3 ms·

Democracies can't really be condensed into one political moment; that is why they are so effective against dictatorships. Dictatorships have to make sense to on

by roenxi 3y ago

Democracies can't really be condensed into one political moment; that is why they are so effective against dictatorships. Dictatorships have to make sense to one person. The usual pattern is authoritarians do something stupid, democracies do something stupid but also erratic, then time passes then the democracies reorganise to try something new and the dictatorship gets stuck in a rut. Eventually the democracy tries something that works to the amazement of all observers. The authoritarians are still pushing the same tired old plan of failure. Democracy doesn't have any secret sauce for making good decisions. Large groups of people are actually notoriously stupid. But they are much more responsive to situations where the government's official plan is obviously not working and the evidence is rolling in.

caskstrength 3y ago
I wasn't arguing that Switzerland is not a democracy, just noted the its political system is nowhere as immune to enacting things like "patriot act" as OP suggested.
- IG_Semmelweiss 3y ago
  Not suggesting Switzerland is immune, and your example perhaps makes citation of Patriot Act a poor choice, but the US has plenty of awful laws to select from that Switzerland has not yet decided to copy (thankfully). Unfortunately, even Switzerland eventually as we know it will collapse, as all governments do. I do not suggest the Swiss system of government is perfect or even great, only that it is considerably more resilient to breaking vs its Euro peers, for precisely the same reason that US republicanism/Democracy has lasted: Both were forged in the embers of of wildly disparate groups of people to agree to join into a republic/federation. As a happy accident of those concessions, a lot of powers normally held by the bipartisan ruling body, were stripped away, and therefore, you have 2 democracies thus far that are winning in the test of time. Also, regarding a canton not allowing vote by X - not going to condone it, but it makes my point. Other countries ban the vote by felons, or by certain classes of people. Yet, they are still called democracies. The only difference is that the agreement to strip voting power is bipartisan in 1 case, and in switzerland it was a niche who approves of it. The fact that Switzerland allows that level of extreme disagreement is the reason why the democratic confederation will persist, for far longer than other neighboring democracies that are not willing to allow the fringes of its population to experiment with self rule, vs conform with the bipartisan viewpoint.

by roenxi 3y ago

caskstrength 3y ago

I wasn't arguing that Switzerland is not a democracy, just noted the its political system is nowhere as immune to enacting things like "patriot act" as OP suggested.

IG_Semmelweiss 3y ago
Not suggesting Switzerland is immune, and your example perhaps makes citation of Patriot Act a poor choice, but the US has plenty of awful laws to select from that Switzerland has not yet decided to copy (thankfully). Unfortunately, even Switzerland eventually as we know it will collapse, as all governments do. I do not suggest the Swiss system of government is perfect or even great, only that it is considerably more resilient to breaking vs its Euro peers, for precisely the same reason that US republicanism/Democracy has lasted: Both were forged in the embers of of wildly disparate groups of people to agree to join into a republic/federation. As a happy accident of those concessions, a lot of powers normally held by the bipartisan ruling body, were stripped away, and therefore, you have 2 democracies thus far that are winning in the test of time. Also, regarding a canton not allowing vote by X - not going to condone it, but it makes my point. Other countries ban the vote by felons, or by certain classes of people. Yet, they are still called democracies. The only difference is that the agreement to strip voting power is bipartisan in 1 case, and in switzerland it was a niche who approves of it. The fact that Switzerland allows that level of extreme disagreement is the reason why the democratic confederation will persist, for far longer than other neighboring democracies that are not willing to allow the fringes of its population to experiment with self rule, vs conform with the bipartisan viewpoint.