3 ms·

Unfortunately, that's not how Switzerland operates, because it's a very direct democracy where the status quo and the will of the majority takes priority over c

by sofixa 1y ago

Unfortunately, that's not how Switzerland operates, because it's a very direct democracy where the status quo and the will of the majority takes priority over common sense and long term thinking. Full franchise (women being allowed to vote) didn't happen in all cantons until the 1990s (after it being made possible in the 1970s), because the existing voters (men) just voted against it.

dotancohen 1y ago
Even disregarding your quip about when women got the vote, your post reads like another anti-Western agenda post that has become very popular in the past two years.
- bondarchuk 1y ago
  It's true though, quite amazingly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerl...
  - dotancohen 1y ago
    Why do you double down on this when I specifically disregarded that aspect of your comment from my post? And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda posts always met with multiple simultaneous downvotes, whereas my other unpopular opinions are downvoted one by one?
    - bondarchuk 1y ago
      Because I (different person btw) was curious about whether it was true, that's all, no further "agenda". There's some discussion on the talk page btw about whether or not it is indeed attributable to direct democracy btw.
    - rented_mule 1y ago
      > And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda posts always met with multiple simultaneous downvotes Maybe because acknowledging flaws in "y" is not necessarily "anti-y"? In fact, it is often "pro-y". I want to improve things I care about. A critical part of that is identifying flaws so they can be learned from and sometimes fixed.
    - mikestew 1y ago
      And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda… Perhaps folks don’t feel as if that’s what you’re actually pointing out. The post you replied to was referring to the direct democracy of Switzerland, not castigating all of Western society. I mean, from my point of view, by “disregarding” you basically ignored the entire point of the comment to support a narrative.
dkiebd 1y ago
I completely reject the notion that direct democracy is bad because Politicians Know Better. It’s borderline if not completely authoritarian and frankly disgusting. Maybe consider that Switzerland is one of the best if not the best country in the world because people can choose what they want it to be.
- Avicebron 1y ago
  This issue with direct democracies is that the they can get out of hand pretty fast unless your population is somewhat homogenous and reasonable. Aka Switzerland. If you're too young to remember twitch plays Pokémon, that's direct democracy and it was wild. A direct democracy could decide tomorrow that we wanted to fuck China sideways with nukes because it's funny and based all because a tiktok went viral.
  - 1718627440 1y ago
    I think people rule differently depending on how much impact it has. People claiming "We should nuke them" knowing it will never happen is very different from them really deciding on that matter.
  - sofixa 1y ago
    > This issue with direct democracies is that the they can get out of hand pretty fast unless your population is somewhat homogenous and reasonable. Aka Switzerland Sorry, but that's just a racist dogwhistle. Switzerland has four main ethnic groups, and has had multiple rounds of migration (e.g. after the Yugoslav wars). Look at their various national sporting teams. Just because you can't look past people's skin colour that doesn't make them "homogeneous". You need an educated and engaged populace that understands their civic duties.
    - Avicebron 1y ago
      I left out race specifically to plumb for people whose mind jumps and fixates on that > educated and engaged populace that understands their civic duties. This describes a homogeneous group. An environment that cultivates this unilaterally (relative to an arbitrary standard), is by definition more homogeneous than one that does not. It's a politics, standard of living, and equality economics dogwhistle that has nothing to do with race.
lclc 1y ago
Yes, how horrible when people get to have a say. Where will this end? In the case of Switzerland, it's ending up as one of the wealthiest countries, with a median wealth of $182,248 per adult. Also, since when is a political ruling class known for long-term thinking? Besides, cars are already taxed based on weight/power (what you considered common sense).
qcnguy 1y ago
That's because women themselves voted against it. Which is actually the history of the female franchise everywhere. The suffragettes were reduced to bombing campaigns because fellow women did not agree that women should be allowed to vote. In the UK it was only WW1 that changed things. Maybe in the UK female franchise would also have been much delayed if not for the huge social upheavals caused by the world wars.
- tzs 1y ago
  > That's because women themselves voted against it That's rather confusing. If women didn't have the right to vote, how would they be able to vote on the question of whether or not to grant women the right to vote?
  - 1718627440 1y ago
    Public opinion and newspaper influence. I think the idea that any policy is about a male/female divide is wrong. I also think, that women in the past having no influence on politics only because they weren't putting their name on documents, is flawed.
- n4r9 1y ago
  > women themselves voted against it Do you have a source for this? According to Wikipedia, > An earlier referendum on women's suffrage was held on 1 February 1959 and was rejected by the majority (67%) of Switzerland's men. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerl...

by sofixa 1y ago

dotancohen 1y ago

Even disregarding your quip about when women got the vote, your post reads like another anti-Western agenda post that has become very popular in the past two years.

bondarchuk 1y ago
It's true though, quite amazingly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerl...
- dotancohen 1y ago
  Why do you double down on this when I specifically disregarded that aspect of your comment from my post? And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda posts always met with multiple simultaneous downvotes, whereas my other unpopular opinions are downvoted one by one?
  - bondarchuk 1y ago
    Because I (different person btw) was curious about whether it was true, that's all, no further "agenda". There's some discussion on the talk page btw about whether or not it is indeed attributable to direct democracy btw.
  - rented_mule 1y ago
    > And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda posts always met with multiple simultaneous downvotes Maybe because acknowledging flaws in "y" is not necessarily "anti-y"? In fact, it is often "pro-y". I want to improve things I care about. A critical part of that is identifying flaws so they can be learned from and sometimes fixed.
  - mikestew 1y ago
    And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda… Perhaps folks don’t feel as if that’s what you’re actually pointing out. The post you replied to was referring to the direct democracy of Switzerland, not castigating all of Western society. I mean, from my point of view, by “disregarding” you basically ignored the entire point of the comment to support a narrative.

dkiebd 1y ago

I completely reject the notion that direct democracy is bad because Politicians Know Better. It’s borderline if not completely authoritarian and frankly disgusting. Maybe consider that Switzerland is one of the best if not the best country in the world because people can choose what they want it to be.

Avicebron 1y ago
This issue with direct democracies is that the they can get out of hand pretty fast unless your population is somewhat homogenous and reasonable. Aka Switzerland. If you're too young to remember twitch plays Pokémon, that's direct democracy and it was wild. A direct democracy could decide tomorrow that we wanted to fuck China sideways with nukes because it's funny and based all because a tiktok went viral.
- 1718627440 1y ago
  I think people rule differently depending on how much impact it has. People claiming "We should nuke them" knowing it will never happen is very different from them really deciding on that matter.
- sofixa 1y ago
  > This issue with direct democracies is that the they can get out of hand pretty fast unless your population is somewhat homogenous and reasonable. Aka Switzerland Sorry, but that's just a racist dogwhistle. Switzerland has four main ethnic groups, and has had multiple rounds of migration (e.g. after the Yugoslav wars). Look at their various national sporting teams. Just because you can't look past people's skin colour that doesn't make them "homogeneous". You need an educated and engaged populace that understands their civic duties.
  - Avicebron 1y ago
    I left out race specifically to plumb for people whose mind jumps and fixates on that > educated and engaged populace that understands their civic duties. This describes a homogeneous group. An environment that cultivates this unilaterally (relative to an arbitrary standard), is by definition more homogeneous than one that does not. It's a politics, standard of living, and equality economics dogwhistle that has nothing to do with race.

lclc 1y ago

Yes, how horrible when people get to have a say. Where will this end? In the case of Switzerland, it's ending up as one of the wealthiest countries, with a median wealth of $182,248 per adult. Also, since when is a political ruling class known for long-term thinking? Besides, cars are already taxed based on weight/power (what you considered common sense).

qcnguy 1y ago

That's because women themselves voted against it. Which is actually the history of the female franchise everywhere. The suffragettes were reduced to bombing campaigns because fellow women did not agree that women should be allowed to vote. In the UK it was only WW1 that changed things. Maybe in the UK female franchise would also have been much delayed if not for the huge social upheavals caused by the world wars.

tzs 1y ago
> That's because women themselves voted against it That's rather confusing. If women didn't have the right to vote, how would they be able to vote on the question of whether or not to grant women the right to vote?
- 1718627440 1y ago
  Public opinion and newspaper influence. I think the idea that any policy is about a male/female divide is wrong. I also think, that women in the past having no influence on politics only because they weren't putting their name on documents, is flawed.
n4r9 1y ago
> women themselves voted against it Do you have a source for this? According to Wikipedia, > An earlier referendum on women's suffrage was held on 1 February 1959 and was rejected by the majority (67%) of Switzerland's men. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerl...