Doesn’t Switzerland operate a system of “a referendum for everything”? The system of referendums (referenda?) is integrated into their policymaking process – unlike in every other country in Europe.
Is this private flying tax being done with a referendum?
Cobalt wrote:
My comment was not aimed at the US constitution specifically; this was just an example that the best intentions in a written document (and in this case “only” the declaration of independence) are worth nothing if the general population chooses to ignore them, and recourse to the law is not available or impossibly slow.
…or the leadership of the country. As far as I understand the constitution of the USSR was even better than that of the US regarding human rights. That doesn’t help much if the leadership choose to ignore it.
Airborne_Again wrote:
As far as I understand the constitution of the USSR was even better than that of the US regarding human rights. That doesn’t help much if the leadership choose to ignore it.
Government cannot create rights, it can only remove them (as in this Swiss initiative) The US Constitution is therefore not about human rights directly, it is about limiting the power of government.
Airborne_Again wrote:
That doesn’t help much if the leadership choose to ignore it.
The soviets were pretty heavy on gun control were they not?
Silvaire wrote:
Airborne_Again wrote:As far as I understand the constitution of the USSR was even better than that of the US regarding human rights. That doesn’t help much if the leadership choose to ignore it.
Government cannot create rights, it can only remove them (as in this Swiss initiative) The US Constitution is therefore not about human rights directly, it is about limiting the power of government.
The comment regarded a constitution not government. Of course a constitution can create rights. Without one (or another legal mechanism) there is no such thing as an enforceable right.
Off_Field wrote:
The soviets were pretty heavy on gun control were they not?
You were not allowed to have a short-barrelled weapon, otherwise – same as the hunting weapons in most other places (except US) – medical, police check and you get shotgun. A couple of years of probation and then you can get a rifle.
Airborn_Again has raised an excellent point – on paper Soviet constitution was not bad.
JasonC wrote:
Of course a constitution can create rights.
In the US we call them God given rights, meaning of course that we are not granted our rights by a government. We had them before any government was created. The basic constitutional issue that relates to this thread is controlling concentration of power, regardless of the perceived merit of the individuals. Quoting from this link
The Founders thought that a free society could only flourish if its leaders are virtuous—which means that its citizens must be able to recognize virtue when they see it. They understood that even virtuous leaders, however, can succumb to the temptation to abuse the rights of others, so they knew these leaders needed to be restrained from exercising their cleverness and strength in ways that undermine individual rights.
And ultimately
Most of all, freedom depends on citizens having the wisdom, courage, and sense of justice necessary to take action when they see government overstepping its bounds.
We’re a long way still from this being implemented, and IMHO the chances of this being implemented in its current form is close to zero. At the very least, a more likely scenario is that the CHF500 would be reduced to 10 or 20. Any proposal passed in one house (the house of the cantons (or senate/lords in NA/UK terms)) then goes to the other house for discussion (house of representatives … the larger house). It only becomes law if it also passes there unchanged. Any changed version goes back to the originating house for approval. Once a law is passed by both houses the opportunity for a referendum comes into play.
Peter wrote:
Doesn’t Switzerland operate a system of “a referendum for everything”? The system of referendums (referenda?) is integrated into their policymaking process – unlike in every other country in Europe.Is this private flying tax being done with a referendum?
Yes and that is the hope that it will be stopped at this stage. It has passed the upper house now and will go to the lower house, where, as CH Flyer sais, it will be debated yet again. This will happen after the elections in fall, where at the moment a left-green landslide victory is projected in the press. If that happens, I am less than optimistic that it will be taken to a “reasonable” level, but rather get even worse.
In any case, the whole thing will most possibly be challenged by a referendum. And if it was “only” the aviation stuff in there, then I would be very surprised if it passed. However, it is not. It is a whole CO2 legislation taking on every aspect of life, the aviation part is only a couple of lines in a multi page text. In other words, it is a "save the planet (and punish mankind for their wrongdoing) kind of text at the moment, which, if opened to public debate, will cause a war of words (if it stays there) probably quite unprecedented in Switzerland. And there is a 50-60% chance that people will be scared enough of the impending doom to accept it. We´ve seen this before, punishing taxes have been accepted “for the greater good” and because people will think that it hits others more than them.
The climate against aviation has been worsening over the last years up to the point where there were proposals to ban short haul transport altogether and so on. The famatism over this issue is mounting by the day and it is yet again a generation conflict carefully ochestrated by the same sort of people who sent children and youths against their parents in the 1960ties and 70ties. That mess is still in very clear memory as it happened throughout much of my school days and it was very ugly indeed.
Most of all, freedom depends on citizens having the wisdom, courage, and sense of justice necessary to take action when they see government overstepping its bounds
That’s the only important part. And that power has to be exercised continuously. Under normal circumstances it means elections or more direct involvement – democracy. This is also the job of the monarch, but is very seldom exercised except in extreme conditions. For everyday stuff there are ombudsman to protect individual citizens, and of course all kinds of organisations that can influence through lobbying and so on.
Surely there must be some Swiss pilot organisations that can handle this ?
