54.8% voted no 🎉
Tighter than I would have liked but I'll take it.
this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2026
100 points (97.2% liked)
Europe
11345 readers
934 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)
- 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.
- 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 When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title.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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- 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.
- 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.)
- 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
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
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
It’s most likely they mean to cap citizens. They still need cheap labor.
No it didn't
The ‘No to a Switzerland with 10 million! (Sustainability Initiative)’ calls for a cap on the permanent resident population
So citizens + permanent residents.
I guess at some point a high population does become unsustainable. 10 million sounds arbitrary though.
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...
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
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.
At the smallest notion of someone challenging your beliefs you just jump straight towards genocide. Hilarious.
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?
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.
Does comparing an apple to an orange change the way that apples taste?
Can you reply to my actual point at some stage?
I'm not the person you were responding to initially.
Even if I was; no. You're not worth debating at all
I mean, but we clearly don’t need more people so…
suggesting
And then you immediately take that idea as established fact?
Sunday’s referendum comes after the country’s population increased 10% in the 10 years up to the end of 2025, when it stood at just over 9.1 million.
10%... sounds scary...
Switzerland's population has grown rapidly since 2002, when it stood at 7.3 million. Now it is 9.1 million...
(From the BBC's article)
"Grown rapidly"... damn, that sounds scary too!
Except...
That's less than 1% growth per year since 2002. Oh.
This is a vote for an anti-human anti-immigration Malthusian agenda.
To be exact it would be 0.92% each year if it had been steady. 7.1 * (0.0092 ^ 24) = 9.1
To contextualize that number, global population growth is 0.85%, the Eurozone is at 0.36%. So we do grow at a remarkable rate compared to our neighbors.
I'm glad the initiative was defeated though.
What will happen to the 10.000.001st citizen? Decapitation?
Cancellation of EU contracts allowing for free migration.
The EU will then cancel all other contracts, effectively crippling the Swiss economy.
The proposal is, without disrespect to the differently abled, completely fucking retarded.
effectively crippling the Swiss economy.
Insha'allah Gaddafi's dream of partitioning Switzerland draws nearer by the day!
Maybe it's just sponsored by Ruzzia
This is likely. They are sponsoring all kinds of extremism and separatism. Their biggest success to date was Brexit, but the rise of the neonazis in Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Slovenia, USA is not to be underestimated as well.
They understand very well that they don't have the faintest chance or even leverage against a united Europe/CA/NZ/AUS/USA. None at all. But divide us, and attack us one by one? Now that they can do. A single European country will have difficulties defending itself, be it economically or militarily.
This is why we must remain united against these dictators. We obviously have many differences and quarrel amongst ourselvee, that is completely fine, as long as we stand together when it comes to saying "fuck off and then fuck off some more and then fuck of all the way and stay fucked off" to the dictators.
Exactly. The ancient Romans already knew that, they use to say "divide et impera", divide and conquer
Straight to the Torture Nexus
Obviously it's just gonna be anti immigration measures, from non white countries first, but it would be so much better if, once the cap is reached, you had to challenge an existing citizen to take their citizenship. Could be a challenge of who scores better on a citizenship test, or something else. But the winner takes the Swiss citizenship and the lower takes the other citizenship.
When you said "challenge an existing citizen", I thought you meant like a deathmatch.
That would work.
No, it's against "white" (you probably meant to say European) countries.
What? I think we're saying the same thing. I'm saying it's anti immigrant bullshit, with a focus on asylum seekers first (specifically called out to end asylum and family reunification first), that certainly come from non-white (non-european?) countries primarily, even though cutting asylum approvals to 0 10 years ago wouldnt stop them hitting 10 million by 2050. Its just a happy goal they get to accomplish on the way to trying to stop free movement.
But it would be more fun if it was a relegation system where anyone can lose. I want someone to be able to challenge me and we trade citizenship if I lose
No, the largest group of asylum people is Ukrainians
How are they going to achieve that? Are they going to have birth quotas like China? Mass deportations? That's inhumane..
It is just a dogwhistle for closed borders and deportations.
The plan would have been: Breaking human rights on asylum and the unity of the family, starting at 9.5 million, then if 10 million was reached anyway, cancelling free movement with the EU, and thereby breaking the bilateral contracts.
that's actually insane... fortunately it has been voted down.
"sorry Timmy, I know you were just born but you're citizen nr 1000001 so we will have to deport you"
Birth count can't sustain the population, like in most developed countries.
Cacothanasia.
It may make sense if the infrastructure isn't following the populations growth, we have that issue on some southern countries in Europe.
I just don't know how they would controlled the population growth without jeopardizing the next generations' future like is happening nowadays to Japan and South Korea
Optimistic of you to think they’re thinking of the next generation at all.