[kuboble]

I think this focuses on the wrong issues.

Tin my observation the main advantage of swiss system is the institution of the referendum.

It means that every major decision is decided by the people. The elected government decides on the 99.9% other issues.

The consequence of this system is that absolute majority of public discourse focuses on the issues and problems and not party affiliation.

So e.g. the most consequential election isn't the one where you have to choose the guy who will make everything great again, but e.g. the referendum if the country should spend billions over the next decades on the new tunnel under alps instead of other infrastructure projects.

[mothballed]

You're completely ignoring that the Swiss system itself was a cultural output of that voting block, one they've kept remarkably insular, and with the remnants of this system going back to something like at least the middle ages. And then lucked out in many ways in WWII where most of Europe did not. The system didn't make the 90-95% euro voting block, the 90-95% white euro voting block made and support the Swiss direct democracy system itself in the context of finding it functional for their relatively insular society.

You can't just ramrod a cultural output into other cultures and expect it to work or even expect different voting demographics who might have individually accepted direct democracy to continue to do so once put in a more diverse country. They tried democracy in Somalia and it worked worse by most measured metrics (including economic) than the xeer system of tribal hearings and decentralized governance for which their culture had adapted.

[kuboble]

The system is unique to Switzerland.

But it's not the consequence of the skin color or the neutrality. All European countries have been practically 100% white until not long ago with vastly different outcomes.

[mothballed]

Liechtenstein is probably the closest second in direct democracy nature in Europe and I'd argue the outcome was close, maybe even better. They do also have some quasi-monarchist elements too though -- they have a monarch but also right of secession (unique in europe I think) to check the monarch so they have basically a direct democracy clamp on any monarchist tyranny on direct democracy outputs.

I think the results have been pretty consistent that out of places 90+% euro-white voters in direct democracy and relatively neutral in WWII performed well (Lichtenstein was neutral in WWII too). I think it's harder to find examples of the creation and effectiveness of direct democracy in places where there is a lot more variance in culture -- Uruguay might be one good example but they are also probably the most guarded of citizenship in all of South America (you can very easily get residency but the judges will produce endless BS requirements if you try to become a citizen; they basically will not let it happen).

>But it's not the consequence of the skin color or the neutrality

Lets not pretend we're referring to the actual melanin in skin jumping out and doing something. No one thinks an albino kid of black parents is suddenly going to think like a Swiss voter.

>All European countries have been practically 100% white until not long ago with vastly different outcomes.

The outcomes of WWII ~neutral nearly all euro white fairly direct democracies (that's basically, switzerland and Lichtenstein) have actually been highly correlated with some of the best outcomes in the world, so I'm not sure how on earth you came to this conclusion or straw man argument that merely having white skin is magically gonna get you anywhere.

[kuboble]

Lichtenstein is so deeply integrated with Switzerland and for many purposes is a little more independent swiss canton that it doesn't hold as separate example.

Swiss culture of democracy in unique in the world and is unique among 100% white countries. It's bread among others from its unique geography and history.

Swiss are genetically indistinguishable from French, German, Italian or Austrian neighbors.

When did culture developed, other 100% white countries (which many didn't exist in their modern shape) like Slavic states, Nordic states, Germanic states, French, Spanish, Portugal, Italian, Greek, Balkan etc. All of them have not developed anything like Switzerland.

Credit goes to very specific swiss culture, and the claim that it is what you get of you put white people together... just doesn't hold.

And the swiss neutrality was just a pragmatic decision at a time and today the concept of neutrality is often being questioned in Switzerland while the democratic system is not.

[mothballed]

No I'm claiming swiss culture is people of 90-95% white euro voting block. Not that 90-95% white skin and magically out of that will dump swiss culture. Whatever white supremacism straw man you think you're arguing against, it's laughably hilarious how hard you are trying to reframe my argument to match it.

Of course I can't prove it, but it was absolutely magical how my comment was flagged the immediate moment after your initial comment posted. So I suspect, this was never a genuine response anyway, you just couldn't help yourself making your little note while flagging mine because if you had reversed the order your fake little straw man argument couldn't have been injected in. And don't bother with "it wasn't me" because it's really only you and I reading at this point and I'm not going be duped.

What we have is a story of direct democracy working in a remarkably insular voting block of 90-95+% white euro voters with a fairly organically evolved direct process going back to in at least various elements the middle ages. And relative neutrality in WWII. When your bullshit argument turned out to be false about varied results (Lichtenstein was consistent when they did the ~same thing) you tried to wash it away as Swiss-adjacent while also claiming swiss are just an indistinguishable mixture of French, German, Italian etc -- defeating your own argument.

The only consistent rebuttal you have is your absurd white supremacism straw man whenever the weaknesses of your argument is pointed out. Which really, just shows how laughably weak of a ground your thoughts stand on. It's pretty clear that the actual facts I presented of the most successful direct democracies (Switzerland, Lichtenstein) have a 90-95% white euro voting block, difficult to naturalize, and neutrality in WWII stand on their own whether they are causal or not and that's why you're so desperate to suppress these facts by flagging them falsely under the bucket of white supremacism because we can't have people objectively witnessing that.

Personally I think it's entirely unreasonable to expect culturally novel political systems to withstand cultural diversity shocks. Africa's stability was totally rocked by the influx of Europeans, as was in the Americas, from the Mongols in Persia, it goes on and on. America's political system developed in the face of absorbing former slaves, absorbing parts of Mexico and former French colonies (Louisiana, and Louisiana purchase), and all sorts of insanely diverse interests that far outpace what Switzerland has tried to absorb. Swiss has been 90-95% euro white citizens.... since a very very long time and has had that stability in which a long history of direct democracy culture to flourish. It would be rather silly to think you can apply the lessons of Switzerland and just drop them in somewhere else. It would also be silly to think the local culture is going to well tolerate direct democracy if they see it as a fast-lane to a rapid immigration channel co-opting their interests (representative democracy slows this down; you basically have to be entrenched to get into high office, and getting entrenched takes time, further favoring the old boy network of established residents).

What we have seen is in culturally stable parts of Europe, with low variance of absorption of non-whites, yes direct democracy has been able to develop and been amazingly effective, but this was in an environment of 90-95% being (in your own words, not mine) "genetically" indistinguishable white Europeans and largely culturally as well -- this is not at all the way people view themselves in place like USA. I'm not asserting it is the actual color of the skin itself that fosters that, although it can be used as way to measure rate of change of absorption of absorption of some other cultures that could complicate the process of unifying votes.