From the case study below, explain the following separately

a) Do you believe Pim Fortuyn was a charismatic leader?

b) Justify your response using relevant theoretical principles

c. Compare and contrast LPF with other 'one-person' businesses (such as Body Shop, Virgin, and Microsoft).

d) If these organizations lost their leader, do you believe they would be able to continue operating? What is the rationale, or why not?

CASE STUDY

The paradox of Pim Fortuyn: a study in charismatic leadership

Rotterdam, a city of contrasts, has always been a multi-cultural melting pot with more non-Dutch than native Dutch residents. However, in 2002, the emergence of sociology professor turned politician Pim Fortuyn brought a breath of fresh air to the previously bland Dutch political scene. Fortuyn, who had previously held several jobs in education and research, was known for his flamboyant, openly blunt, outspoken, and charismatic nature. He was a flamboyant, openly , blunt, outspoken, and charismatic man with a penchant for lap dogs, luxury, and Cuban cigars.

Fortuyn's political career began in 2001 when he became leader of the small and supposedly radical national party, Leefbaar Netherland. He guided the party towards the right, criticising bureaucracy in Dutch public services and challenging long-established Dutch political norms. However, he was thrown out for suggesting that Article One of the Dutch Constitution, which banned discrimination, should be changed (despite his promise not to raise this as an issue), and for publicly criticising Muslim leaders and their stance on homosexuals.

Fortuyn's particular brand of politics was as paradoxical as the man himself. Branded right-wing, he was frequently compared with France's Jean-Marie Le Pen or Austria's Jorg Haider. In fact, he supported rights, legalized drugs and prostitution, and succeeded in blending liberal and reactionary populist policies, including a drastic reduction in bureaucracy, a clampdown on crime, and a return of much of the Netherlands contribution to the EU (proportionally the largest of any member state). However, the fly in this apparent ointment of liberalism was his stance on immigration. His policies on race included zero Muslim immigration, a cut in the overall annual number of immigrants from 40.000 to 10,000, and better integration of the two million immigrants already on Dutch soil.

However, Fortuyn argued that his apparent far right-wing stance on immigration was just the opposite because he believed that Islam undermined the ultra-liberal permissive society which he cherished. He argued that Islam was a backward culture, treating homosexuality the same way as heterosexuality in Holland. He sought to strengthen this liberal view by arguing that he was not against immigrants per se, but questioned their ability to assimilate into a liberal and radically tolerant culture.

Although both the press and opposition parties had a field day, arguing that his policies were long on rhetoric, short on substance, and did not stand up to detailed costing, Fortuyn struck a chord with people in the most densely populated country in Europe. He often said, "I'm not anti-Muslim. I'm saying we've got big problems in our cities... It's not very smart to make the problems bigger by letting in millions more immigrants from rural Muslim cultures that don't assimilate." He claimed that Islam was a "backward culture" and that Muslims allowed into the Netherlands looked down on the Dutch. Critics argued that Fortuyn's only appeal was to voters' inherent fear of outsiders and crime and their feelings of increasing alienation from the old political elites.

In April 2002, his Leefbaar Rotterdam party came from nowhere to win 17 out of 45 seats in the Rotterdam City Council elections, ending overnight the ruling Labour party's post-war dominance. Professor Pim Fortuyn (LPF) Party, led by the controversial Professor Pim, began his campaign for the national elections in Rotterdam the following month. Despite being involved with two main parties, the LPF and the original Leefbaar Rotterdam, he was not well-known to many Dutch voters. His dogmatic, opinionated, provocative, and illogical approach to politics made him even more controversial as the press outside the Netherlands took notice of his party's policies.

The controversy enhanced his reputation, and his party appeared poised to take an unprecedented number of parliamentary seats. Estimates gave the LPF at least 28% of the parliamentary seats, but 90% did not care as long as Fortuyn's name was on the list. This resulted in a vivid and exciting election campaign that was far more vivid than had been seen in Holland for decades.

On 6 May, just nine days before the election, Volkert van der Graaf shot Fortuyn dead leaving a television studio in Hilversum. The murderer was a self-styled environmentalist who had previously said that he objected to fishing with worms because it was both cruel to the worm and the fish, rather than someone from the Islamic community whom Fortuyn had publicly vilified. The murderer was filmed by a television crew who happened to be outside, and pictures on TV and in the newspapers of a bloodied and dying Pim lying prostrate on the ground would have appealed to the politician whose death, mourning, and subsequent funeral were as public and over the top as his life.

The assassination left the Netherlands in shock, as such an event had never happened in living history in this tolerant country. LPF gained a massive sympathy vote in the election, taking 26 of the 150 seats in parliament and entering into yet another coalition with the Christian-Democrat CDA and the conservative VVD parties. However, not one of the candidates had anything like his stature, and the outcome of the election resulted in a hard-right party, led by novices who lacked experience and a common political vision. Without their charismatic leader to keep them in check and provide direction, LPF resorted to very public squabbling over their struggles to maintain any leadership.

In the days following Pim's death, political pundits forecast that his charisma and style would change the face of Dutch politics forever. However, after the CDA and VVD took the majority of votes in January 2003, they still needed a third party to form yet another coalition. There then followed another five months of political discussion and argument with the various minor parties until a new government was finally sworn in in May 2003.