of The Netherlands,

with troops stationed around the world,

I'm really honored

to be here today.

When I look around

this TEDxAmsterdam venue,

I see a very special audience.

You are the reason

why I said yes to the invitation

to come here today.

When I look around,

I see people

who want to make a contribution,

I see people

who want to make a better world,

by doing groundbreaking scientific work,

by creating impressive works of art,

by writing critical articles

or inspiring books,

by starting up sustainable businesses.

And you all have chosen

your own instruments

to fulfill this mission

of creating a better world.

Some chose the microscope

as their instrument.

Others chose dancing or painting

or making music like we just heard.

Some chose the pen.

Others work through the instrument of money.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I made a different choice.

Thanks.

Ladies and gentlemen --

(Laughter)

(Applause)

I share your goals.

I share the goals

of the speakers you heard before.

I did not choose

to take up the pen,

the brush, the camera.

I chose this instrument.

I chose the gun.

For you, and you heard already,

being so close to this gun

may make you feel uneasy.

It may even feel scary.

A real gun

at a few feet's distance.

Let us stop for a moment

and feel this uneasiness.

You could even hear it.

Let us cherish the fact

that probably most of you

have never been close to a gun.

It means

The Netherlands is a peaceful country.

The Netherlands is not at war.

It means soldiers are not needed

to patrol our streets.

Guns are not a part of our lives.

In many countries

it is a different story.

In many countries

people are confronted with guns.

They are oppressed.

They are intimidated --

by warlords,

by terrorists,

by criminals.

Weapons can do a lot of harm.

They are the cause

of much distress.

Why then am I standing before you

with this weapon?

Why did I choose the gun

as my instrument?

Today I want to tell you why.

Today I want to tell you

why I chose the gun

to create a better world.

And I want to tell you

how this gun can help.

My story starts

in the city of Nijmegen

in the east of The Netherlands,

the city where I was born.

My father

was a hardworking baker,

but when he had finished work in the bakery,

he often told me and my brother stories.

And most of the time,

he told me this story I'm going to share with you now.

The story of what happened

when he was a conscripted soldier

in the Dutch armed forces

at the beginning of the Second World War.

The Nazis invaded The Netherlands.

Their grim plans were evident.

They meant to rule

by means of repression.

Diplomacy had failed to stop the Germans.

Only brute force remained.

It was our last resort.

My father was there

to provide it.

As the son of a farmer

who knew how to hunt,

my father was an excellent marksman.

When he aimed,

he never missed.

At this decisive moment in Dutch history

my father was positioned

on the bank of the river Waal

near the city of Nijmegen.

He had a clear shot at the German soldiers

who came to occupy a free country,

his country,

our country.

He fired. Nothing happened.

He fired again.

No German soldier fell to the ground.

My father had been given

an old gun

that could not even reach

the opposite riverbank.

Hitler's troops marched on,

and there was nothing my father could do about it.

Until the day my father died,

he was frustrated about missing these shots.

He could have done something.

But with an old gun,

not even the best marksman in the armed forces

could have hit the mark.

So this story stayed with me.

Then in high school,

I was gripped by the stories

of the Allied soldiers --

soldiers who left the safety of their own homes

and risked their lives

to liberate a country and a people

that they didn't know.

They liberated my birth town.

It was then that I decided

I would take up the gun --

out of respect and gratitude

for those men and women

who came to liberate us --

from the awareness

that sometimes only the gun

can stand

between good and evil.

And that is why

I took up the gun --

not to shoot,

not to kill,

not to destroy,

but to stop those who would do evil,

to protect the vulnerable,

to defend democratic values,

to stand up for the freedom we have

to talk here today

in Amsterdam

about how we can make the world a better place.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I do not stand here today

to tell you about the glory of weapons.

I do not like guns.

And once you have been under fire yourself,

it brings home even more clearly

that a gun is not some macho instrument

to brag about.

I stand here today

to tell you about the use of the gun

as an instrument of peace and stability.

The gun may be one of the most important instruments

of peace and stability

that we have in this world.

Now this may sound contradictory to you.

But not only have I seen with my own eyes

during my deployments in Lebanon,

Sarajevo and [unclear] national

as The Netherlands' chief of defense,

this is also supported

by cold, hard statistics.

Violence has declined dramatically

over the last 500 years.

Despite the pictures

we are shown daily in the news,

wars between developed countries

are no longer commonplace.

The murder rate in Europe

has dropped by a factor of 30

since the Middle Ages.

And occurrences of civil war and repression

have declined since the end of the Cold War.

Statistics show

that we are living

in a relatively peaceful era.

Why?

Why has violence decreased?

Has the human mind changed?

Well we were talking on the human mind this morning.

Did we simply lose our beastly impulses

for revenge,

for violent rituals,

for pure rage?

Or is there something else?

In his latest book,

Harvard professor Steven Pinker --

and many other thinkers before him --

concludes that one of the main drivers

behind less violent societies

is the spread of the constitutional state

and the introduction on a large scale

of the state monopoly

on the legitimized use of violence --

legitimized by a democratically elected government,

legitimized by checks and balances

and an independent judicial system.

In other words, a state monopoly

that has the use of violence

well under control.

Such a state monopoly on violence,

first of all, serves

as a reassurance.

It removes the incentive

for an arms race

between potentially hostile groups

in our societies.

Secondly, the presence of penalties

that outweigh the benefits of using violence

tips the balance even further.

Abstaining from violence

becomes more profitable

than starting a war.

Now nonviolence starts to work

like a flywheel.

It enhances peace even further.

Where there is no conflict,

trade flourishes.

And trade is another important incentive

against violence.

With trade, there's mutual interdependency

and mutual gain between parties.

And when there is mutual gain,

both sides stand to lose more

than they would gain

if they started a war.

War is simply

no longer the best option,

and that is why violence has decreased.

This, ladies and gentlemen,

is the rationale behind the existence

of my armed forces.

The armed forces

implement the state monopoly on violence.

We do this in a legitimized way

only after our democracy has asked us

to do so.

It is this legitimate,

controlled use of the gun