Democrazia diretta in Svizzera
https://i.redd.it/0p0bh1lda53f1.jpeg
di 927xks
Democrazia diretta in Svizzera
https://i.redd.it/0p0bh1lda53f1.jpeg
di 927xks
34 commenti
It is why Switzerland is not part of the EU and why we in the EU will never have such political/voting system. The autocrats in Brussels will not allow it.
When did you give women the right to vote at the federal level again thanks to direct democracy?
That system works only if you are not relevant to Russia and therefore are not the victim of massive desinformation campaigns, cyberattacks or manipulations.
45.5 % turnout is not something to be proud of.
Could only realistically work in a relatively homogenous democracy, imho, with a relatively small population
the aspect here nobody talks about is that direct democracy directly leads to the people bearing responsibility/having available to them the full set of tools to guide the nation. In all countries unsuccessful policies exist, Switzerland isn’t an exception just because the people voted for such an unsuccessful policy but at the end of the day the Swiss people need to own their mistake and can go over it again at a later point while in other countries people only can go protest and in a even worse case have to accept the incompetency of a autocratic government… just look at Erdogan and how he handled inflation
How does a country with so much direct democracy and participation allows so much money laundering?
It would never be introduced in Germany as this would primarily lead to a stricter migration policy.
How does this work, though? I feel like votes in most countries would be massively influenced by misinformation from within the country where the vote is taking place or by, for example, Russia, China, or the USA.
Yeah
Women in Switzerland gained the right to vote in federal elections on 7 February 1971, **following a national referendum** in which 65.7% of male voters approved the measure. **This made Switzerland one of the last European countries to grant women full voting rights at the national level.**
Ok and? Direct democracy is not the best system
I want to be Swiss.
That system has a lot of vulnerabilities to populistic politics. It also can lead to minorities getting walzed over.
Guys I’m so happy for you
Everyone saying direct democracy is great in theory but doesn’t work on large scale, why not? Are you 100% happy with how everything is run? Imagine if with 1m signatures you could force a vote on a new idea, rather than just a debate. Imagine you can vote for your preferred candidate, but block if they do something you do not like, through a referendum.
This takes so much power away from lobbyists and politicians, as many studies have shown, money has less influence in Politics and over people than in other countries. The truth of the matter is, if you disagree with it, you are fine if voices are suppressed, and you are fine with it because currently it’s not yours. The far right wants this at the moment, because it’s their voice being suppressed. Like the AFD being shut out of government. Whether you like them or not, they are popular for a reason, and the reason why they are popular is not being addressed. So they will keep growing and as long as they are shut out of government they will want direct democracy so they can participate. Imagine for a minute the AFD rises to power, which will happen during the next election. Are you then ok if your voice is suppressed? Are you fine with having a Trump like figure and not being able to do anything other than wait 4 years for the next election?
Whether you think what has been done to the AFD is right or not, and I do agree the AFD is dangerous, if you do not change anything history will repeat itself. Hitler rose to power for the same reasons. People didn’t hate Jews. People were suffering and Hitler gave them an out and someone to blame. The AFD is doing the same. The people that voted for the AFD feel unheard, so they become more radical. Direct democracy defuses that tension, because every voice has to be heard.
Everyone saying direct democracy is a bad idea, would also be complaining if a Trump like figure like Marie le pen or Alice Weidel would rise to power. Your position is only supported by the fact that the European governments are rather liberal at the moment. What happens if they are not? Wouldn’t you think it’s a good idea if Trump had to get his agenda past the population? If every decision he made would have to pass a national vote? Because then it wouldn’t pass. As the majority of the population, does not support most of it and things such as gun control would finally pass as they are widely popular even with Republicans and NRA members.
It’s always the people that have never experienced it, that disagree with it. The numbers speak for themselves. Higher Happiness, Higher standard of living, Higher life expectancy, Higher incomes across the board (In a low level position in Switzerland I earn more than a brain surgeon does in the EU), Higher GDP per Capita, Higher Political participation, Higher education level and Higher PPP adjusted salaries.
Slow change is lasting change. While the far right is on the rise everywhere talking about stripping rights from women for example, that stuff is just a fringe in Switzerland because slow change is lasting change. Whether you agree with someone or not, calling them a racist for example, will not change their opinion. If you listen to a person and address their concerns, whether real or imagined, that changes hearts and minds. The most clear example of this is the Black KKK member, that caused 100+ people to leave the KKK as a result of not being confrontational. Because of the direct democracy, everyone has to be heard out, and one side cannot steam roll the other.
European countries take 3 steps forward, 2 step back. Constantly. We just make one step. Slowly, but we move forward, constantly. Every other European government flip-flops in laws and policies. That is bad for the citizens and bad for the economy. There is a reason Switzerland is as prosperous as it is, and it can be described in one word. Stability. Things change, but they do so slowly.
Rest in attached comment below:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1kvx8rj/comment/mudo7fs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1kvx8rj/comment/mudo7fs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
With average voter turnout 45,4% you could have “50%+1 vote” with *less than one quarter of population*. “The final say”?
direct democracy works very well in Switzerland, but its at about a limit of the scale that it could work in – definitely unfeasible for a country any larger than that, and also switzerland has a population well adjusted to this kind of system.
it does allow for things that the population wants, but would never be passed by any other type of government, eg. in switzerland they passed a law that forbid building of new minarets, and they had to pass it because a citizen initiative got enough votes to put it into a vote, and it won with 57% of the votes adding this as an amendment to the constitution.
Why is this sub so negative to non-EU countries?
It’s so shitty to come to r/Europe and see negativity to European countries.
It has its perks but also its weaknesses. People are in general voting against change, so we move forward very slowly in politics. Big steps are very difficult for Switzerland. In a fastly changing world this can be a weakness.
A good thing though, is that there is almost no chance of losing this direct democracy. Also because everyone wants to keep it. Swiss Orbans or Trumps would have had no chance of destroying our democracy like they do in Hungary or the USA.
How does it work when all cantons band together and always vote opposite against what one other canton wants?
How’s the media (local too)? Democracy without access to relevant facts isn’t.
Thats very expensive for the state tho. Also, ideally politicians should be able to make decisions that are needed long term, but hurt the people right now, and dircet democracy doesnt encourage that.
That’s a really bad turnout rate.
While I applaud trying to be as democratic as possible, The issue with referenda is that they often boil down complex nuanced issues to simple yes no questions.
Also, but this is true for all elections nowadays, the public can be heavily influenced
Imagine if the people who elected trump could vote on every aspect of your life basically.
Many European countries should take note on how Swiss democracy works, and even improve on it.
More citizens assemblies, referendums and participatory budgeting!
and they chose to be a tax heaven…
Swiss here. This is wrong.
Switzerland is a semi-direct democracy on the federal level. We still have an elected parliament and government and don’t vote on every single issue directly (which would be the characteristics of a direct democracy
What does active participation mean? Because 45.4% turnout is less than half of ours.
The fun starts when the people oblige the government to do something that it has no authority to do because it would mean it had to force a decision onto other sovereign countries. Putting the government into an impossible position (unless we are talking about the option of invading said sovereign countries to force them to comply with the will of the Swiss voters).
Can the souvereign vote against bilateral contracts or the constitution? For example vote to build nuclear weapons without leaving the nonproliferation treaty?
This system makes decision making extremely susceptible to populism. Populist politicians in indirect democracies can only make you vote for a party every few years. But in direct democracy every good proposal for change can fail if a big party campaigns against it. That’s also aplies to use of direct democracy in other countries. Populism by conservatives and EU-scepticists was a major reason why the British public voted to leave the EU in 2016.
I wonder whta would happen if you combined a system like this with one like Australia’s, where voting is mandatory