What was so special about the Dutch 17th century?

It all started when Jane asked why the Dutch painted such amazing pictures in the 17th century. The pictures referred to are the "genre" paintings (italicised, because there is no better word to describe them, although no definition I know that is not slightly disparaging). I haven't yet answered the question, but, as often happens, I've come up with a few potential answers to different questions. Jonathan Israel has published extensively in this area and he should know a thing or two. So I noticed a recent review by him with interest. What claims did he make for the 17th-century United Provinces?


Israel's claims are pretty wide-ranging and grand. They comprise:
Firstly, "around 1700, Holland rather than England counted internationally as the world's foremost model of a tolerant, prosperous republican ethnic and religious melting pot."

Secondly, "The Dutch Republic was also the world's model for commercial freedom. Even after Britain had long overtaken it in economic dynamism in the mid-eighteenth century, the Dutch Republic, as Diderot pointed out in the 1770s, still outstripped Britain in one crucial respect: the Netherlands was the first society in known human history to give a decent standard of living to everyone."  Quite a claim!

Thirdly, "The Dutch Patriottenbeweging, or Patriot movement of the years 1780-87, was ... the first major democratic movement in the Western world" 

The last point is quite a bit beyond the 17th century, but Israel's point seems to be that events around the time of the French Revolution were crucially dependent on what people were thinking and saying in the 17th century, so there is a relevance. 

Even if only one of these were true, it would justify studying the Dutch Republic. And the next question is, did it make a difference to their paintings? Are the Dutch genre paintings the first true democratic art? Something worth thinking more about.