'Trumpugees' fleeing U.S. for liberal Netherlands find it's taken a right turn
The so-called 'Trumpugees' looking for an alternative to Donald Trump 's rightist agenda have been looking to the European country as a haven.
But the country's new Prime Minister, Dick Schoof, is preparing to usher in a wave of policies more in common with the Republican administration in Washington.
Despite that, GTFO Tours - an organization founded by Bethany Quinn and Jana Sanchez to help Americans relocate to the Netherlands - says it has seen a 200 per cent uptick in inquiries in recent months.
'I think a lot of Americans have sort of been waiting to see how things are going, but they just keep getting worse,' Quinn told Newsweek.
The organization pointed to Trump's hardline immigration policies and anti-transgender rights stance as the driving force behind the increase.
Quinn said Americans have been bracing for setbacks in social progress since Trump took office in January.
She argued that Trump's slew of executive orders on his first day in office, 'reversed 60+ years of progress.'
'A lot of Americans are just looking to have a peaceful life. They just wanna live their lives and they don't want to worry about their safety. They don't wanna worry about their government collapsing,' Quinn continued.
The Netherlands may seem like an obvious choice to escape the American grind, but the country's government has had its fair share of turmoil.
The government's four-party coalition collapsed in June when Geert Wilders, the leader of the far-right Party for Freedom, withdrew after the other three parties declined to back his immigration plan.
Then in July, the Dutch parliament passed a slew of anti-immigration reforms targeted at asylum seekers.
The Netherlands is also pumping the brakes on reforms for transgender citizens. A bill introduced in 2021 to make it easier for trans individuals to change their gender registration on official documents was recently withdrawn.
'This cabinet is letting transgender people down in an unprecedented way,' chair Remke Verdegem said of the decision.
The wave of conservative policies mirrors the harsh immigration and anti-trans policies of the Trump administration.
Grover Wehman-Brown, an American looking to move to the Netherlands, recently told Newsweek, that as a trans individual, they felt increasing fear living in the U.S.
Wehman-Brown said that they experienced a 'constant threat and vigilance' growing up trans in rural Ohio, and was now starting to see those tensions again.
'I had gone to the Netherlands once 15 years ago, and I really liked the short amount of time I spent there, so I was like, "this is really a lovely place where everybody seems busy and purposeful, but cooperating well together and things are running smoothly,'" they added.
Wehman-Brown isn't the only one, with a survey by the Immigration Advice Authority citing that one in four Americans were weighing emigration after Trump's 2024 win.
Canada has also emerged as a leading destination for fed-up Americans to relocate. However, any refuge could be short-lived if the president makes good on his threats to turn the country into America's 51st state.
Almost 500 fleeing U.S. citizens have tried to claim asylum in Canada since the billionaire's re-election.
But liberals seeking refuge from Trump's America have been dealt a crushing blow after their favorite sanctuary issued a brutal crackdown.
The Canadian government is bringing in emergency powers to make it easier to block applications and its border agency says the proposed overhaul is to 'protect the system.'
Other popular destinations for American progressives include Portugal and Spain.
Interracial lesbian couple Doris Davis and Susie Bartlett living in NYC told Reuters in May they are considering the move.
'We love this country, but we don't love what it has become. When your identity is being attacked, there is a personal sense of... anger (and) frustration,' Davis said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
32 minutes ago
- Times
Neil Kinnock: Labour should bring in ‘wealth tax' to balance books
Sir Keir Starmer should introduce a wealth tax to fill the £5 billion hole in the finances left by the government's welfare climbdown, Labour's former leader Lord Kinnock has said. In a provocative intervention that will appeal to sections of the party's backbenchers, Kinnock said taxing the highest earners in the country would be popular with the 'great majority of the general public' and help Rachel Reeves fill her budget shortfall. He suggested that the tax could be levied on assets of more than £10 million and raise as much as £11 billion for the Treasury. He warned that the chancellor had become boxed in by her own words that ruled out further borrowing to cover day-to-day spending or raising income tax, national insurance or VAT. • Is reform of the welfare system still possible? 'Unless you are looking for other original sources of revenue in order to invest in public services and long term investment, then you are really jammed into a bit of a corner,' he told Sky News. However, Kinnock said that there were other 'pathways' to raise money that some within Labour were 'willing to explore' and that would 'commend themselves to the great majority of the general public'. He said: 'They include asset taxes in a period in which for the last 20 odd years in the United Kingdom, like quite a lot of other western economies, earned incomes have stagnated in real terms while asset values have zoomed. 'Even by going for, an imposition of two per cent (tax) on asset values above £10 million, say, which is very big fortune. The government would be in a position to collect £10 or £11 billion a year.' There are calls from the left of the party for Reeves to consider increasing taxes on wealth to pay for higher spending. Louise Haigh, the former transport secretary who quit the cabinet last year, has said that the tax system 'punishes earned income but barely touches the sides of the real driver of inequality — wealth'. Rachael Maskell, who was one of the leaders of the backbench Labour rebellion which forced the government to drop its welfare reform suggested that as much as £24 billion a year could be raised by equalising capital gains tax — and through income tax. Before the election, Reeves said that the government had 'no plans for a wealth tax'. • Keir Starmer's Labour as chaotic as Tories, voters say Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, warned on Sunday that the climbdown on welfare reform would impact other areas of government tax and spending. Downing Street sources told The Sunday Times plans to shelve the two-child benefit cap were 'dead in the water' while the likelihood of tax rises has increased. When asked if there was now less chance of the cap being scrapped given the costs that come with Tuesday's decision, Ms Phillipson told the BBC that ministers were 'looking at every lever and we'll continue to look at every lever to lift children out of poverty'. But she added: 'The decisions that have been taken in the last week do make future decisions harder.' Reeves is looking at a number of potential tax-raising measures ahead of the budget, including a further freeze to income tax thresholds that would increase the number of people paying the higher rate of tax. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said that Reeves may need as much as £30 billion to cover the cost of reversals on welfare reform and winter fuel payments coupled with downgrades to economic growth forecasts. But the Treasury is likely to be reluctant to look at wealth taxes as it is feared this could increase the flight of the super-rich from the UK, damaging investment and growth. Reeves is already considering softening changes to inheritance tax that affect wealthy non-doms. Sir Mel Stride, the shadow chancellor, said a new wealth tax would be the 'worst thing to do'. He said: 'We've also seen around 10,000 to 15,000 high net worth individuals leave our country as a result of this government's policies. Now, some people, the socialists, might say, 'Well, who cares about that?' Well, the problem is that the amount of tax that those people have been paying requires about a third of a million people on average earnings, to cover that lost tax that's just gone straight out of the door. 'So the last thing we want to be doing now is piling further taxes on the wealth creators. We need to be, if anything, getting those taxes down, and empowering them to go out and do what they do best, which is creating jobs, and, you know, creating wealth and prosperity for our country.'
The Guardian
35 minutes ago
- The Guardian
US completes deportation of eight men to South Sudan after legal wrangling
Eight men deported from the US in May and held under guard for weeks at an American military base in the African nation of Djibouti while their legal challenges played out in court have reached the Trump administration's intended destination, war-torn South Sudan, a country the state department advises against travel to due to 'crime, kidnapping and armed conflict'. The men from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Vietnam and South Sudan arrived in South Sudan on Friday after a federal judge cleared the way for the Trump administration to relocate them in a case that had gone to the supreme court, which had permitted their removal from the US. Administration officials said the men had been convicted of violent crimes in the US. 'This was a win for the rule of law, safety and security of the American people,' Tricia McLaughlin, a Homeland Security spokesperson, said in a statement on Saturday announcing the men's arrival in South Sudan. The supreme court cleared the way for the transfer of the men last Thursday. The men had been put on a flight in May bound for South Sudan but which was diverted to a base in Djibouti, where they were held in a converted shipping container. The flight was diverted after a federal judge found that the administration had violated his order by failing to allow the men a chance to challenge the removal. The supreme court's conservative majority had ruled in June that immigration officials could quickly deport people to third countries. The majority halted an order that had allowed immigrants to challenge any removals to countries outside their homeland where they could be in danger. A flurry of court hearings on4 July resulted in a temporary hold on the deportations while a judge evaluated a last-ditch appeal, before the judge decided he was powerless to halt their removals and that the person best positioned to rule on the request was a Boston judge whose rulings had led to the initial halt of the administration's effort to begin deportations to South Sudan. By Friday evening, that judge had issued a brief ruling concluding that the supreme court had tied his hands. US authorities have reached agreements with other countries to house immigrants who cannot quickly be send back to their homelands.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
‘Enemies of Labour' to benefit from Corbyn-led party, says peer
Lord Kinnock has criticised plans by Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana to form a new left-wing party, saying it would "only assist the enemies of Labour". Kinnock mockingly suggested the new party be called the "Farage assistance group", arguing that division on the left would benefit right-wing parties such as the Conservatives and Reform UK. Ms Sultana announced her resignation from Labour and her intention to co-lead a new party with Mr Corbyn last week, saying they aim to tackle poverty and inequality, and oppose war. Mr Corbyn appeared to be surprised by Sultana's announcement, issuing a non-committal statement, and his team reportedly urged her to retract it. Polling data indicates a hypothetical Corbyn-led left-leaning party could attract 10 per cent of voters, primarily drawing support from Labour, the Greens, Lib Dems, and the SNP.
