this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2026
667 points (99.7% liked)

World News

56633 readers
3230 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Nearly 55% of voters in Switzerland on Sunday rejected an initiative championed by the top right-wing party to cap the rich Alpine country’s population at 10 million, early results showed.

The populist Swiss People’s Party, which has the most seats in parliament, has stirred up and fostered anti-migration sentiment over the years, notably about an influx of workers from the neighboring European Union.

Some have dubbed the proposal a “Swiss Brexit” because it could jeopardize Switzerland’s deep ties to the European Union anchored by deals that foster economic growth, cultural ties and cross-border travel, among other things. Switzerland is not one of the EU’s 27 member states, but it is all but surrounded by four of them

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] justlemmyin@lemmy.world 163 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Aww yep, good to hear only 45% support 'capping' the people they don't like, phew.

[–] sours@lemmy.world 104 points 5 days ago (5 children)

It's so fucking embarrassing to be a human being and watch dumb shit like this and authoritarianism growing around the world.

[–] NOPper@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 5 days ago (1 children)

So many countries started because of this kind of shit I've human history, but we're all outta globe to pack our shit and start a proper country with blackjack and hookers...🫤

[–] possumparty@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 5 days ago (1 children)

somehow you left this comment five times

[–] NOPper@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 5 days ago

Holy shit...appreciate the heads up! Its funny too, the top one is the only one with the spelling correction edit. No idea what happened but thanks for pointing it out!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] TheDuke@europe.pub 29 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Well, you have to see it in a bit of a context. Many votes in Switzerland are concluded on a much tighter scale. Sometimes stuff gets accepted or declined by 50.5% or even less. 55% against the initiative is pretty decent, especially when it looked like it would pass for a long time. Me personally I would have liked to see 95% against this crap, but this has never happened on any matter that was voted on, so...

Also, the cities and suburbs, with the supposed "problems of immigration" right in front of their doorstep, all declined the initiative. It was the country side and small communities that aren't even affected by immigration, that voted for it. This shows once again, that fear is a powerful tool to mobilize masses. Thankfully it didn't work this time but we gotta stay alert and fight the narrative of fearmongering every single day.

Source: Me, I'm Swiss.

[–] 8uurg@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

Another indication that interacting with others from outside your bubble is the best vaccine against right wing rethoric regarding immigration: in rural areas and suburbs such interactions tend to be much rarer than within the city...

[–] Eril@feddit.org 27 points 5 days ago

My thoughts exactly. Everyone is like "the Swiss have spoken and are clearly not supporting capping the population". And I feel like that is not really showing the reality...

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 52 points 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (31 children)

What is it with right wing populists and their obsession with immigration? All they ever do is state the immigration is bad, and that it's the root of all evil, provide no evidence for the claim, and then just keep parroting the claim ad infinitum until either elected or arrested/shot.

I get that they're racist but they're bordered by the likes of France, who exactly is it that's coming over that they have a problem with?

[–] sunbytes@lemmy.world 32 points 5 days ago

Basically it's a way to distract from actual political issues, and shift blame to people that have a hard time defending themselves.

It's a very old technique but ususally works very well. The Romans used to execute Christians, and in mediaeval times European leaders would do pogroms (of Jews), burning of Catholics etc. Then 20th century examples like segregation, Nazism and fascists like Oswald Mosely.

Nowadays we have the modern versions in MAGA and Reform and "stop the boats" and whatever this Swiss movement calls itself.

Always condeming "the other" and making sure only to pick on those who can't stand up or really speak for themselves, because that persecution is cheaper and easier than acually solving problems.

Especially if those problems could be solved by worker reforms and progressive tax systems.

[–] BananaIsABerry@lemmy.zip 7 points 5 days ago

We had a foreign exchange student from Switzerland living with us recently, and I can confirm that the German side of Switzerland thinks the French side as lesser.

load more comments (29 replies)
[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 12 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Just what the hell kind of law is that?

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 days ago

A fascist law.

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

What I have seen, it's basically the right wing group of the Swiss government trying to pull a soft 'Brexit', if they have a population cap, essentially it ends free movement, so they would effectively be able to pull out of EU agreements. It's an insane move that I am glad to see has failed.

[–] spicehoarder@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

A %6 percent margin is not a failure.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Darkard@lemmy.world 26 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Hmm, yet another right wing politician, peddling policy that would weaken the European Union.

Holly gosh, I wonder where he gets his ideas and/or funding from?

[–] SleeplessCityLights@programming.dev 3 points 4 days ago (6 children)

Switzerland is not part of the EU. It is well known that they are neutral, I would say it is common knowledge. Are you trying to spread misinformation or just clueless?

[–] Jiral@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Switzerland is in the EU's Single Market and has other important agreements in place with the EU. A key reason for that referendum was the SVP's ambition to force Switzerland out of the Single market. They can't get the Swiss to agree to that so they try it in hidden ways, this time with playing the anti-foreigner card, while not mentioning that this is designed in reality to force Switzerland out of the Single Market. So yes, this referndum had a lot to do with the EU. The majority of Swiss voters was not fooled though, again. But also this time, the SVP will not take no for an answer and will try again, with a different construct.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] GardenGeek@europe.pub 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Since Switzerland has strong associations with the EU which were actively threatened by a possible implementation of this proposal he's not completely wrong. This would have weakened EU as well as Switzerland as both parties profit of their strong cooperation.

For this reason foreign powers try to end or impede the cooperation between the different national states and divide the continent in order to conquer it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rapchee@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

they didn't say they were part of the eu

[–] dickalan@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

I don't think politicians give a fuck whether Switzerland is neutral or not

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 5 points 4 days ago

A lack of repercussions

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

55%... wow... what a landslide... /slowclap

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] vrek@programming.dev 46 points 5 days ago (9 children)

I know this isn't how it would work but im just picturing some one woman giving birth, the doctor hands her the newborn and she holds it for the first time... Some man walks in wearing a black suit and pulls out a gun. He shoots the baby through the head. "sorry that was the 10 million and 1 Swiss child, we have a limit!"

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 25 points 5 days ago (6 children)

Clearly it would be more humane to take out the oldest Swiss person instead of the youngest

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Much better idea: kill the richest person and distribute their wealth evenly amongst the rest of the population, public infrastructure, and social programs

Repeat until there's no billionaires, no poverty, and nobody has to go without anything essential for living in a modern society.

[–] thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world 15 points 5 days ago

this is switzerland, silly. they're more likely to kill the poorest first.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Canadian_anarchist@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 days ago (2 children)

You might find Kurt Vonnegut Jr.'s story "2BR02B" ("to be or not to be") an interesting read. It's not exactly like your theory, but it's not too far off.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Luisp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 4 days ago (3 children)

How do you cap population? Abortion is mandatory now!

[–] jestho@lemmy.zip 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

1940s Europe: 👀

[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Killing babies in the name of satan AND removing womens' bodily autonomy in one action, call that far-centrism. /j

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 days ago

If the permanent resident population exceeds 9.5 million before 2050, the Federal Council and Parliament will need to take measures, particularly in the areas of asylum and family reunification. The Federal Council would also need to invoke or negotiate exemptions and safeguard clauses in international agreements that contribute to population growth. If the 10-million threshold is exceeded, Switzerland would have to terminate these agreements, including the one with the EU on the free movement of persons after two years. This would also render the other agreements under Bilateral Agreements I null and void. Switzerland’s participation in the EU’s Schengen and Dublin agreements would also be called into question, thereby jeopardising close cooperation in the areas of security and asylum.

Basically it says that once some thresholds of population are surpassed migration laws and agreements start getting more strict until population reduces again.

As for the practicality of it if the referendum would have passed and a law would me made of it it wouldn't "cap" the population per se, it would have banned immigration into the country for as long a Switzerland population is above 10 Million.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 22 points 5 days ago (1 children)

What does the article mean when it says switzerland is "all but surrounded by four of them"?

[–] i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca 38 points 5 days ago (3 children)

It means Switzerland is all but surrounded by four EU member states. Germany, Italy, France, and Austria.

The point being every country around them is in the EU and Switzerland is a notable enclave when you look at a map.

[–] gnufuu@lemmy.ca 32 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Liechtenstein: "Am I a joke to you?"

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 29 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

If you've been to Lichtenstein, you know the answer is yes. We have villages that are bigger. And the architecture there is eclectic.

[–] remon@ani.social 11 points 5 days ago

I mean ... yes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] anothermember@feddit.uk 15 points 5 days ago (6 children)

"All but" has always confused me as a phrase even as a native English speaker. You would think it means it isn't surrounded at all, i.e. "all but:" = "the last thing it would be is:", but apparently not.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] calamitycastle@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I have no particular skin in this game, but reading the article:

  1. Results are still pending
  2. Turnout of 59% > 55% of 59% is actually 32%

Come on folks 👀

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I'm please to hear of the results. I didn't think the "No" side would have won by more points because the pre-referendum polls showed neck and neck.

Anyway, it's a silly initiative to begin with. I was thinking even if the "Yes" side won, in my mind I'm thinking "let the leopards eat their faces". Never mind the arguments on culture and so on, the economic damage to capping the population is insurmountable because it means fewer workers to migrate. And also, how is capping 10 million even logistically possible? Are they going to deport people? Who decides who to deport if a person is either long term resident or born and raised there? Are they going to do sterilisation if by some miracle there is a baby boom (which by the way, Switzerland like the rest of the world right now is having fewer fertility rate) and the population is reaching 10 million? Far right policies are moronic because they are purely based on emotions. Leopards eventually do eat their faces.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Jiral@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago

The SVP sold it as anti-foreigner thing but it was really about forcing Switzerland out of the Single Market, a Swiss eqivalent for Brexit. Again. The SVP doesn't take no for an answer.

load more comments
view more: next ›