The Dutch parliament on migration: A state of emotion? “Sometimes, I find it frightening to realize that Mr. Wilders and I have something in common. It seems, namely, that both his and my ancestors came from Indonesia. I find it impressive that someone, being a product of migration himself, can speak against migration like this.” Photo: Jesse Klaver and Geert Wilders Quotation: Jesse Klaver Source: ANP 2 Photo: Jesse Klaver and Geert Wilders Quotation: Jesse Klaver Source: ANP The Dutch parliament on migration: A state of emotion? Written by Tanja Runhaar Student number: 10657819 Supervisor: Rosa Sanchez Salgado Second reader: Franca van Hooren Word count: 19.400 July 2017 This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Master of Science (MSc) in Political Science: Public Policy and Governance University of Amsterdam 3 4 PREFACE “The roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet”, Aristotle said. In front of you lies my master thesis, and I can only hope that you will find it sweet. What I can say for sure, however, is that there would have been no growth without nutrition. First and foremost, I want to thank Rosa, for giving me the opportunity to graduate on this complex, but highly relevant topic, and supervising me along the way. Furthermore, I want to thank Adger van Helden, Mona Keijzer, Jan-Pieter Dees and all other people at CDA for answering my questions – including the political incorrect ones – with openness and honesty. Of course, my parents and five older brothers cannot be left out. Not only because they are exquisite examples of how to debate passionately, but more importantly, because they taught me the value of integrity, social responsibility, and gratitude. And above all, because they are my indispensable support. In front of you lies my master thesis, I hope you find it sweet. 5 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………. 9 Part I: Literature overview…………………………………………………………………10 1.1 Emotions in politics………………………………………………………………………11 1.2 Emotions in deliberation………………………………………………………………….13 1.3 Emotions in parliamentary debates……………………………………………………….16 1.4 Emotions in the Dutch parliament………………………………………………………..18 Part II: Theoretical framework ‘duality of emotion’……………………………………..20 2.1 Research questions………………………………………………………………………..21 2.2 Methodology……………………………………………………………………………...23 Part III: Analysis…………………………………………………………………………….25 3.1 Emotional discourse and emotion markers……………………………………………….26 3.2 Type of debate and type of speaker………………………………………………………36 3.3 Emotional awareness and emotion management…………………………………………43 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………47 Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………….49 References……………………………………………………………………………………50 Annex I: Debates…………………………………………………………………………….56 Annex II: Speakers…………………………………………………………………………..57 7 8 INTRODUCTION In the Dutch general elections of March 2017, ‘good’ populism beats ‘bad’ populism. (The Guardian 2017). Months later, however, The Netherlands still does not have a government. A main reason why this is taking so long, is that the largest political parties, who are ought to form a new government, were not able to reach an agreement on migration policies (NRC 2017). This lack of agreement is not surprising, and certainly nothing new. In 2013, an increasing number of migrants crossed the Mediterranean Sea towards the European Union. Most of them were refugees coming from war zones in the Middle East and Africa. Especially from April 2015 onwards, the term ‘crisis’ was widely used, as the European Union (EU) struggled to cope with the great amount of asylum applications and illegal border crossings. In the wake of failed referendums, the Brexit and poor crisis management, the European migration crisis is still a great challenge to the legitimacy and credibility of EU institutions. These challenges at the European level reflect the challenges faced at the national and sub-national level – also in The Netherlands. In the years prior to the Dutch general elections in March 2017, the many debates on migration particularly showed division, fuelled by public debate (NOS 2015). The public debate on migration clearly involves intense emotions. But is the role of emotions in parliamentary debates just as straightforward? The question, however, is not whether emotions play a role in these debates. Research has proven that reason and emotion complement one another (Damasio 1999); that there is always emotion where there is reason. In fact, recent psychiatric and neurological research has refuted the opposition between reason and emotion (Damasio 1999; Solomon 2007). Thus, it seems obvious that emotions play a role in parliamentary debates too. The real question is: are they expressed in that area, and if so, which ones, how, by whom? How are they perceived? What is the emotions’ influence? And how far does that influence reach (Hogget & Thompson 2012; Marcus 2000)? Is the ‘animosity’ between Jesse Klaver and Geert Wilders reflected by emotional dynamics in the debate? Formal political deliberation is often perceived as a pragmatic and technocratic process in which rational discussion leads to best decision-making, and consequently, the role of emotions is often not empirically analysed (Durnova 2015: 224). And if acknowledged, they are often considered obstacles. “Images and sentiments have become much more important [than they were in the past]”, one of the recent informants of the Dutch cabinet, Tjeenk Willink, stated. “They sometimes threaten to conceal the facts and values we share. In cabinet configurations, facts and values must prevail. Otherwise, there will be no sound policy or homogenous coalition” (De Correspondent 2017). Indeed, “it is usually considered that the 9 power of social actors is derived from their self-control in defining goals, and executing them according to values and against any distracting impulse and emotion” (Barbalet 2002). In my thesis, I consider emotions, in line with recent literature, an integral part of the process of reasoning. The purpose of my thesis is to contribute to a better understanding of the role of emotions in public policy-making, through the analysis of that role in Dutch parliamentary debates – particularly on the topic of migration. This understanding is relevant, not only for scientific ends, but also for societal ends. Migration is arguably the most hotly debated topic of recent years, and research shows that political appeal to emotions influences the public (Brader 2005). Hence, my main research question will be: What is the role of emotions in Dutch parliamentary debates on the topic of migration? This question includes others: which emotions are expressed, how, by whom, how are they perceived, and what is their influence? I endeavour to answer these questions by the analysis of 19 debates, and two in- depth interviews. This thesis consists, broadly speaking, of three parts. The first part is a literature overview, divided into four sections, moving from generalistic to more specific literature. I will start with the study of emotions in politics and then going into the role of emotions in deliberation. This will be followed by a section in which I discuss parliamentary debates as a form of deliberation. I end the first chapter with an overview of the role emotions have played in the recent history of the Dutch parliament. The second part is the theoretical framework, in which I will discuss how my analysis is placed within the previously discussed research context, which research questions I aim to answer, and which methodology I will be using to answer them. The third part is the analysis itself, divided into three sections, or chapters. Here, I will start with a general discussion on which emotions I found in my research, and how they were displayed. After that, in the second chapter, I go into the type of debate and the of speaker as factors of influence on the displayed emotions. The third chapter will be less empirical and more reflective, discussing emotional awareness and emotion management of parliamentarians, largely based on the two in-depth interviews. Finally, I will work towards a conclusion and discussion, placing my research in the wider context of recent literature. PART I: LITERATURE OVERVIEW In this literature overview, I will discuss what is already known about the topic of emotions in politics, and with that describe the academic context in which my research can be placed. This part is divided into four sections, moving from generalistic to more specific characteristics of 10 the topic. First, I am going into the study of emotions in politics, mostly within the research field of political psychology, a relatively new field of research. Second, I will discuss the role of emotions in deliberation and how parliamentary debates can be seen as a form of deliberation. Then I continue with the role of emotions in parliamentary debates, to what extent parliamentary discourse reflects emotions and how far-reaching the effects of this reflection can be. Also in this section, I will discuss a very closely related study on the role of emotions in parliamentary debates on a European level of analysis. The fourth section, lastly, aims to provide insight in the history of the Dutch parliament, and the development of how and to which extent emotions play a role in parliamentary debates. 1.1 Emotions in politics In the history of political science, relatively little research has been done on the role of emotions in politics. Instead, political science was dominated