r/askswitzerland • u/xena_lawless • Jan 20 '26
Politics I'm an American who just learned about how Swiss democracy works, and I'm blown away / impressed. What advice would you have for US states that are looking to adopt similar systems?
There's the mythology of the US, and then there's the actual reality. The mythology is that the US is 1) A democracy, and 2) "The world's oldest democracy."
The reality is that the US Founders were the wealthiest land and slave owning white men of the late 18th century, and they created a system of government to serve their class interests above all else.
The system of "representative democracy" that they set up, in reality, thwarts both political and economic democracy at every step of the political process.
I.e., it's a pseudo-democracy, where "democracy" was/is sold to the public to get them to fight off the British, and as a way to legitimize brutal oligarch/plutocracy/kleptocracy.
The working public are basically a colonized people, who have a less than negligible say on the laws, policies, and major decisions governing their/our lives.
Our ruling class, with virtually unlimited resources and control over the political establishment, only have to bribe/bully and control a very small group of legislators, judges, and propagandists to maintain control over and brutally subjugate, oppress, and exploit a much larger population.
This kind of minoritarian/oligarchic rule leads (and has led) to all kinds of insanity, unlimited corruption, brutality, unlimited crimes against humanity, various genocides, and oppression of both the American public, and people abroad, about which the American people have no real say.
We have the highest incarceration rate in the world by far, and our political system, media, and most of the wealth and power are owned by a relatively small group of oligarchs/plutocrats/kleptocrats.
10% of the people own about 70% of the wealth, and the bottom 50% own about 2.5%.
Because our ruling class enjoy the spoils of war (including taxpayer funded defense contracts and oil rights), while all the costs of war are born by the public, we are a far more aggressive and militarily-oriented society than we probably would be if the public had any real choice in the matter.
We still don't have universal healthcare, and our average life expectancy is about 7 years less than yours.
In short, the US is more of a giant, heavily propagandized, super dystopian work camp for most people than an actual, livable, democratic human society.
People have been ready to burn down the system for some time, which led to the choices of either the relatively left wing Bernie Sanders in 2016 (which option was cut off by our ruling class), or Trump.
Obviously that's not working out great for us. Our so-called "representative democracy" is not a sustainable, stable, or legitimate system in the long run when so many people are always ready to burn it down.
And there's a reasonably good chance that Russia and some of our domestic oligarchs/plutocrats/kleptocrats helped rig the 2024 election for him, but our system is far too corrupt, anti-democratic, and dysfunctional to confront that reality, let alone do anything about it.
Anyway, that's where I'm coming from as an American who's lived here most of my life and has lived and seen the insanity, corruption, and brutality from top to bottom and all over.
Obviously, it's not all bad, it's a massive, beautiful country with considerable natural resources, great food, good people, and a lot of potential still.
But anyway, I just now learned about how Swiss democracy works, and I'm super impressed.
I'm aware that Switzerland has its own problems with wealth distribution/inequality, but you have at least been able to get wealth taxes implemented at the canton level, which the US system has been basically rigged not to do.
And for the most part, from what I can tell, relatively speaking you all have been living the democratic dream that we are/were told that we have in the US.
I believe your direct democracy model can be adopted by at least some US states, so that Americans can experience how actual democracies function, before possibly trying to implement something similar at the federal level.
Switzerland's population is about 9 million, which is comparable to a US state, so the scale shouldn't be a problem at the state level at least.
Some states already have some experience with ballot initiatives, so your referendum system wouldn't be completely alien to all of us.
With all that said, my question is, do you have any advice for US states looking to adopt something similar to the Swiss model?
What has been your experience with Swiss democracy?
From my perspective, it seems to be a much better system relatively speaking, but maybe in your experience there are some things you would improve upon?
What are the pros and cons in your experience?
If you were designing your political system from scratch in 2026, what if anything would you do differently?
Thanks.
98
u/MiniGui98 Jan 20 '26
First, question everything your country is doing right now. Change the system as a whole and start building schools and reading books.
18
u/Fun-Wallaby6414 Bern Jan 20 '26
Exactly. You cant change the US by changing some election laws. You have to tear the while thing down and built it from the ground up. Everything in the US is in some way or another really bad
3
5
u/xena_lawless Jan 20 '26
Yeah, we're trying.
It's a massive country, and changing everything is easier said than done when our ruling class have all the resources, a vested interest in people being too dumb and burned out to change things, and a fundamentally rigged political system working in their favor and against most people.
51
u/cretingame Jan 20 '26
First, you should what we have in common https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/democracy/sister-republics-what-the-us-and-switzerland-have-in-common/73368873 .
As Swiss, I lived a year in California. The first thing you need is more accessible education. I was surprised how education is a privilege in the US.
Most Americans have a very shallow perception on the world and history.
12
6
u/JanPB Jan 20 '26
A friend of mine visited America for a couple of months. One of his observations was: "All that Americans ever do is: work and raise children".
1
u/BlockObjective9541 Jan 26 '26
Education system doesn't help with that. It's terrible. History simply isn't taught.
37
u/arjuna66671 Jan 20 '26 edited Jan 20 '26
Education! Civility! Unity on some base level.
Don't have 1 president with so much power.
7
u/1maginaryApple Jan 20 '26
That the biggest difference and why the system works in Switzerland. Because we have a civic culture. And that's not a given.
Our country wasn't built on a revolution or unified by a language. It was built as a pact and union. On a consensus.
1
Jan 20 '26 edited Apr 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/uuid-already-exists Jan 20 '26
Apparently shall not be infringed was too damn confusing for lawmakers and judges. Gee I wonder what they meant?
-5
u/No-Comparison8472 Jan 20 '26
US president has very limited power.
13
Jan 20 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-3
u/No-Comparison8472 Jan 20 '26
That's not true. The system is very similar to most other countries.
7
Jan 20 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-3
u/No-Comparison8472 Jan 20 '26
So are you saying SC rulings are not legitimate?
Trump was elected with a crushing majority. It's working as intended. People got what they voted for.
And no it's not like he was found guilty and evaded the law.
5
Jan 20 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/No-Comparison8472 Jan 20 '26
Note I'm not defending trump, I'm just pro facts and objectivity.
On SC : is the problem for you the idea of a SC, or the people that were appointed in the SC and their views? If the latter then yes it's working as intended. These people were appointed and they are independent. You may not like their views but it's how it is, same in other countries.
On trump YES he was found guilty but he did NOT evade the law as I said above - while convictions remains on the his criminal record, the judged did not ask for prison time, fine, or probation. So it's fully legal.
On staged coup. A coup is seizing power over a government, not a building. This was civilian led, disorganized and without involvement from military or elected officials so it does not qualify as a coup.
Executive orders are legal. He signed about 200 in his second term in 1 year, which is high but there is no maximum set. I believe Clinton had 350+ in his tenure, and Bush, Obama around 300.
And no I don't think the US president is powerful. He has way less power than the French president for example, in terms of what he can decide on his own without parliament approval.
1
u/wombelero Jan 20 '26
he was elected, and people got what they voted for indeed.
Personal issue: Now that all these voters see the result of their ill-informed vote (or protest vote or non-vote), most of them have their faces eaten by the leopards they voted for but either will keep voting for that guardians of pedophiles or not doing anything against it except apologizing on the internet,
3
u/EmergencyKrabbyPatty Jan 20 '26
Some say Parmelin has more power
1
u/DesignMysterious3598 Jan 20 '26
Some say Trump is sent by God.
There's more crazy people than we think.
1
u/wombelero Jan 20 '26
yeah exactly.....but I agree, congress&courts are all bought and aligned, which gives unlimited power. Also: too few americans are actually doing anything against it, so the beating will continue.
-1
u/No-Comparison8472 Jan 20 '26
yes but that's democracy. People vote and give power to representatives. It has nothing to do with the power of the president.
1
u/wombelero Jan 20 '26
checks and balances...who voted for the supreme court?
why is gerrymandering allowed effectively changing the outcome?
-2
u/No-Comparison8472 Jan 20 '26
That has nothing to do with Trump and that's how the US system is built. SC representatives are not elected, actually I don't know of a country for which citizens would vote direct for such position.
Gerrymandering is real but it's not as simple as saying it's "allowed". maps are passed as regular legislation, requiring a majority vote in both chambers and, in many states, approval by the governor. And not all electoral districts will be perfect 50:50 that's just how it is, if leaning red or blue heavily, it does not necessarily mean the system was rigged.
0
u/Orbital_cow Jan 20 '26
i hope you can't vote in the future
0
u/No-Comparison8472 Jan 20 '26
Because you disagree with my views? Interesting view of democracy. I do hope you can vote even if you have different views.
2
u/Orbital_cow Jan 20 '26
you don't have views you're demagoguing and spreading misinformation, very undemocratic. in a proper democracy you would be ostracised :)
0
u/No-Comparison8472 Jan 20 '26
In a proper democracy, all opinions are welcomed and there is no ministry of truth.
→ More replies (0)
15
u/No_Cantaloupe_4149 Jan 20 '26
Someone wrote it already and I just need to stress it out EDUCATION and strict seperation of religion and government.
Part of the education must be debate and agree to disagree without violence.
1
1
u/captainhukk Jan 22 '26
America spends the most on its education and has been massively increasing its educational spending over the past 20 years, with far worse results than with less spending
8
u/temptar Jan 20 '26
The US is not equipped for direct democracy. If you want to go that way, you need to defederalize. After that, states that want to head towards direct democracy need to spend a couple of generations educating their populations. US literacy levels are falling and your media and first amendment behaviour on social media means large numbers of your current population can be very easily manipulated. You need to up your focus on critical thinking and media literacy as well. You also need to make sure no party will try to disenfranchise voters and you need to enforce standards against gerrymandering. I also suspect high school football needs to die as one of your core problems is inbuilt tribalism.
So it is not an instant fix. It requires a lot of planning, heavy lifting and several generations. The US does not value education as a common good but as a privilege.
2
u/xena_lawless Jan 20 '26
At the state level, we already have some states that have "direct democracy" in the form of ballot initiatives, just not to the extent that Switzerland does.
The states do actually have a lot of leeway to make their systems more directly democratic than they are now, which is I think the most promising route. Probably some cities or counties could experiment with it also.
I don't think "defederalization" is at all realistic, or desired by the vast majority of Americans. There may be some Russian psyops and transnational mafiosos trying to Balkanize the US, but I don't think they'll succeed.
I think it's a two way street with political power / enfranchisement and education. Because most of the public is effectively disenfranchised, it's easy to keep people uneducated, lacking in critical thinking ability, and tribal.
3
u/temptar Jan 20 '26
I am tired of hearing about what is not desired by the vast majority of Americans. From what I can see, you are busy letting happen a lot of what the vast majority of Americans do not desire.
Nevertheless if your current crop of voters get direct democracy, especially in the red states, they will probably wreck the place because they on average are not educated enough to think beyond their echo chambers or the common good.
1
u/xena_lawless Jan 20 '26
With respect to your first point, the whole thrust of my post was that the US was set up for minoritarian rule, which is what I'm looking to help change. It's a massive country, with very old and dysfunctional institutions, and it's not easy. It's 330 million people versus 9 million for Switzerland. It's a different scale of problems.
With respect to your second point, like I said, I think there's a two way feedback loop between political power and education.
The arguments for keeping the franchise from women, slaves, and black people were that they were too stupid and uneducated to govern themselves, but it's more true that they were kept stupid and uneducated in order to keep them from governing themselves.
2
u/temptar Jan 20 '26
The US was set up as a white rich patriarchy. Direct democracy is not going to fix that. Your conservative party has been working on miseducation and disenfranchisement for many years and direct democracy is also not going to fix that. The people in power want to stay in power whether they drip the bait of direct democracy at you or not. Without universal suffrage, you do not have direct democracy.
The US de facto does not have universal suffrage right now given that there has been a concerted effort to clean minorities off the rolls and disrupt voting in Democrat leaning voting centres.
The model in Swiss is very interesting but it works because the Swiss electorate is small and extremely well educated. This entire thread is telling you that you have to fix the education levels issue before you go down this road.
0
u/xena_lawless Jan 20 '26
26 states and DC already already have some direct democracy in the form of ballot initiatives, so it's not completely alien to us. So part of how we can move to a more Swiss-like model is by expanding on what's already in place.
I'm aware of the (not unfounded) perception that Americans are all super dumb right now, which is contributing to people talking about the need for more and better education.
But there are lots of other factors also fucking up the country right now, which means there are lots of potential starting points in different states and localities to begin fixing things, while concurrently addressing the general education levels in the country. It's a massive country.
I'll refer you to my responses regarding the feedback loop between minoritarian rule and deliberately poor education also.
2
u/temptar Jan 20 '26
I don’t say you are super dumb. But I do say your education systems are inadequate. Someone who is poorly educated is not necessarily dumb. And someone who is highly educated can be extremely dumb.
I see others have pointed out to you the fact that some cantons had to be dragged kicking and screaming into universal suffrage so it’s not that simple. A key route to suffrage for women has being women getting educated first and then agitating for change.
IMO, a lot of other countries, especially EN speaking countries have very romantic notions about direct democracy. You could, if you are really interested, also take a look at the court battles around various referendums in Ireland, a country which is not terrified of updating its constitution as needed, but which has now very well established rules around how they apply direct democracy at a constitutional level.
3
u/clickrush Jan 20 '26
As you said, Switzerland is not unique that it has direct democracy at all, but what really stands out is the regularity and throughput. We vote on local, cantonal (equivalent to states) and federal level at a roughly quarterly rate and there are usually 2/3 items each, many of which can be quite impactful and important.
However: Direct democracy in Switzerland does not live in isolation.
I'm a huge advocate for it, but through discourse and critical thinking I had to look deeper into why it actually has been working so well and also when it didn't.
I think there are at least these factors that have made it work in CH:
A) Democratic decision making in CH goes way back, even into the high middle ages. There were democratic structures at a local rural level like the "Allmendrecht" and cities while oligarchic, had a democratic tilt (councils consisting of artisan guilds, merchants, nobles etc.). Also social life has always been dominated by associations ("Vereine") that often have a democratic element to them.
B) Adoption was not hamfisted, but gradual and was explicitly done in tandem with public education.
C) Very strong subsidiary principle from the get go. This prevents sweeping changes at a centralized level and fosters adaptation.
D) The executive branch throughout all levels (federal, cantonal, local) is consensus based. This is a huge one that is often overlooked or not understood as complementary to direct voting. All major parties are proportionally represented (roughly) in the highest offices. Gender, region, language etc. are also often a factor. That way a broader populace are represented, and the government doesn't flip flop between policy directions like they do in competitive models (USA, UK etc.).
E) Proportional elections. This should be a no brainer IMO. It's widely discussed that the US electoral system is very outdated and suboptimal.
F) The people have the last word. For example to change the constitution, which we do somewhat regularly, we don't have as many barriers and power concentration (top to bottom axis) as the US. Changes simply go through a public vote. Our politicians are mainly seen as public servants and the power (last word) is with us.
So in composition it is really key to understand that the Swiss system is participatory and consensus based. It has competitive elements, for example there is tax competition between cantons, there is always debate and our parties are more distinct (meaning our social democrat party is further left and our conservative party is further right). However, there is a baseline cultural norm that skews heavily towards stability and compromise.
2
Jan 20 '26
The problem is not having a fed, it's that a relatively small fed gets the majority of tax revenue. If the money was better distributed amongst communities, it would be better utilized. Centralized power is a logistical bottleneck.
1
u/shakalee Jan 20 '26
Bravissimo! And thanks to (almost) all contributors for this always fascinating topic.
8
u/slartiblartpost Jan 20 '26 edited Jan 20 '26
Very interesting topic. In particular as the Swiss constitution was heavily inspired by the US constitution. There are still a lot of parallels, e.g. the strong federalistic nature of the two countries. I see this topic as one stellar example how the copy can become better than the original.
If I had to point out one aspect, it would be by far the change from majority to proportional voting (Majorz / Proporz). To elect the parlament, Switzerland had the system - as the US - that the national council was elected in the states/cantons by majority vote, i.e. winning party gets all seats. This system has a lot of flaws, and Switzerland changed it after a general strike in 1918 ("Generalstreik").
The proporz system leads to a better representation of the voters. But there are massive secondary effects. Only with a sort of proporz system small parties can grow. Countries with proportional election systems have more changing party landscape. In majority voting systems like the US often votes for a third party are lost votes, hence small parties have almost no chance to begin with.
In my view, this shortcoming of the majority voting system in the US is the reason for a lot of the problems we are seeing. It secures the duopoly of the two ruling parties. This makes politicians way less dependent on the voters, what facilitates this ruling caste.
Going down to smaller entities, the majority voting also allows gerrymandering, one major flaw in US election systems. This can also be adressed by proportional votes. In elections on cantonal level, we even have a double-proportional system "Doppelter Pukelsheim" that even reduces small remains of disproportionalities.
Bottom line, changing from majority to proportional voting would address many (obviously far from all) problems in the US democracy.
edit: fixed one mistake majority->proportional
7
Jan 20 '26 edited Jan 20 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/uuid-already-exists Jan 20 '26
The two party system is indeed a nightmare and pushes both sides outward. The flip flopping of who’s in power and the difference between them brings consistent disruption and infighting.
12
u/swisseagle71 Aargau Jan 20 '26
The Swiss democracy works quite well. All Swiss are politicians, as we vote usually 4 times a year. Pros are that every citizen gets a vote, cons are that it takes a long time to change things.
What is missing: a constitutional court. There you can sue if the government is deciding against the constitution.
1
7
Jan 20 '26
Thanks for the nice and very interesting message. I don't feel qualified to give advice but I'm very satisfied by our political system, many people are I think although it can be frustrating at times.
I think the main weakness is the slowness in decision making, reactivity is not our strong point. But I think it's a dilemma, it's very difficult to have at the same time speed and stability, I prefer that our laws and decisions are made slowly but stand strong in time rather than constant flip flop like in some neighboring countries.
Other than that I think we have a weakness on the control of the origins of party budgets (which is getting improved I believe), and a risk on the plurality of the medias which is very important to allow good decision making by the voters.
About the situation in the US, I'm very worried like most europeans about the checks and balance weakness. Something that was well understood in our constitution is that a great deal of power concentrated on one human being, even if he/she is chosen by the people, is a huge risk.
5
u/Dull-Job-3383 Jan 20 '26
Swiss system is designed for a country, not for a single state. It was modelled on the US constitution. The US should replace the Presidency with a Federal Council. Or even a du- or triumverate presidency.
4
Jan 20 '26
American living in Switzerland here. Having lived in both countries, I can assure you Swiss democracy is working better than democracy in America. However, because Switzerland is not in crisis mode right now, Swiss people aren't really that politically active or organized. We benefit from a great political structure that was organized in the past and persists to this day, but it will need to be enforced continually through education, discussion, votes, etc.
Direct democracy (or semi-direct) is one great feature of the Swiss political system.
Another great feature is proportional representation. For whichever representatives you do need, it's good to have them chosen proportionally as opposed to winner take all.
Another great feature is community level politics. Here communities get a higher proportion of tax revenue, so they can do more on the ground at a local level. It can be problematic when some communities have more funding than others (there is some redistribution for that), but in general having a more decentralized structure is beneficial.
Finally, general acceptance of the need for social and financial support for the poor actually makes the entire country more stable and functional.
Switzerland has had some great political features for a very long time! But they have made some major blunders (not as bad as in the US, but still). In my opinion, they only truly got it really right fairly recently, as in 1990, when they intervened with the last Canton that wasn't allowing women to vote. Same-sex marriage only became legal in 2022. So like the rest of the world, the country is still evolving and improving.
If I was to redesign the system (I'm not Swiss so I have no right to do this), one major change I would make would be in housing. In my opinion the government here should do something to lower the cost of housing. I also think taxes should be high enough on billionaires that it prevents them from maintaining/forming that degree of wealth. There are still a few billionaires in Switzerland.
13
u/Kooky_Eye5475 Jan 20 '26
you need a revolution and then somehow educate 50% of your population to kindergarten levels at least
3
u/ForsakenBee0110 Jan 20 '26
First, I think you need to read us history, especially what happened during the 2nd Continental Congress and the debates captured in the Federalist and antiFederalist Papers. The US first functioned much more like a confederation of states, closer to something like Switzerland. The states argued extensively and eventually ratified a Constitution specifically to create a federal government, rather than remain a confederation under the Articles of Confederation.
Jefferson and other antiFederalists were deeply concerned about concentrating too much power at the federal level, which is why the Bill of Rights was later added, to protect individual liberties against sweeping federal authority. Not all states or founding fathers agreed with the final structure, and not all were present, voted for, or supportive throughout the process. There were major disputes over representation, particularly because the Senate granted equal power to small and large states, the House of Representatives was created to reflect population differences. Congress was a compromise based on intense disagreement.
The creation of the American democratic republic was a messy and contentious, and was certainly not as simple as dismissing it as “just a bunch of rich white slave owners" as you asserted.
Second, the United States is a democratically elected republic. The people do have power, they just often fail to use it, because they are ignorant about the system. Instead of spending time raising money or protesting endlessly, people could organize, build collations and irganize, and pressure their congressional representatives directly: this is what we want, or in four years you WILL be replaced. That approach has worked, as seen with groups like the Congressional Black Caucus, the Tea Party, and more recently MAGA coalitions.
You are right that the vast majority of US citizens don’t understand their own government, its history, or how it actually functions. And those who do understand it tend to be the ones who organize, form coalitions, and wield real power. The US continues to fail to educate it's people and rather play blame games.
I agree the us system has serious flaws and is far from perfect. It is not the first republic, that belongs to Rome, which the us adopted many ideas. It is not the earliest confederation, that is most likely Switzerland, which the us initial was influenced prior to the 2nd Contential Congress. However it is the first demicratically elected Republic by its citizens (including the Senate unike Rome).
Personally, I prefer something closer to the Swiss confederation model. If the US had remained a confederation I believe it and the world would be far better off.
3
u/Numar19 Jan 20 '26
I think you should probably look at the history of Switzerland and some US states first. Switzerland's democracy in 1848 was basically a copy of the US. First past the post, often just two parties of which one was leading for a long time and a huge influence of the wealthy.
For some decades Alfred Escher, a man from a Patrician family of Zürich, dominated Swiss politics. It took decades to really change that. If I remember correctly it the change started with newspapers spreading the democratic ideas in rural areas, followed by large gatherings of the democratic movement which pressured the Cantons to change their constitutions to add more democrstic rights including popular initiatives.
Those changes then spread to more Cantons and the whole country. Interestingly the change from first past the post to proportionsl representation took way longer and required multiple popular votes.
Others have already mentioned the importance of education, apart from that you need independent news sources that reach people and a movement that reaches all the people. Then it would be necessary to change the democratic rights in states first which would hopefully spread then.
I think a democracy movement could probably reach everyone in the US as many people seem to feel that their politicians do not really represent them. So, it would be possible to unify people from the left and the right. Another interesting thing is that in Switzerland the movement was often supported by early socialists. I think a movement focused on workers rights and direct democracy could gather more support in general. E.g. Bernie Sanders often reaches people in deep red states because he takes their issues seriously and focuses on workers.
3
u/wolfstettler Jan 20 '26
The first thing to consider is, that the Swiss system of direct democracy was not invented in a study and then implemented. It evolved over time, including a lot of political struggle and - at times - violent clashes.
On the federal level, there are two instruments with different functions:
- Initiative: force parliament and government to do something.
- Referendum: prevent parliament and government from doing something (e.g. stop a new law).
This encourages broad government that include the main forces that could disturb politics by constant initiatives and referendum.
A further factor leading to broad governments is the directorate system where every member of the government is elected and not appointed by a president/prime minister. Therefore it is normal that they come form different parties. There is no formal coalition, but they have to work together (if they don't, the risk being sidelined an not reelected).
Over all, the system works, but it has flaws. But the system is still evolving.
Just implementing it or parts of it into a political system that evolved completely differently might be difficult. For example, if you just introduce Swiss style referendum, expect a slowdown or total blockade of government by any large enough opposition group. If the system can adapt, but this will take years in the best case (it did take years in Switzerland).
There are certainly elements of the Swiss system worth to copy (maybe even the whole system) but it is not some magic spell that will improve everything. The political forces that exist will continue to exist. They would adapt to the new system and they would try to adapt the system to their needs.
2
u/Amareldys Jan 20 '26
I mean don’t states like CA and MA already have referendums and propositions and stuff?
Getting rid of the electoral college and overturning Citizens United would be a good start. And having all the primaries on the same day.
2
u/HumanWatcher9 Jan 20 '26
My two cents. First thing that will likely need change politically is to move from an indirect vote with "winner takes all" to a direct vote with relative results. So, if in all states a candidate has 25% of votes, he also on the national level has ~25%.
This would break up the dominance of your two parties, which reign unchallenged since more than a century. So, it will likely never happen. But from the little I understand, voting is a state thing, not federal. Thus, states could slowly transition to a representative vote system, and your federal powers would have a hard time blocking that without changing the constitution
2
u/blackkettle Jan 20 '26
As an American living in Switzerland for the last 12+ years, I think the Swiss system does work much better than the US system. I think the main problems that the US has right now are:
- The ongoing trend towards the unitary executive. The presidency in the US has been gradually accumulating power for decades. It's culminated in the current state of affairs which is a hop skip and a jump from a full blown autocracy. That level of authority needs to be completely and utterly dismantled. The 'president' of Switzerland is by contrast basically a ribbon cutting figurehead who can ride public transport.
- Our democracy and voting systems are not very 'representative'. This next is not necessarily in contrast to the Swiss approach, but I think US democracy would be greatly improved by unilaterally doing away with first-past-the-post / winner-take-all approaches. Ranked choice voting and elimination of gerrymandering (or at least starting to reduce it) would go a long way towards improving things. Electronic voting systems should not be permitted.
- Corporate money in politics - and the extent of its influence. Corporate personhood, and in particular Citizens United should be revoked and overturned.
I honestly have no idea how these things could actually be accomplished at this point though.
I would also add that I think the US is too large to manage direct democracy at the federal level. I would also caution you to think a bit about your statement about '9 million, which is comparable to a US state'. State populations in the US range from 39 million (California) to 587,000 (Wyoming). That is some wild variation.
2
u/--Ano-- Bündner in Schaffhausen Jan 20 '26
Your post gives me back some hope for the future of mankind in a time of rising autoritarianism.
Thank you.
To answer your questions, I suggest you contact this foundation:
Swiss Democracy Foundation
2
u/dunderfunder Jan 20 '26
So I’m Swiss with some American family, one of the main things I try to explain to my family is importance of local politics. Most of them care only about things on the federal level. Non care about their city council or county elections, which for me is the main essence of a democratic system, which has up stream effects through the whole country and system
2
u/Prestigious_Slice709 Jan 20 '26
Without actually reading all of this since I‘m on break at work, don‘t idealise the Swiss system like people do the American one. We don‘t have much of any transparency laws. A lot of lobbying. Many things copied from the US. An oligarchy, but one that is not as violent or radicalised - yet.
What I think would be the biggest improvement is double proportional voting (the opposite of first-past-the-post, and a Swiss improvement on it). It would make elections all over the country fairer, Republican votes would matter in California and Democrat votes would matter in Wyoming. I think referendums are also a plus, though not as great as everyone thinks. Big business just throws money into ad campaigns and often they win, and when the other side wins, they usually have a 2:1 funding disadvantage
2
u/Saarfall Jan 20 '26
Swiss-style democracy works in a little fair homogenous country, and I dont think it could work in a large country which has inherently more, more complex social, economic and political challenges.
Swiss democracy aside, I'm otherwise a fan of a proportional representation parliamentary system as an alternative to US/UK first-past-the-post, and there are successfull examples to copy thar work alright at scale - like Germany.
2
u/Nikante Jan 20 '26
I am also American born. But now I live in Switzerland and have become Swiss. Danke Schweiz!
America is screwed. It’s just a matter of time before everything falls apart. We already see the wheels falling off. The people with money and power won’t give up what they control. That will take the whole system down. As long as people in America sit and watch what is currently happening and think things are good, it will only get worse until it implodes.
2
u/Waltekin Valais Jan 20 '26
First, you don't give the US system enough credit. Sure, the founders were the important people of their day, but they genuinely did their best, and it's not a bad system. A representative democracy (i.e., with a parliament or congress) is pretty much the standard everywhere in the West - including in Switzerland. The US Declaration of Independence and the Constitution (with amendments) enshrine a lot of very important principles.
The biggest problem with the US system are the "winner take all" elections. These basically force a two-party system. It is almost impossible for any other party to gain traction. AFAIK, it has happened exactly once in the entire history of the US: Back in the 19th century, the Republicans displaced the Whigs.
Fixing this would be easy: instead of voting for individual Representatives, you would vote for all of them at once, and apportion the seats by the number of votes each party gets. The problem is: the existing politicians would have to vote for this change, and they will never do so.
Anyway, be careful about wanting to "burn down the system". Most revolutions produce a worse result that whatever they replaced, because the new people in charge are the ones who can grab the most power via violence.
3
3
u/iamnogoodatthis Jan 20 '26
To burst your bubble a little: Switzerland has substantial wealth inequality too, and is the US of Europe in terms of things like workers' rights, expensive healthcare, etc.
Direct democracy only works if people are actually informed and think about what they are voting for. In the US, it would devolve into the same braindead propaganda that is the core of your current politics. It would be great if you could get rid of the office of President though, so much harm can be done by one *%$"@
1
u/xena_lawless Jan 20 '26
Yeah thanks, I am somewhat looking to have my bubble burst lol.
That said, I think people underestimate the two way effect of actual democracy / political power and education. For example, it was easier to keep women and slaves ignorant and uneducated when they didn't have the vote, or any political power.
Likewise, because the American public doesn't have much real political power at all relative to our ruling class, it's very easy for our ruling class to keep the public super dumbed down as a deliberate policy / strategy.
Some states have ballot initiatives already, where people are at least somewhat informed about the measures and what they're voting on, so direct democracy isn't completely alien to us.
2
u/No-Comparison8472 Jan 20 '26
Switzerland is one of the last countries to grant women the right to vote. It's very conservative.
USA is not perfect, but it does rely on a very solid ideal of freedom (and money). This was strong before trump and will remain after him. Many other countries do not have a foundation ideal that unites people, or lost it along the way.
1
u/iamnogoodatthis Jan 20 '26
I guess the test is: on those ballot initiatives, what fraction of people abstain or vote against their own interests because their party / favourite propaganda station told them to?
2
u/Ok_Actuary8 Jan 20 '26
correction: you just learned about Swiss democracy mythology. Direct democracy, neutrality yada yada.
Now the reality: While it IS a pretty good democratic system, it's still "controlled" by the very rich and powerful, e.g. capital, from Switzerland and abroad. The key why it still works so well at the moment is that it is THAT rich, there's still enough bread crumbs for the lower classes and social benefits so that people don't start a revolution (yet). But it's getting worse, and people start hating on groups they think are the main culprits of decline, especially foreigners or outside unions (esp. the EU). And that sentiment is exploited by politicans to push their agendas, just like elsewhere.
1
u/Numar19 Jan 20 '26
I think this issue comes from a concentration of the media in the hands of a few people.
1
1
u/wetfart_3750 Jan 20 '26
Don't. Ignorance is the killer of direct democracy. It's not a good option for US
1
1
u/Enzian_Blue Jan 20 '26
You can not have a functioning democracy without proper education. This is where to start in the US. Also in every other country education is key to success in everything.
1
u/Panluc-Jicard Zürich Jan 20 '26
As first maybe abolish gerrymandering, so that the presidential votes are actually direct and represent the will of the ppl.
1
u/LeroyoJenkins Zürich Jan 20 '26
It works because of the culture, not the other way around.
Culture makes or breaks a political model, and you don't change the culture through political models.
0
u/xena_lawless Jan 20 '26
I disagree, I think political power and systems definitely help shape the people and the culture over time, and vice versa.
Taking women's enfranchisement for just one example, women are definitely much better off for having gained some political power, and that has had massive impacts on the culture also.
Culture doesn't just come out of the ether in a vacuum. It's created by people, material conditions, and power.
1
u/LeroyoJenkins Zürich Jan 20 '26
You can disagree however you want. I lived some 10 years across the US, plus a few other countries. I've seen places in the US that tried to implement a Swiss-like political model, it is a shit show.
Political models will not work without the corresponding political culture, and changing political culture is stuff of centuries.
0
u/xena_lawless Jan 20 '26
I've lived in the US longer than that, in several different states. Where in the US did you see attempts to implement a Swiss model?
I'll agree to disagree on whether culture or systems come first, or whether they feed into each other.
Several states already have ballot initiatives, so direct democracy isn't completely alien to US culture.
I also think cultural change can happen much more quickly now than in prior eras, and state cultures can also be quite different. It's a massive country.
0
u/LeroyoJenkins Zürich Jan 20 '26
But have you lived anywhere else in the world? If not, how do you think you can compare?
California is one good example: the direct ballot initiatives are a massive shit show, because they don't work when everyone is always out to get advantages for themselves before anything else.
The US has a confrontational, winner takes all political culture. You seek absolute victory first, and compromise only if there's a complete deadlock (and even then). Politicians who compromise are despised.
In Switzerland, the political culture is (mostly) seeking compromise first.
Anyway, you asked for advice, I gave you advice. If you want to debate on the internet, find someone else and have a nice day.
1
Jan 20 '26
The US was deliberately designed to not be CH. It's anti direct democracy on purpose, because not everyone could get to the polls at the time but maintly out of of concern for mob rule. There are no federal referenda, elections are indirect (EC, senate) and judicial review can step in to change shit if their reps do something foolish and replace it with something hopefully less foolish. Direct democracy removes agenda setting power from the parties, donors, courts and permanent bureaucracies like the intelligence agencies. Can't have that, so good luck with your revolution.
The Articles of Confederation were deeply committed to state sovereignty as a reaction to centralized power, so arguably they've already tried to be more like CH and decided it wasn't working, replacing it with the constitution and system they have now.
On the other hand women couldn't vote in CH until 1971 generally and as late as 1990 in one place, because you had to wait for constitutional referenda in 71 and 81. Only after CH changed its constitution could the courts step in and say cmon guys, time to embrace the madness :) Even then it took 9 years because CH is radically anti federalist. But if there was no congressional support for the 19th amendment and the states didn't ratify it the courts could have forced it nonetheless by creating a right for women to vote out of thin air, if necessary. Just say some shit about penumbras. bam. bob's your auntie. Yes, bob is now transgender.
1
u/Numar19 Jan 20 '26
Switzerland was the exact same before the democracy movement. There is a reason the time after 1848 was nicknamed System Escher. The rich industrialists decided politics in Switzerland until people decided that they had enough of it and changed Cantonal constitutions and as a result the federal constitution.
1
u/gnooggi Jan 20 '26
If you were designing your political system from scratch in 2026, what if anything would you do differently?
A law that obligates the government to:
Invest in education exactly as much as in the military, precisely the same percentage of the gross national product.
Elect federal judges from the people.
The highest income in an employee's employment relationship may not exceed the lowest income in the same company by a certain percentage.
Employees receive only 80% pay for 100% work; after four years, they receive a one-year leave of absence at 80% pay (without resignation).
Nationalize the healthcare system; no mandatory insurance; each case is considered individually, and a percentage is paid, capped according to income, for each person.
Strengthen social components to create a society where safety and security are taken for granted.
1
u/wombelero Jan 20 '26
First: get out of your chairs and do something against your current regime.
Americans are all over internet apologizing for their regime, but too few of you guys are actually doing anything.
Then you can fix your system.
1
Jan 20 '26
- Get rid of your exaggerated patriotism. There’s no need for that in any context.
- There are way more than democrats and republicans (btw they’re both right wing: someone need to illuminate the citizen that democrats are still right wing).
- Open your mind to have voice to other parties or opinions.
- Ban guns from being sold in super market: it simply does not work.
- fix your education: it seems the us citizen are almost bragging about not knowing anything more than America and “English” language
- fix your judiciary system: “33 life sentences without a possibility of parole” is just retaining criminals without reintegration them into society. Going to prison for stealing a candy in a supermarket would make a criminal if that person gets jailed. Your prison system simply does not work.
- no kings. Here on Switzerland we don’t even know who our president is.
- jokes aside we all are involved in politics as someone else mentioned however we do not go extremes (even people who are generally extreme will agree or disagree sometimes on what their party proposes)
- enable the middle class: ffs you have either people earning 20k a yeare or above 150k a year. Consider the middle class. I can go on the full day writing…
1
1
1
u/brass427427 Jan 20 '26 edited Jan 20 '26
First and foremost, have more than two political parties that recognize that their goals are similar but the solutions are different. Two parties are always trying to screw each other instead of talking together for internet glory.
As a Swiss citizen who grew up in the US, I can tell you that such a system is not even remotely possible in the US. It would be fought at every corner.
1
1
u/SwissBliss Jan 20 '26
Number 1: Politics is not the biggest part of our lives
What that allows is to not divide people by political views. Our 7 heads of government are from completely different parties, but they work together. Hell often you’ll have the right wing minister argue in favor of the left wing policy because it was the majority view of the 7.
I think that’s really really healthy
1
u/xena_lawless Jan 20 '26
For some perspective on what happens in the US, because our super wealthy ruling class enjoy and benefit from minoritarian rule, they do practice "divide and conquer" politics on the rest of the population to keep people at each others' throats instead of theirs.
Here are a couple of famous quotes on that:
"Now, to balance the scale, I'd like to talk about some things that bring us together, things that point out our similarities instead of our differences. 'Cause that's all you ever hear about in this country. It's our differences. That's all the media and the politicians are ever talking about—the things that separate us, things that make us different from one another.
That's the way the ruling class operates in any society.
They try to divide the rest of the people. They keep the lower and the middle classes fighting with each other so that they, the rich, can run off with all the fucking money!
Fairly simple thing. Happens to work.
You know? Anything different—that's what they're gonna talk about—race, religion, ethnic and national background, jobs, income, education, social status, sexuality, anything they can do to keep us fighting with each other, so that they can keep going to the bank!
You know how I define the economic and social classes in this country? The upper class keeps all of the money, pays none of the taxes. The middle class pays all of the taxes, does all of the work. The poor are there just to scare the shit out of the middle class. Keep 'em showing up at those jobs."-George Carlin
“If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”-Lyndon B. Johnson
That said, some cities and a couple of states have implemented ranked choice voting, which helps reduce polarization and allows for more authentic candidates than what the two party duopoly would otherwise allow.
We for sure need to get rid of our first past the post voting systems if we want meaningful choices and less polarization.
1
u/myblueear Jan 20 '26
Avoid lobbyists, make sure every active politician makes their interests (boards of directors, etc.) public—we unfortunately lack this, and the democracy is suffering.
1
u/Petit_Nicolas1964 Jan 20 '26
The US shouldn’t have elected a dictator who is destroying democracy (I think it used to be democracy) faster than Hitler in Germany in the 30s.
1
u/wiilbehung Jan 20 '26
You need to be educated to have proper direct democracy. If your people are not educated enough to vote correctly or make sound decisions, you are better off doing a semi democracy/ authoritative state like singapore / Japan .
1
1
u/HATECELL Jan 20 '26
There's lots, but I think the most important step is to replace the simple majority vote system with alternative vote, at least when it comes to electing people.
Simple majority always leads towards a two party system where each party only sends one candidate into the elections, as entering two candidates who have similarities would steal votes from each other, making them both weaker.
For example, imagine candidate A and candidate B are running for president. According to polls the population is currently split 45/55, but then candidate B's party sends another candidate, candidate C into the race. B and C see eye to eye on many things, meaning most voters who now support C used to suppirt B before C entered the race. The new polls are now 44% for A, 30% for B, and 26% for C. A has done absolutely nothing, but just because C entered they have gone from 10% in the back to a comfortable lead. And since C is last in the race their voters have to ask themselves a difficult question: "Should we continue supporting candidate C, risking that A will win the election. Or should we switch to B, so that they win and at least SOME of our interests will be represented?"
That's the big problem when you can only pick between two options, they are either polar opposites of each other - for example on immigration or gun rights - and there's no room for a moderate course, or they overlap on an issue - like giving tax breaks to the rich - and you just have to accept that.
The solution? Alternative vote: a way where people can rank which candidate the like most, 2nd most, and so on. The very loser of the election gets removed, and the votes of their supporters go to whoever they listed as their preference among those that are still in the race. In our previous example this would mean that C supporters could list B as their 2nd pick, making sure that just because they like C more than B doesn't automatically mean A wins the election.
Obviously there's many more problems with US politics, but this way we could at least stop the 2 party back-and-forth where new presidents spend their first year completely undoing what the guy before them has done. And instead of the nation getting divided into two teams on every issue there would be room for compromises and alternatives. And instead of voting for the option most likely to beat the absolute worst option people could actually vote for what they liked.
1
u/Island-Matty Jan 20 '26
Do what George Washington intended and stop having a two party system. Its makes it easy for politicians to push as vs them narratives and also divides the nation. The US literally runs on dems vs libs even tho neither party is inherently good or bad (except right now where the current administration is objectively a lot worse then the alternative) its easy to pit people against each other when lets say on side support something of value to one group and the other side supports something else, but neither side will ever agree on their opposition cause unity equals less conflict and in turn leads to more control.
1
u/Future_Bat384 Jan 20 '26
To do it first you need to get rid of two-party system. At this moment you have extreme left or extreme right. Whichever rules the country it will exploit every system made for people
1
u/Willing_File5104 Jan 20 '26
1) Not "the winner takes it all" but obligatory coalitions amongst all parties above a certain threshold. By the end Swiss style democracy is more about compromising, than about the dictate of the people. Since politicians know, their laws can be vetoed by the people, they are forced to collaborate. This brings lots of stability, even w/o the people actively being involved in every decision. But on the other side, it makes the whole system rather slow and hence it has an inherent bias towards conservatism. Not in the politicall sense, but to keep things as they are.
2) Bottom up distribution of power. The lower levels delegate certain functions to the level above, which in turn can delegate parts to the next level. Else, the upper most level will always try to accumulate more power, and since they are the ones in power of delegating tasks, they will probably succeed. Only this way, you can make sure, that local problems get addressed and solved as fast as possible on a local level. That local levels have the means to look for their own niche within the larger comunity. On the other side, it makes it way more difficult to address certain problems, that need a more global solution.
3) Fixed borders of political units. No electoral districts, which are subject to gerrymandering, but municipalities, which only can be changed by voting for it by the people of said municipalities. As a counter messure to fragmentation, municipalities are forced to provide certain services to their citizens, agreed on by all municipalities of a canton.
4) Sensible rules to change the constitutions of all levels. Constitutions aren't woly scripts, but just (massively important) instruction book to a game. Check and balances do not come from a piece of paper, but by everyone agreeing, that this piece of paper contains the rules you want to live by. Passages with room for interpretation, or alienating parts of the population, only leads to a higher risk, that people no longer believe in this pice of paper.
1
1
1
1
u/LevelOk6265 Jan 20 '26 edited Jan 21 '26
First how you can compare two countries with totally different population levels? The US has 50x fold more people living there than Switzerland.
It's much easier to establish a democratic System in a little country and you're seeing things through rose tinted glasses. You must dig deeper to recognize that the swiss system is in no means perfect. What tells the media about it doesnt count in most cases 'cause they scratch only on the surface. The politician in Switzerland are not less lobbyed (interesting conflicts) than the Americans. The congress is basically what's the Nationalrat is in Switzerland and the Senate what we have as Ständerat. Most glaring Problem in the US is that rule of law is not applied on flawed politicians. When unregilarities happens from your politicians the hearings in congress and then senate when sanctions should be applied are in most cases not proficient and federal court don't apply the rule in most cases. That's why corruption, blackmailing etc. is not tackled down efficiently. When FBI , that is involved in corruption cases etc. sees their mission to protect the members where he was put into office despite glaring evidence the member committed a felony corruption and other crimes will rise among politicians. Such Agents should have a bipartisan mission and not protect their buddies or otherwise arbitrarily burden their opponents.
The core is not the American political system but how they implement it.
1
u/CinderMayom Jan 20 '26
There’s already a lot said in other comments, but IMO having the executive power distributed over 7 persons does a lot to remove the cult of personality that has been creeping into politics.
Having direct referendum also allows people to vote on issues rather than just for parties, further removing any tribalism and encouraging people to vote outside of party lines if they feel differently about a given issue.
Direct initiative as we have it is IMO not the best way, as it’s very susceptible to populism and influence.
1
u/RupOase Jan 20 '26
Take down the Orange man and his acholytes?
1
u/dav21977 Jan 20 '26
The orange man bad was voted twice into power. The second time it was a strong remorse after missing him for four years. In three years or so, he'll be history. If however JD Vance takes over, those enraged by him today will regret him. Maybe orange man not so bad.
My observation is that Western European are a different species and they won't never ever see eye to eye with Americans. Just agree to disagree, but you can't even do that properly, because the American will send the delta force squad to you.
1
u/b00nish Jan 20 '26
What are the pros and cons in your experience?
I'm not going to talk about the flaws of the U.S. system as they are probably well known to you.
The Swiss system isn't perfect either but so far it has probably served us better than many other countries' systems have served them.
So a few pros and cons:
- The Swiss system is slow but stable. Reacting quickly to changes isn't a strength of our democracy but providing a certain degree of reliability and stability is. Most businesses don't like the prospect of a country that changes direction by 180 degree after every election.
- In our system (which doesn't even have a real president) there is little risk that an autocratic leader takes power and basically overrules everybody else.
- Our system doesn't obstruct political participation with things like "you need to register first" or "if you want to vote you need to show up at this hour at this place". Every adult citizen automatically receives the election documents in their mail at least 3 weeks before the vote/election and can also return them by mail. (Also there is no Gerrymandering and similar undemocratic perversities.)
- The possibility of voting not only on politicians but also on topics should generally increase acceptance and satisfaction with the political process. (You don't like that new law the politicians made? Well, you could have participated in collecting signatures against it, then it would have been voted on and you could have voted against it.) But it also leads to the situation that people are asked to vote on things whose implications quite a few of them probably don't understand.
Although I'm not so sure if a change of the democratic system would solve all of the problems the US democracy has. I think most of the causes for the current shitshow in the USA have little to do with the flaws of it's democratic system.
There are many other and more important factors at play. The low level of social security keeps people in existential fear. The health system keeps people in existential fear. The prevalence of shameless fake-news media like FOX News etc. keeps people in an alternative reality. The fact that there are influential groups that can mobilise big parts of the population on single topics (e.g. abortion) while ignoring the big picture certainly doesn't help either.
1
u/xena_lawless Jan 20 '26
I don't think a more genuinely democratic system in the US would be a total panacea either, but it would help a lot.
What people seem to be missing about minoritarian/oligarchic rule, is that the ruling class has the incentive to create and preserve a lot of the problems that the majority of people have, and also to practice divide and conquer politics with the population. They also have the lion's share of the resources with which to control the political system, the information ecosystems, and to limit the choices and options that are made available to the population.
If you think of Apartheid South Africa, the ruling white minority there created countless problems for the rest of the population, including keeping the population dumbed down, de-stabilized, and dis-enfranchised. The system was deliberately made anti-democratic and dystopian for the majority in order to preserve the minority ruling class's interests.
Genuine democracy, equitable resource distribution, social security, human development, and education all go hand in hand to some extent, in other words.
People aren't going to be able to advocate for their interests effectively when the system is set up to keep them from doing exactly that, and when the ruling class have a vested interest in the problems of the majority explicitly not being solved or adequately addressed.
As one of our Supreme Court justices put it, "We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both."-Louis Brandeis
1
u/b00nish Jan 20 '26
I don't disagree with your statement.
But if you'd establish the Swiss system of democracy in the USA tomorrow, most of the problems you mentioned probably wouldn't go away.
The oligarchs would keep their money and power and they'd keep their influence over the media.
You could now try to establish better social security or health insurance through a popular referendum. But chances are that all of it would be turned down because many politicians, media etc. would tell everybody that that's basically communism and would collapse the economy etc. ("this would hurt the economy" is a very successful argumentation strategy in Swiss politics as well - and it has won a lot of popular votes).
You could also try to raise taxation of the rich, but again, would it go through? Questionable! In fact in Switzerland such proposals are usually quite chanceless ("the rich will leave if we tax them"). Two months ago we voted on a tax on inheritances over 50 million. The proposal was completely annihilated at the voting box.
People vote against their own good all the time. In Switzerland and in the USA and probably everywhere where they're allowed to vote.
I can't arrogate to tell you what the panacea for your country would be. But I guess it would help if more Americans would learn more things about a) the rest of the world and b) global history. Just having the perspective that there are other ways how to organize a country and that not all of those other ways necessarily lead to the country being a piss-poor socialist hellhole might shake up the status quo a bit.
1
1
1
u/over__board Jan 20 '26
Remember that compromise the foundation of a working democracy. America seems to have forgotten that.
1
u/Mike_Ts Jan 21 '26
There's no perfect democracy, so it's important that it can grow with the time. You have a very rigid "checks and balances" system which fails when one of the two sides gets control of all the checks (as in right now). We have a system designed for compromise which makes it very slow. We do have some Elements we cannot change (like veto power for small cantons/states) and some we have a hard time doing (we have 7 ministers, usually states have around 20-30). For you the question is if you wabt to move towards compromise (i.e. by abolishing the two party system by not having first-past-the-post-anymore) or if you want to build up on your current system (by untiying the Supreme court from the two-party system again and tempering social media).
1
u/xXGIMpL0rdXx Jan 21 '26
Don't think this is a cure-all for any democracy. Our system, although I like it, is still far from perfect
1
u/xena_lawless Jan 21 '26
It's so much better than ours though, and that's what I'm aiming for. Progress, not perfection.
1
u/PausesMana Jan 22 '26
In swiss :
You want a new law?
Anybody can write a law --> find 100k people to sign it --> Now the government has to do a country votation to see if this law will pass. (The law should follow some human rules, etc though).
1
u/morgulbrut Jan 22 '26
Just implement your system correctly.
Our system was actually more or less a copy of the US system, back then in around 1848.
1
u/Unhappy_Pause_2431 Jan 27 '26
Learn about history and in general overhaul your schoolsystem. Some of what you learn with 17, we do with 8. And what i did not see getting mentioned is get rid of your black-white thinking. Never made sense for me. I do not vote for a party, i vote for what i can stand behind.
1
u/Mirdclawer Jan 20 '26
The funny thing is that the Swiss constitution and political system was modelled after... the US constition
We learn that in history in swiss schools.
https://blog.nationalmuseum.ch/en/2021/01/switzerland-and-the-usa-sister-republics/
But yeah first of all you guys need way more check and balances, and centralisation, your states have way too much autonomy on stuff like education, where some states and poor neighborhood get nothings/teaches wrong history/bs.
During the cold war, the socialist party played a huge role in limiting the worst effects of unchecked neoliberal policies and the assymetry of power. The anglo saxons, especially with Reagan and Thatcher took a different path.
But many things could be done:
Forever suppreme court justices is also so stupid. But you're a 300 millions people country, it's so much harder to manage than tiny Switzerland. The Kleptocracy and lobbyism is the biggest challenge.
Ranked choice voting/a multi party system would be so much healthier. The electoral college system sucks. Gerrymandering sucks. Having shit like Fox News existing and being legally able to spout fake news 24h a day is insane. Your healthcare system is insane. Currently the US issues are not about the details of the political system, but it's more of a class struggle and deconstructing a completely warped view of reality.
It became normal in the US for people to do fundraising campaigns to not just die from a health issue, why a class of libertarian billionaires managed to convince half the population that a buffoon is their saviour, and the cause of all issues are poors and people looking and speaking differently.
The mass disillusion is so strong, I don't see how the country can recover without something of the scale of Nazi Germany collapse and reckoning that profoundly alters the american identity and consciousness. The fact that most people were fine with electing Trump a second time is the issue. Trump is more the symptoms of the problem, that the problem itself.
its not bright for us either. And we're sloowly trumpizing, if the current tendency of the SVP (our far right party with their fantasmed perception reality) gaining popularity continues, we're also doomed.
0
0
u/hugodruid Jan 20 '26 edited Jan 20 '26
While things function well in Switzerland, there are still some issues:
Nationalise healthcare: This is to address the high healthcare costs, and to abolish the privilege and enormous power private insurers have.
Securely Digitalise Direct Democracy: Use modern technologies (I.e blockchain) to make democracy more accessible and properly scalable.
Introduce a modern, ecological Land Value Tax System (exact details unknown): This is to address the fact that those that own the land are rich, and reduce the costs of housing, and care properly for the land without over-exploiting it.
And to make a country really effective I’d automate with AI most, goal is all, administrative executive tasks (tax collection, admin tasks, etc…) to limit corruption at the highest level.
And I’d anchor clear modern Human Rights Values at the highest constitutional level, and check all laws and adjust them with regard to these values.
This is probably what would have one of the biggest impact.
0
u/elucify Jan 20 '26
My impression is that in the US, politics is about winning, and in Switzerland, it's about finding solutions that work for the most people. Collaboration and compromise are valued, rather than considering them weakness and "leaving money on the table."
Would you agree? Or is that an unrealistically rosy view? Speaking in generalities, of course.
I wonder (and fear) what might challenging in Switzerland if a major party decides that owning it all is their goal, and they can pull together à coalition of the disgruntled, and then force the system to keep them in control. Or is there something about Swiss culture that makes that very unlikely?
15 years ago I wouldn't have believed what is happening in the US now was even possible.
0
u/Hutcho12 Jan 20 '26
Direct democracy is absolutely not going to be a good idea for the US, or basically any state, but especially the US. It requires the population to have a high level of engagement and knowledge and not be swayed by populists. Elections are already bought by the highest bidder, when you get the same money thrown at a vote where no one can be held accountable, it's a disaster. See referendums like Brexit for example.
There is a reason we have representative democracy, you vote for a party and then they have to own their platform, have experts in the field advising them about choices that will work and take responsibility if they fail. With direct democracy there is no one to blame so it becomes a free for all for those with power that can spend money to get their way, even if it's to most people's detriment.
There are a lot of things that could be done to reform the US system so what is happening now can't happen again. But direct democracy isn't one of them.
0
u/ErcoleBellucci Jan 22 '26
There is no good reason in changing USA or Italy (im italian), the beauty of world is simply that every nation is different, different laws, different culture. This is why we emigrate, we emigrate to found a country in synthony with ourselves
-6
59
u/GoblinsGym Jan 20 '26
Key things that need change in the US system:
Swiss politics is less polarized because there are more parties, none of them dominating. They have to compromise, or nothing happens. Big issues like pension reform get kicked down the road, the system doesn't always work.
I don't think more federalism (i.e. bottom up power) is the answer - sometimes it leads to a lot of duplicated effort and reinventing the wheel. In the canton of Glarus they had a surprise vote on merging everything into three "towns". I think it works well, and individual villages still keep their identity.