Why the law has not eliminated race discrimination
Despite being prohibited by law since 1971, race discrimination continues to exist in the Netherlands, making it harder for some people to find a job and increasing their likelihood of being arrested. Why is this? PhD candidate Alison Fischer argues that white supremacy is deeply embedded in Dutch law and culture.
When Fischer arrived in the Netherlands as an American immigrant and former criminal lawyer, she often heard people say: ‘Racism is an American problem.’
‘I thought, great! I’ve finally found a racism-free country’, she says with a trace of irony. ‘Racism in America comes from a history of colonialism and slavery. The Netherlands shares that history, but for many it feels distant because those practices mostly took place overseas.’
‘Good intentions are not enough’
Fischer – who will defend her PhD on 18 September – explored that Dutch colonial history in her research on why the law has failed to eliminate race discrimination. She also examined parliamentary reports, annual reports from organisations and newspaper archives (from 1978 to 1999). A significant part of her research focused on the Landelijk Bureau Racismebestrijding (LBR), an organisation tasked with tackling racism through legal means.
‘In practice, this led to fewer than ten court cases in 15 years. The focus was on dialogue, awareness and voluntary codes of conduct – well-intended but without legal consequences. Good intentions are not enough.’
The anti-racism laws available to the LBR were ineffective then and remain so today, she argues. Since the 1970s, Article 137c has criminalised discrimination, but it was designed to address deliberate hate and personal prejudice. ‘But personal prejudice isn’t the reason why we see such stark economic disparities between people racialised as white and non-white (people considered by society to be white or non-white, Ed.).’
Institutional racism
Criminal law is a blunt tool, says Fischer. To find someone guilty, there needs to be intent and clear evidence, but that’s not how discrimination works. If you don’t get a job, it’s hard to prove you were rejected because of your skin colour, for example, unless someone explicitly tells you so.
Fischer believes that legislation alone cannot address structural inequality because racism is embedded in institutions. Conscious and unconscious bias and prejudice lead to discrimination in the job market, education, the housing market and government (as illustrated by the child benefits scandal in the Netherlands).
White supremacy
At the root of this, says Fischer, is white supremacy, which is a legacy of the colonial era. During that time, laws explicitly categorised people by race for the financial benefit of white Europeans. ‘For example, only those racialised as non-white could be enslaved.’
Although these colonial laws have been abolished, the hierarchical thinking remains. ‘We never truly dismantled those structures – we just made them less visible. The problem is that people still think white European ways are superior.’
Solution?
Fischer thinks the solution lies not in more laws or harsher penalties but in a broader approach that looks further than individual prejudices. She calls for a holistic strategy in which institutions, policymakers and educators take joint responsibility. History education also plays a key role. ‘If every secondary school student learns about Indonesia, Suriname and our colonial past, we will better understand the roots of today’s inequality.’ True change, she argues, can only happen when structural racism is acknowledged and actively dismantled.