this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2026
100 points (97.2% liked)

Europe

11353 readers
856 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Switzerland will hold a referendum on Sunday on whether to cap its population at 10 million people.

If the measure is passed, Swiss officials will have to roll out measures to curb population growth until 2050.

Businesses have warned that limiting immigration will weigh on Switzerland’s growth and competitiveness.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Summzashi@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I guess at some point a high population does become unsustainable. 10 million sounds arbitrary though.

[–] GenosseFlosse@feddit.org 10 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The people suggesting that dont do that to be sustainable, but because they don't want to share with others. To be sustainable they could limit meat consumption, travel less, buy less Bs from temu but this would be inconvenient for them, so it doesn't happen. It's only the others who must give up something, but not them.

Now where have I seen that before...

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's such a dumb take. Having fewer people is a valid way to be sustainable.

Of course that's not the goal of whoever is pushing this. But the idea that we should all go shit in the woods so the earth could sustain 15 billion humans is so ridiculous it sounds like a psyop to make ecology appears more like a sect than a matter of survival

[–] idealism_nearby@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Population control is "valid" in that it works I guess? But then so does mass genocide. Fewer people = less pollution. Doesn't mean we should do it.

We can reduce the vast majority of our footprint by doing exactly what he said: less animal products, less driving, less low quality consumerist bullshit purchased. You summarising it as "shitting in the woods" is just disingenuous bollocks. People can and should lead more sustainable lives.

[–] Summzashi@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

At the smallest notion of someone challenging your beliefs you just jump straight towards genocide. Hilarious.

[–] idealism_nearby@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Have you heard of "comparisons"?

Like, apples and oranges are both round, and fruits. Yet people say that comparing the 2 is "like comparing apples and oranges".

Are you upset at the idea of comparisons? Or do you just want to avoid the other points I'm making?

[–] Summzashi@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's a terrible comparison that poisons a fruitful debate for no reason at all. You're comparing a fair point to genocide, making it an indefensible position and grinds any discussion to a halt.

[–] idealism_nearby@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Does comparing an apple to an orange change the way that apples taste?

Can you reply to my actual point at some stage?

[–] Summzashi@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

I'm not the person you were responding to initially.

Even if I was; no. You're not worth debating at all

[–] architect@thelemmy.club 3 points 2 days ago

I mean, but we clearly don’t need more people so…

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

suggesting

And then you immediately take that idea as established fact?