects of their war on American energy, also driven by radical climate ideology. Should they continue advocating for even more extreme environmental policies driven by ideology and not science, they, along with their liberal compatriots around the world, may soon find themselves driven from power entirely.
Shane Harris is a writer and political consultant from Southwest Ohio. You can follow him on Twitter @Shane_Harris_