Volt Becomes First Dutch Political Party to Abandon X, Citing Elon Musk’s “Dystopian Worldview”
In a bold move that has sent ripples through the Dutch political landscape, Volt, a progressive political party with two seats in the House of Representatives, has announced it will deactivate it’s accounts on X, formerly known as Twitter. This decision makes Volt the first political party in the Netherlands to abandon the platform, citing concerns over its owner Elon Musk’s alleged promotion of extremist ideologies and interference in global politics.
Party leader Laurens Dassen revealed that Volt’s official account, along with those of its leadership, will be deactivated next Monday. “He fully uses X to serve his dystopian worldview,” Dassen stated,referring to Musk. “He gives a platform to hatred,extremist ideas,and disinformation. Now Musk is also interfering in the German elections, as he previously did in the American elections. That is the reason for us to say: we are drawing a line here, we no longer want to be part of this.”
Musk’s recent actions have drawn sharp criticism. He has openly supported the far-right AfD party in Germany, claiming it is indeed the only party capable of saving the country. This week, he hosted a live conversation on X with AfD leader Alice Weidel. Musk has also waded into British politics, targeting Prime Minister Keir Starmer with a series of messages while promoting the radical right-wing Reform UK party.
The Dilemma for Dutch Political Parties
Table of Contents
Musk’s behavior has created a dilemma for Dutch political parties. While many view X with apprehension,they also rely on it as a key platform for public engagement. According to market researcher Newcom,X had 3.1 million users in the Netherlands at the beginning of last year, though the majority are not active. Despite this, the platform remains highly influential in political circles, notably in The hague, where it is seen as more impactful than larger platforms like Facebook, TikTok, or Instagram.
Volt’s accounts, including @VoltNederland (31.6 thousand followers), @DassenLaurens (42.4 thousand), and @KoekkoekMarieke (12.2 thousand), are relatively modest compared to those of other politicians. Dassen has called on other Dutch parties to follow suit, arguing that collective action could diminish X’s relevance. “Musk is not concerned that we are moving away from X,” he said. “But now you often hear the argument: yes, but journalists, politicians, experts are on it. So then I have to sit on it too. The moment we are active elsewhere en masse, X is no longer necessary.”
X as a Platform for the Radical Right
Since Musk’s takeover in 2022, X has increasingly become a hub for far-right voices. Geert Wilders, leader of the PVV and one of the platform’s most prominent Dutch users with 1.5 million followers, has embraced X as his primary communication channel. This week, Wilders publicly thanked musk for supporting Tommy Robinson, the far-right leader of the English Defense League, who is currently serving a prison sentence.“Many thanks to @elonmusk for his brave and fair support of Tommy, who caused a political earthquake in the UK,” Wilders wrote.
Other politicians, though, have struggled with their presence on X. Many have left due to hate messages, while others remain active, albeit reluctantly. barbara Kathmann, an MP for GroenLinks-PvdA, emphasized the need for collective action at the European level to regulate platforms like X. “To stay or not is an individual decision,” she said. “But more meaningful to me is the question of how we rein in sun kings like Elon Musk,who exercise political power and thus disrupt the free world.”
Kathmann pointed to the Digital Services Act (DSA), a european Union law adopted last year, as a potential tool to hold platforms accountable. The DSA aims to curb the spread of harmful content and ensure greater transparency from tech giants.
Key Takeaways
| Aspect | Details |
|————————–|—————————————————————————–|
| Party | Volt, the first Dutch political party to leave X |
| Reason | Elon Musk’s alleged promotion of extremism and disinformation |
| Key Figures | Laurens Dassen (Volt leader), Geert Wilders (PVV leader), Barbara Kathmann |
| Platform Influence | X seen as more influential than Facebook, TikTok, or Instagram in The Hague |
| Call to Action | Dassen urges other Dutch parties to abandon X |
Volt’s departure from X marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over the role of social media in politics. As the platform continues to evolve under Musk’s leadership, the question remains: will other parties follow Volt’s lead, or will X remain an indispensable tool for political engagement?
For now, Volt’s decision underscores the growing tension between the need for public discourse and the ethical concerns surrounding the platforms that facilitate it. As Dassen aptly put it, “The moment we are active elsewhere en masse, X is no longer necessary.”
What do you think about Volt’s decision? Should more political parties take a stand against platforms that amplify extremist voices? Share your thoughts below.
In a bold move, volt, the pan-European political party, has announced its decision to leave X (formerly Twitter), becoming the first Dutch party to do so. The decision comes amid growing concerns about the platform’s impact on democracy and its algorithmic practices under the leadership of Elon Musk.
laurens Dassen, leader of Volt Netherlands, emphasized the need for stronger protections for users of online services. “As a continent, we have to show our teeth,” he stated, highlighting the party’s commitment to safeguarding democratic values in the digital age.
The Debate Over Staying or Leaving
While Volt is stepping away from X, not all politicians agree with the decision. Jan Paternotte, a member of the Dutch political party D66, acknowledges Musk’s “undermining character for democracy” but sees value in remaining on the platform. With over 56,200 followers, Paternotte has adapted to the challenges posed by X’s algorithms.
“I don’t read the hate messages; I have had ten years of training for that,” he said.“My timeline is no longer usable due to the dirty algorithms, but I have created lists of reliable accounts on topics such as Ukraine. I will stay well informed there. I also notice that some messages are shared a lot and reach a different audience than I would normally reach.”
Paternotte also shared how X has been a valuable tool during critical moments,such as the COVID-19 pandemic. “At the time of the corona crisis, I placed calls on X if an age category could be vaccinated. Then I received many messages from people who were happy that I had pointed it out to their loved ones, such as.I understand that many people are chased away, but I see staying a bit as fighting back against Musk.”
Exploring Alternatives
Volt’s departure from X is part of a broader strategy to explore alternative social media platforms. The party plans to make more active use of platforms like BlueSky, Mastodon, and LinkedIn. Dassen also called for a debate within and outside the party about the presence on Instagram, especially after owner Mark zuckerberg announced the cessation of moderation and fact-checking in the US.
“But I see moving away from X as a first step,” Dassen added. He also urged the Dutch government to reconsider its presence on X, advocating for greater pluralism in the social media landscape. “First of all, the government must look for alternatives. I don’t think any minister is on BlueSky now. They need to look much more at the pluralism of the social media landscape.”
Key Takeaways
| Aspect | Details |
|————————–|—————————————————————————–|
| Party Decision | Volt becomes the first Dutch party to leave X. |
| Concerns | Undermining of democracy, harmful algorithms, and lack of user protection. |
| Alternative Platforms | bluesky, mastodon, LinkedIn. |
| Government Role | Calls for the Dutch government to explore alternative platforms. |
A Call for Action
Volt’s decision underscores the growing tension between political entities and social media platforms.As Dassen puts it,“We need to show our teeth” to ensure that online spaces remain safe and democratic.The party’s move could set a precedent for other political groups grappling with the same challenges.
What do you think about Volt’s decision to leave X? Should more political parties follow suit? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
For more insights into the evolving social media landscape, explore our coverage on Instagram’s moderation policies and the rise of alternative platforms like BlueSky.—
Stay informed and engaged. Follow us for more updates on the intersection of politics and technology.
For engaging with a broader audience,especially during critical moments like teh COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine.Despite the platform’s challenges, he believes that staying active on X allows him to amplify important messages and connect with constituents who might not engage with traditional media.
Volt’s departure from X highlights a broader ethical dilemma faced by political parties and leaders worldwide. Social media platforms like X have become essential tools for political dialogue, enabling politicians to reach vast audiences quickly and directly. However,the rise of extremism,disinformation,and hate speech on thes platforms has raised serious concerns about their impact on democracy and public discourse.
Laurens Dassen’s call for collective action reflects a growing sentiment among some politicians that the risks of staying on platforms like X may outweigh the benefits. By leaving X, Volt is taking a stand against what it sees as a platform that enables harmful content and undermines democratic values. Though, as Jan Paternotte’s outlook illustrates, not all politicians are ready to abandon X, viewing it as a necessary tool for political engagement despite it’s flaws.
The Role of Regulation and Collective Action
Barbara Kathmann’s emphasis on the need for European-level regulation underscores the complexity of addressing these challenges. The Digital Services Act (DSA) represents a significant step toward holding tech giants accountable for the content on their platforms.By requiring greater clarity and imposing stricter rules on harmful content, the DSA aims to create a safer and more responsible digital habitat.
However,the effectiveness of such regulations will depend on their implementation and enforcement. As Kathmann pointed out, the power wielded by figures like Elon Musk raises questions about how to rein in individuals who exert significant influence over public discourse.Collective action, both at the national and European levels, might potentially be necessary to address these challenges and ensure that social media platforms serve the public interest rather than undermining it.
Conclusion
Volt’s decision to leave X marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate about the role of social media in politics. While the platform remains a powerful tool for political engagement, its association with extremism and disinformation has led some to question its ethical implications. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, the tension between the need for public discourse and the ethical concerns surrounding social media platforms will likely persist.
What do you think about Volt’s decision? Should more political parties take a stand against platforms that amplify extremist voices? Share your thoughts below.
