Political Party Membership

[miniboes]

I am currently studying public administration, which means the likelihood that I end up at some political function is very high. I have often been told it is useful to join a party, and I'm sure it is, but I have two problems with this:

a) I am not sure which party I most identify with; the Party for The Animals (animal liberation, left-wing, environmentalist) or GreenLeft (green left-wing liberalism). Also wants to abolish animal agriculture). The parties are actually incredibly similar (some journalists say they might as well merge), and the only reason I prefer GreenLeft is because of their charismatic leader.
Info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GreenLeft , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_the_Animals

b) My views have changed radically in the last few years. Although I think I generally change my mind for the better, I don't want to be stuck a leftist environmentalist for the rest of my life if I decide that's not the best path.

On the other hand, I figure being a member of a party will help with getting internships and jobs in the future.
My brother actually suggested I become a member of every single party I remotely agree with, justifying by saying that I am still young and do not want to limit myself to one particular party or ideology yet. I'm not going to do that, though, because that'd be very expensive. I'd rather have an audible subscription than a membership of the liberal party.

Thoughts? Advice? I'd love to hear it.

[Volenta]

a) I am not sure which party I most identify with; the Party for The Animals (animal liberation, left-wing, environmentalist) or GreenLeft (green left-wing liberalism). Also wants to abolish animal agriculture). The parties are actually incredibly similar (some journalists say they might as well merge), and the only reason I prefer GreenLeft is because of their charismatic leader.
Info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GreenLeft , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_the_Animals

That's a question you have to figure out by yourself.

I do suggest you take a look in how the parties actually vote in the parliament, since that's something where parties do differ a lot in my opinion. One is way more pragmatic and willing to give in then the other, and whether you think that's better or not is up to you. I also think that the Party for The Animals is more reasoning from a philosophical foundation—which is noticeable if you listen to (references in) their speeches—where GreenLeft is more into the political game. It has been noticed that Party for The Animals is the only party in the Dutch parliament to have a completely alternative vision of life. Those are some differences.

Choosing a party just because of it's, in this case charismatic, leader (which will be replaced someday) is not wise. It should be about the actual content and the methods they use.

b) My views have changed radically in the last few years. Although I think I generally change my mind for the better, I don't want to be stuck a leftist environmentalist for the rest of my life if I decide that's not the best path.

You can always switch when you feel disconnected. It's not like a religion you can't get out of.

On the other hand, I figure being a member of a party will help with getting internships and jobs in the future.
My brother actually suggested I become a member of every single party I remotely agree with, justifying by saying that I am still young and do not want to limit myself to one particular party or ideology yet. I'm not going to do that, though, because that'd be very expensive. I'd rather have an audible subscription than a membership of the liberal party.

I think being a member of a political party is a good idea anyway. Not a lot of people today are member, which is pretty troublesome (and I confess that I'm also not a member). Lots if not most of the population is completely disconnected with politics nowadays.

[brimstoneSalad]

I missed this thread. That's pretty interesting; how to they break down in support of nuclear power, and addressing the energy aspects of global warming?

[miniboes]

I missed this thread. That's pretty interesting; how to they break down in support of nuclear power, and addressing the energy aspects of global warming?

I have since become a member of the party for the animals. Every single political party in the Netherlands is disappointing in some regard when it comes to global warming. Leftist parties are anti-nuclear and right-wing parties don't care. Below are the positions of some of the parties:

Party For The Animals (PvdD):
"The Party for the Animals rejects nuclear energy. Nuclear power plants come with unnecessary risks and dangerous waste. New nuclear power plants will produce polluting energy for at least 40 years and moreover frustrate the transition to sustainable energy for all those years. Nuclear energy is also dependent on finite materials en is therefore not a good alternative for fossil energy sources. Nuclear energy is not necessary to power the lights of the Netherlands. The Party for the Animals finds that a transition to real sustainable energy, based on wind- and solar energy is long due."

GreenLeft (GL):
"GreenLeft opposes nuclear energy. Accidents with nuclear power plants have enormous consequences. Moreover, nuclear energy results in radioactive waste. Nuclear energy also takes sustainable energy off the market; every euro that we spend on nuclear energy cannot be invested in wind-, solar- or geothermal energy. And that's a waste because while the wind keeps blowing and the sun keeps shining, uranium inevitably runs out."

Labour Party (PvdA):
"The Labour Party does not deem nuclear energy a long term solution. Nuclear energy results in safety risks. It is true that nuclear power plants are way cleaner than coal plants for example, but nuclear energy is not complete Co2-free and more importantly, it results in a waste problem for the coming hundred thousands of years. Besides that there are safety- and proliferation issues."

Democrats 66 (D66):
"D66 chooses renewable energy sources like solar and wind."

Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA)
In 2020 14 percent of energy has to be produced sustainably. In time coal- and nuclear power plants will no long be needed. We think it has to be easier for companies to produce, store and trade sustainable energy. The government should therefore provide better procedures and, if possible, fewer rules.

People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD)
"A serious environment policy can only be accomplished worldwide. The Netherlands has to abide by European environment norms, but we do not want to come up with any additional rules. We do not strive to be the best kid in class if the environment does not improve and the Netherlands only gets poorer.

Mark Rutte, our Prime Minister, said: "And of course a car that drives fast pollutes less per definition because it's on the road shorter."'

Party for the Freedom (PVV):
"Sustainable is another word for expensive."

It is not particularly surprising that the Netherlands is, after 16 years of the VVD and PvdA/CDA being in power, the second to worst kid in Europe.

[brimstoneSalad]

I have since become a member of the party for the animals. Every single political party in the Netherlands is disappointing in some regard when it comes to global warming. Leftist parties are anti-nuclear and right-wing parties don't care. Below are the positions of some of the parties:

That's really disappointing. Maybe you can help change that?
Like distribute Pandora's Promise (maybe translate and subtitle it?) to friends you make in the party?

Mark Rutte, our Prime Minister, said: "And of course a car that drives fast pollutes less per definition because it's on the road shorter."'

That's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
So basically Trump looks pretty good by comparison?

[miniboes]

I have since become a member of the party for the animals. Every single political party in the Netherlands is disappointing in some regard when it comes to global warming. Leftist parties are anti-nuclear and right-wing parties don't care. Below are the positions of some of the parties:

That's really disappointing. Maybe you can help change that?

I will certainly try.

Like distribute Pandora's Promise (maybe translate and subtitle it?) to friends you make in the party?

I haven't seen it yet, but I might very well do so. Party for the Animals people are probably among the more open-minded.

Mark Rutte, our Prime Minister, said: "And of course a car that drives fast pollutes less per definition because it's on the road shorter."'

That's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
So basically Trump looks pretty good by comparison?

Yep. it makes me ashamed to have him be the face of our nation.

But no, I'd not want Trump anywhere prime-ministership. Note that the prime minister is the first among equals, a chairman of a council rather than the embodiment of the executive power. I can see Trump being amazing at being PM, but also be a complete disaster. I do not want to gamble with my country.

Rutte does the job adequately I suppose. He's uninspired above all. If the council of ministers was entirely composed green politicians except Rutte, and the green parties had a majority in parliament, Rutte could do nothing to prevent green policies from being enacted. I think he would be humble and centrist enough to cooperate.

[miniboes]

Unfortunately, the Party for the Animals is so small that it's incredibly hard for me to get politically active within it. I have therefore joined the significantly larger GreenLeft. I think I want to apply for one of the national commissions of the youth group of the party. The commissions are:
- Healthcare
- Integration & emancipation (probably includes a lot of regressives)
- Education
- Law & Justice
- Economy & Finance (includes discussion about Piketty, base income, etc.)
- Energy & Raw Materials
- Environment & Food
- International (Includes European Union, migrant crisis, organizes debates)

I think the best paths for me would be energy & mateirals (to try to steer the party towards a less dogmatic, more factual and pronuclear direction) or environment &food (to make sure there is a sufficient emphasis on the reduction of animal product consumption). Sitting in one (or both?) of these commissions increases my chances significantly to be appointed to a position within the party of that expertise. Am I right to expect these paths to have the highest expected impact?

[brimstoneSalad]

It seems so. If you join both, can you quit one to focus more on the other if you find one is less productive?