this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2025
290 points (99.0% liked)

World News

51431 readers
3581 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Swiss voters on Sunday decisively rejected a call to require women to do national service in the military, civil protection teams or other forms, as all men must do already.

Official results. with counting still ongoing in some areas after a referendum, showed that more than half of Switzerland’s cantons, or states, had rejected the “citizen service initiative” by wide margins. That meant it was defeated, because proposals need a majority of both voters and cantons to pass.

Voters also heavily rejected a separate proposal to impose a new national tax on individual donations or inheritances of more than 50 million francs ($62 million), with the revenues to be used to fight the impact of climate change and help Switzerland meet its ambitions to have net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SARGE@startrek.website 89 points 3 weeks ago (10 children)

Is Switzerland full of sexist people who think "someday I'LL be rich so I don't want to tax MYSELF more, hypothetically maybe in the distant future"?

[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 75 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Afaik, Switzerland is a very conservative place. So that pretty much aligns with what you said.

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 66 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They are so conservative that women got the right to vote federally in 1971. In one Canton they only got the right to vote at the local level in 1990 after a Supreme Court decision. They were the last Western Democracy to do so.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Native Americans didn’t get the right to vote until 1975… unless you are counting the 1990 thing they weren’t the last.

[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

I want to be part of a normal species

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 34 points 3 weeks ago

Sexist is debatable but... yeah

But everyone worshiping the rich? Yeah, that is Switzerland in a nutshell. A decade or so ago I spent a week in Switzerland on holiday and... even the state funded museums kinda felt like "And then so and so developed a really cool technology that saved countless lives. AND THEN THEY GOT RICH!!! FRANCA FRANCA BILS Y'ALL!!!! And here is what they bought with it and the house they lived in and how much paper it takes to print out their monthly statement and... Oh, the tech? Whatever, nobody cares about that"

[–] Tryenjer@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

It's no coincidence that they are notorious for being a tax haven for unsavory individuals with shady dealings.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] oxysis@lemmy.blahaj.zone 74 points 3 weeks ago (31 children)

If men have to sign up for the draft then it is only fair that women have to too. It’s unfair that only men have to risk being drafted and losing so much of their life to war.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 23 points 3 weeks ago

As a general rule, I oppose gender roles codified into law.

[–] Barrington@feddit.org 19 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Personally, I think having a draft is a terrible idea regardless of gender.

They voted down adding women to this already bad idea. Potentially in the future, they remove the draft altogether.

I guess my point is, why would you want them to make the situation worse just so it is equal?

[–] remon@ani.social 13 points 3 weeks ago

Potentially in the future, they remove the draft altogether.

Support for mandatory military service in Switzerland has been going up in recent years, so I wouldn't count on it.

Counterpoint: with a draft, people are less willing to support the government going to war.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] biotin7@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 weeks ago

Actually I rather if Drafting was abolished altogether

load more comments (28 replies)
[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 43 points 3 weeks ago (22 children)

Insane that any democracy would reject an inheritance tax

[–] Ibisalt@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

the problem how i understood is, that we are not only talking about cash money but also money that is in businesses. family owned businesess may then be forced to sell their business to shareholder owned foreign corpos, because they could not afford it due to the tax. that sparked some major fear among voters. the result was not even close, it was 78% No! thats hughe and beyond any left/right worldview, not a single canton voted yes, that alone is a clear indicator that this bill was not very well-thought-out

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] ObtuseDoorFrame@lemmy.zip 22 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It feels very strange to be a US citizen and actually be able to judge another country for making a silly conservative decision. Woo?

[–] telllos@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I think, the initiative was rejected by all parties,but probably for different reasons. If you look at the position of the parties in this table

Edit: this is the position of the left

[–] LegoBrickOnFire@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What is not well enough reprensented in this post is that the Service Citoyen was not only about makimg women do a mandatory service. It was to transform the outdated and regressive mandatory service for men into a more general service to the collective that treated security not as a entirely militaristic issue but as a wholistic one.

Now parliament will interpret this as a mandate to cull the existing useful civil service and force every men (and potentially women too) into the military.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

There shouldn't be mandatory military service at all

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 9 points 3 weeks ago

My theory is that if you can't convince enough people to volunteer to fight for your nation, then you have failed as a nation.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] aldhissla@piefed.world 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

ITT: people judging the vote and the voters by the magnanimous title alone.

The initiatives were worded and implemented so poorly, that it wouldn't surprise me if the initiants wanted to lose both these votes.

  1. The inheritance tax would have caused mass nationalisations and it had pegged the tax proceeds to go towards climate goals instead of let's say the federal pension fund deficit (AHV-Loch). It would be incorrect to state that the voters don't support an inheritance tax or climate goals based on this vote.
  2. The "service citoyen" proposal would have made some kind of civil or military service mandatory for all, but would have essentially reduced the military to a volunteer force, which would be socially unacceptable. The Swiss have a historically repeatedly confirmed will to keep a citizen's militia as the country's only security force.
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Leomas@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The takes on here are wild as a Swiss dude.

[–] Leomas@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Hint: Mandatory service is a problem.

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

Mandatory service is not a problem. As long as we live in a world with countries like russia mandatory service does more good than harm.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Isreal uses its mandatory service to get teenagers to support genocide.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SlartyBartFast@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago

I thought everyone had to serve. Sad.

[–] SereneSadie@quokk.au 6 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

Nazi collaborators continuing to be backwards idiots. What a surprise.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

As an American, I have no room at all to judge this decision. But

proposals need a majority of both voters and cantons to pass.

That sounds amazing. Let's do that, please.

I mean, straight popular vote would probably be better. But this could really do what the Electoral College stans say that it was made to do, without doing what it actually does.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That sounds amazing.

It sounds arbitrary and heavily weighted to favor the smaller cantons. Same problem we have with the US Senate and the filibuster. Representatives for a meager 30M voters can obstruct policy championed by the other 300M

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›