‘Intruders threaten what we have’, it is recognisable rhetoric in Dutch politics today. And it does not just apply to migrants. Wolves, too, are portrayed by populists as intruders threatening our animals. An opinion piece by Ronald van Velzen (lecturer in history at ESHCC) appeared in the Volkskrant on 18 February, in which he writes that the debate on the wolf is not powered by facts, but by fear.
This article is an abridged and edited version of Ronald van Velzen's opinion piece
Fear of the ‘other’ increasingly forms the basis for policy, often without factual or scientific foundation. Research shows that citizens in the Netherlands are concerned about this new political climate. Therefore, debate from the underbelly is creating a harsh, polarised society. The wolf is now also a victim of this.
Looking at the figures, the damage caused by the wolf in the Netherlands is limited. In 2023, only 0.8 per cent of all sheep slaughtered in the Netherlands were due to wolves. In addition, fatal incidents between humans and wolves are scarce. Despite 15 thousand wolves living in Europe, zero fatal incidents were reported between 2002 and 2020.
Selectively
The emergence of a species that gets in the way of ‘us’ is approached selectively. When a wolf in Lower Saxony bit the pony of EU president Ursula von der Leyen to death, a year and a half later she called for a review of the wolf's protected status. This would make hunting the animal easier. So it does not matter that stray dogs in the forest do more damage to nature than the wolf and that goats and sheep die an equally gruesome death in the slaughterhouse. Killing animals is only a problem when it is a companion animal or an economically valuable animal.
Wolf and migrant: ‘threat’
Like migrants, the wolf is portrayed as a threat to an imaginary ‘Dutch’ landscape. Sheep are ‘ours’, the wolf is an intruder, is the credo. Not surprisingly, wolves are fought with the same polarising and xenophobic rhetoric. The imaginable fear among residents of areas where the wolf is spreading is further fuelled by politicians who conveniently capitalise on it: ‘They walk streets and squares, approach people, jump fences, threaten pets, and seize livestock (...) No more, the wolf has to go.’ This rhetoric is very similar to fear-mongering about migrants and is also reflected in proposed measures to keep the wolf out: ‘problem wolves’ should be eliminated and ‘wolf-free regions’ should be introduced.
Wolf lessons
The wolf reminds us that not everything is controllable, but the fear of the animal has deeper roots within Europe. Historically, in Christian traditions, the wolf was associated with chaos and evil, a legacy of pagan religions in which the wolf was instead revered. In European popular culture, it was long depicted as a bloodthirsty predator that disturbed order. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger called it Unheimlichkeit: the uneasy feeling that arises when we are confronted with something we cannot understand or control. And that is exactly what makes the wolf a threat.
Instead of fearing the unknown, we should accept that we are part of a complex and diverse world, where lives cannot be controlled or mastered. And that is not a bad thing at all. On the contrary, it can be a starting point of inclusive and empathetic politics.
- Researcher
- More information
