Re: Swiss government: was Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth
Politicians tend to learn slowly, the hard way, as the New Zealanders found recently when they switched to proportional representation. After being corrected by the voters a few times, they change their ways. It's a bit like the legendary farmer with his Missouri mule and two-by-four. You have to get their attention. It's noticeable right now in Canada that the two leading parties are eager to get out of the current minority government siutation and back to single party majority government, as soon as they think they can win an election under our current first-past-the-post electoral system. I notice also in Ireland and New Zealand under proportional representation that the ruling parties don't mind a stable minority government in preference to a coalition. Before the last elections in New Zealand and the Irish Republic, polls showed that *the voters* did not want a single-party majority government but preferred a coalition. In Ireland this even extended to the supporters of the biggest party (Fianna Fail) which has formed single-party majority governments in the past. I have been told of a similar poll result in Germany. It looks as if the voters dislike friendly dictatorships. In most European countries it sems that the politicians have learned to co-operate enough to get along in a coalition government. It might not be all that hard in the U.S. One can imagine that more centrist presidents would be produced by say an electoral college elected by PR-STV and electing the President by IRV, plus two houses of Congress elected by PR-STV. Sometimes Congress acts like it was composed of four or five parties now. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Michael Redler wrote: One side note: I wonder what would happen if we had a coalition government, required to play nice with six or eight political parties and forced to negotiate our differences. As it is, we have difficulty with only two. :-) Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With apologies for nitpicking, herewith some extracts from Political Switzerland, a small book by Oswald Sigg (Zurich: Pro Helvetia, 1997): The Swiss Government is called the Federal Council. It consists of seven members and is headed for a period of one year by a president elected from among the Federal Council members. [snip] ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: Swiss government: was Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth
Thanks Doug, I think nitpicking (as you say) is allowed in this forum. It's always good to have someone around who is interested in checking the details. The only additional thing I would encourage is to look for what can't be found in print. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting and sometimes required a plane ticket. One side note: I wonder what would happen if we had a coalition government, required to play nice with six or eight political parties and forced to negotiate our differences. As it is, we have difficulty with only two. :-) Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With apologies for nitpicking, herewith some extracts from Political Switzerland, a small book by Oswald Sigg (Zurich: Pro Helvetia, 1997): The Swiss Government is called the Federal Council. It consists of seven members and is headed for a period of one year by a president elected from among the Federal Council members. Ever since 1944, the [party] composition of the government has remained the same... The Federal Council is elected by Parliament every four years (both chambers meet in the National Council Hall)... The meetings of the Federal Council are chaired by the President of the Confederation who is elected for one year only from among the Federal Councillors. He is thus something in the nature of a prime Minister ad interim whose office consists first and foremost of chairing the meetings of the Federal Council and performing certain representative duties. During his year as president he also continues to be head of his own department. Switzerland has no actual head of state. When a foreign head of state, or even a queen, visits Berne [the capital of Switzerland], they are usually received by all seven members of the Federal Council. Each member of the Federal Council is the head of a department, or of what would be known abroad as a ministry. There are just seven such departments in Switzerland, so that each head of department is responsible for several sub-divisions which usually correspond to several ministries abroad. The Swiss Parliament, the Federal Assembly, is made up of two chambers: the National Council, with 200 members, and the Council of States, with 46 members [2 per canton = U.S. state or Canadian province]. The Assembly is elected by proportional representation. In 1995 it contained four relatively large parties and 8 small ones. Since the party composition of the government hasn't changed since 1944 and elections are likely to affect only personalities and particular measures, the turnout for elections to the Assembly tends to be low; 42.2% in 1995. By petition of 50,000 citizens within 90 days of the passage of a law, it may be required to be ratified by a referendum. In the cantons, proposals for laws may be put forward by a petition to be submitted to a referendum. The Federal Constitution is also subject to change through an initiative by petition of 100,000 citizens, followed by a referendum. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Michael Redler wrote: ...for what it's worth, My grandmother's house is only 400+ years old. Freudian slip? :-) Michael Redler wrote:Hi Kieth, There's a lot of stuff you threw out there. To address it all would take a heck of a lot of time -- suffice to say that I agree with most of it. Switzerland: If part of it's government was based on the US constitution, you wouldn't know it. It gained it's Independence over 700 years ago and I think they had it pretty much nailed down before Jefferson put pen to paper. I visited my grandmother two weeks ago as I've done almost every year since I was an infant. Her 700+ year old house is a testament to their cautious attitude toward progress (I'm alluding to housing development). You are right about voting. Before my Aunt could build her new house, it had to be approved by those in her neighborhood. She, in fact, had to build a stick frame of the house to show its size and shape and offer a visual aid for all who would approve it (or not). Presidents: They have seven of them, representing all of the regions of the confederation. Since Switzerland has four national languages, They are usually fluent in two or three of them (German French Italian and Rhetto-Romanish). This makes me wonder about the whole one nation, one language thing. I don't want to go on too long -- especially since I think you already did a great job covering much of this. I just wanted to offer some perspective as a witness to quite another interpretation of democracy. I sometimes see my relatives and the country they live in with envy. This is a country that hasn't experienced war within its borders since the crossbow was the weapon of choice. They have a well organized, cohesive government where you don't have to own a car and you would be hard-pressed to find a hungry child -- all of this while the language (and sometimes culture) can change within a thirty
Re: Swiss government: was Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth
Hi, Hi Mike, et. al., Well if we had more choices there might be less of a need for negative voting. What I mean is that it seems like a long long time since either of the two parties have put up candidates whom I wanted to vote for. Rather, I find myself voting for the one I least dislike. Derek -- Original message -- From: Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks Doug, I think nitpicking (as you say) is allowed in this forum. It's always good to have someone around who is interested in checking the details. The only additional thing I would encourage is to look for what can't be found in print. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting and sometimes required a plane ticket. One side note: I wonder what would happen if we had a coalition government, required to play nice with six or eight political parties and forced to negotiate our differences. As it is, we have difficulty with only two. :-) Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With apologies for nitpicking, herewith some extracts from Political Switzerland, a small book by Oswald Sigg (Zurich: Pro Helvetia, 1997): The Swiss Government is called the Federal Council. It consists of seven members and is headed for a period of one year by a president elected from among the Federal Council members. Ever since 1944, the [party] composition of the government has remained the same... The Federal Council is elected by Parliament every four years (both chambers meet in the National Council Hall)... The meetings of the Federal Council are chaired by the President of the Confederation who is elected for one year only from among the Federal Councillors. He is thus something in the nature of a prime Minister ad interim whose office consists first and foremost of chairing the meetings of the Federal Council and performing certain representative duties. During his year as president he also continues to be head of his own department. Switzerland has no actual head of state. When a foreign head of state, or even a queen, visits Berne [the capital of Switzerland], they are usually received by all seven members of the Federal Council. Each member of the Federal Council is the head of a department, or of what would be known abroad as a ministry. There are just seven such departments in Switzerland, so that each head of department is responsible for several sub-divisions which usually correspond to several ministries abroad. The Swiss Parliament, the Federal Assembly, is made up of two chambers: the National Council, with 200 members, and the Council of States, with 46 members [2 per canton = U.S. state or Canadian province]. The Assembly is elected by proportional representation. In 1995 it contained four relatively large parties and 8 small ones. Since the party composition of the government hasn't changed since 1944 and elections are likely to affect only personalities and particular measures, the turnout for elections to the Assembly tends to be low; 42.2% in 1995. By petition of 50,000 citizens within 90 days of the passage of a law, it may be required to be ratified by a referendum. In the cantons, proposals for laws may be put forward by a petition to be submitted to a referendum. The Federal Constitution is also subject to change through an initiative by petition of 100,000 citizens, followed by a referendum. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Michael Redler wrote: ...for what it's worth, My grandmother's house is only 400+ years old. Freudian slip? :-) Michael Redler wrote:Hi Kieth, There's a lot of stuff you threw out there. To address it all would take a heck of a lot of time -- suffice to say that I agree with most of it. Switzerland: If part of it's government was based on the US constitution, you wouldn't know it. It gained it's Independence over 700 years ago and I think they had it pretty much nailed down before Jefferson put pen to paper. I visited my grandmother two weeks ago as I've done almost every year since I was an infant. Her 700+ year old house is a testament to their cautious attitude toward progress (I'm alluding to housing development). You are right about voting. Before my Aunt could build her new house, it had to be approved by those in her neighborhood. She, in fact, had to build a stick frame of the house to show its size and shape and offer a visual aid for all who would approve it (or not). Presidents: They have seven of them, representing all of the regions of the confederation. Since Switzerland has four national languages, They are usually fluent in two or three of them (German French Italian and Rhetto-Romanish). This makes me wonder about the whole one nation, one language thing. I don't want to go on too long -- especially since I think you already did a great job covering much of this.
Swiss government: was Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth
With apologies for nitpicking, herewith some extracts from Political Switzerland, a small book by Oswald Sigg (Zurich: Pro Helvetia, 1997): The Swiss Government is called the Federal Council. It consists of seven members and is headed for a period of one year by a president elected from among the Federal Council members. Ever since 1944, the [party] composition of the government has remained the same... The Federal Council is elected by Parliament every four years (both chambers meet in the National Council Hall)... The meetings of the Federal Council are chaired by the President of the Confederation who is elected for one year only from among the Federal Councillors. He is thus something in the nature of a prime Minister ad interim whose office consists first and foremost of chairing the meetings of the Federal Council and performing certain representative duties. During his year as president he also continues to be head of his own department. Switzerland has no actual head of state. When a foreign head of state, or even a queen, visits Berne [the capital of Switzerland], they are usually received by all seven members of the Federal Council. Each member of the Federal Council is the head of a department, or of what would be known abroad as a ministry. There are just seven such departments in Switzerland, so that each head of department is responsible for several sub-divisions which usually correspond to several ministries abroad. The Swiss Parliament, the Federal Assembly, is made up of two chambers: the National Council, with 200 members, and the Council of States, with 46 members [2 per canton = U.S. state or Canadian province]. The Assembly is elected by proportional representation. In 1995 it contained four relatively large parties and 8 small ones. Since the party composition of the government hasn't changed since 1944 and elections are likely to affect only personalities and particular measures, the turnout for elections to the Assembly tends to be low; 42.2% in 1995. By petition of 50,000 citizens within 90 days of the passage of a law, it may be required to be ratified by a referendum. In the cantons, proposals for laws may be put forward by a petition to be submitted to a referendum. The Federal Constitution is also subject to change through an initiative by petition of 100,000 citizens, followed by a referendum. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Michael Redler wrote: ...for what it's worth, My grandmother's house is only 400+ years old. Freudian slip? :-) Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi Kieth, There's a lot of stuff you threw out there. To address it all would take a heck of a lot of time -- suffice to say that I agree with most of it. Switzerland: If part of it's government was based on the US constitution, you wouldn't know it. It gained it's Independence over 700 years ago and I think they had it pretty much nailed down before Jefferson put pen to paper. I visited my grandmother two weeks ago as I've done almost every year since I was an infant. Her 700+ year old house is a testament to their cautious attitude toward progress (I'm alluding to housing development). You are right about voting. Before my Aunt could build her new house, it had to be approved by those in her neighborhood. She, in fact, had to build a stick frame of the house to show its size and shape and offer a visual aid for all who would approve it (or not). Presidents: They have seven of them, representing all of the regions of the confederation. Since Switzerland has four national languages, They are usually fluent in two or three of them (German French Italian and Rhetto-Romanish). This makes me wonder about the whole one nation, one language thing. I don't want to go on too long -- especially since I think you already did a great job covering much of this. I just wanted to offer some perspective as a witness to quite another interpretation of democracy. I sometimes see my relatives and the country they live in with envy. This is a country that hasn't experienced war within its borders since the crossbow was the weapon of choice. They have a well organized, cohesive government where you don't have to own a car and you would be hard-pressed to find a hungry child -- all of this while the language (and sometimes culture) can change within a thirty minute walk. Mike [snip] ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: Swiss government: was Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth
Thanks for this post. I found it very enlightening. AntiFossil Mike Krafka Minnesota USA * If you think you are too small to make a difference try sleeping with a mosquito. Dalai Lama * Experience is the comb that nature gives us when we are bald. Belgian proverb * - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 6:29 PM Subject: Swiss government: was Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth With apologies for nitpicking, herewith some extracts from Political Switzerland, a small book by Oswald Sigg (Zurich: Pro Helvetia, 1997): The Swiss Government is called the Federal Council. It consists of seven members and is headed for a period of one year by a president elected from among the Federal Council members. Ever since 1944, the [party] composition of the government has remained the same... The Federal Council is elected by Parliament every four years (both chambers meet in the National Council Hall)... The meetings of the Federal Council are chaired by the President of the Confederation who is elected for one year only from among the Federal Councillors. He is thus something in the nature of a prime Minister ad interim whose office consists first and foremost of chairing the meetings of the Federal Council and performing certain representative duties. During his year as president he also continues to be head of his own department. Switzerland has no actual head of state. When a foreign head of state, or even a queen, visits Berne [the capital of Switzerland], they are usually received by all seven members of the Federal Council. Each member of the Federal Council is the head of a department, or of what would be known abroad as a ministry. There are just seven such departments in Switzerland, so that each head of department is responsible for several sub-divisions which usually correspond to several ministries abroad. The Swiss Parliament, the Federal Assembly, is made up of two chambers: the National Council, with 200 members, and the Council of States, with 46 members [2 per canton = U.S. state or Canadian province]. The Assembly is elected by proportional representation. In 1995 it contained four relatively large parties and 8 small ones. Since the party composition of the government hasn't changed since 1944 and elections are likely to affect only personalities and particular measures, the turnout for elections to the Assembly tends to be low; 42.2% in 1995. By petition of 50,000 citizens within 90 days of the passage of a law, it may be required to be ratified by a referendum. In the cantons, proposals for laws may be put forward by a petition to be submitted to a referendum. The Federal Constitution is also subject to change through an initiative by petition of 100,000 citizens, followed by a referendum. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Michael Redler wrote: ...for what it's worth, My grandmother's house is only 400+ years old. Freudian slip? :-) Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi Kieth, There's a lot of stuff you threw out there. To address it all would take a heck of a lot of time -- suffice to say that I agree with most of it. Switzerland: If part of it's government was based on the US constitution, you wouldn't know it. It gained it's Independence over 700 years ago and I think they had it pretty much nailed down before Jefferson put pen to paper. I visited my grandmother two weeks ago as I've done almost every year since I was an infant. Her 700+ year old house is a testament to their cautious attitude toward progress (I'm alluding to housing development). You are right about voting. Before my Aunt could build her new house, it had to be approved by those in her neighborhood. She, in fact, had to build a stick frame of the house to show its size and shape and offer a visual aid for all who would approve it (or not). Presidents: They have seven of them, representing all of the regions of the confederation. Since Switzerland has four national languages, They are usually fluent in two or three of them (German French Italian and Rhetto-Romanish). This makes me wonder about the whole one nation, one language thing. I don't want to go on too long -- especially since I think you already did a great job covering much of this. I just wanted to offer some perspective as a witness to quite another interpretation of democracy. I sometimes see my relatives and the country they live in with envy. This is a country that hasn't experienced war within its borders since the crossbow was the weapon of choice. They have a well organized, cohesive government where you don't have to own a car and you would be hard-pressed to find a hungry child -- all of this while
Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth
...for what it's worth, My grandmother's house is only 400+ years old. Freudian slip? :-) Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi Kieth, There's a lot of stuff you threw out there. To address it all would take a heck of a lot of time -- suffice to say that I agree with most of it. Switzerland: If part of it's government was based on the US constitution, you wouldn't know it. It gained it's Independence over 700 years ago and I think they had it pretty much nailed down before Jefferson put pen to paper. I visited my grandmother two weeks ago as I've done almost every year since I was an infant. Her 700+ year old house is a testament to their cautious attitude toward progress (I'm alluding to housing development). You are right about voting. Before my Aunt could build her new house, it had to be approved by those in her neighborhood. She, in fact, had to build a stick frame of the house to show its size and shape and offer a visual aid for all who would approve it (or not). Presidents: They have seven of them, representing all of the regions of the confederation. Since Switzerland has four national languages, They are usually fluent in two or three of them (German French Italian and Rhetto-Romanish). This makes me wonder about the whole one nation, one language thing. I don't want to go on too long -- especially since I think you already did a great job covering much of this. I just wanted to offer some perspective as a witness to quite another interpretation of democracy. I sometimes see my relatives and the country they live in with envy. This is a country that hasn't experienced war within its borders since the crossbow was the weapon of choice. They have a well organized, cohesive government where you don't have to own a car and you would be hard-pressed to find a hungry child -- all of this while the language (and sometimes culture) can change within a thirty minute walk. Mike Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Michael, Hakan and all Hakan, Thank you for spending the time to point toward better examples of democracies than the US. As a dual citizen, I think that Switzerland is an especially good choice. Are you really? That must make for some interesting comparisons. I posted this before, but I think I'll post it again, seems pertinent right now. What difference does one person one vote make when non-person corporations that are inimical to democracy and the public interest can buy off the entire political apparatus? It's just a meaningless formula now, it obscures the reality as much as reveals it. How many of those increasingly meaningless votes even get cast? - or how few rather? You think that's what democracy means? You have to abandon these formulas and look at what really happens in people's lives. How about a rich country that didn't allow its women to vote until 13 years ago? Probably some backward oil sheikhdom in the Gulf or something, eh? Switzerland, actually. I think it's the oldest democracy in the world, going back to the 13th century, and much admired, though certainly not without its flaws. Everywhere you look you find exceptions to these simplistic formulas, both better and worse. I don't want to interpret what Hakan said, but I believe he was talking about realities, not just empty forms. Switzerland, by the way, modelled its current federal constitution on the US, in 1848. Government there is a very local business, strictly bottom-up, the federal government is tiny and hardly seems to matter. There's no clear division between the governing party and the opposition. The Swiss don't just vote once in four years, they seem to be voting most of the time - in fact they vote whenever they feel like it, it's a citizens' right to organize a referendum on just about anything. Interest and turnouts are high. Not so easy to recognise today's US in that mirror image, is it? Who's the president of Switzerland? The name doesn't spring immediately to mind, does it? Or maybe, does Switzerland have a president or a prime minister, or a chancellor, or what? Don't know? Neither do I. Sounds good to me. It would seem the leaders, if that's quite the word (I think it isn't quite the word), don't have much choice but to abide by the consitution, and anyway nobody seems to take very much notice of them. At the time James had got a lot of Americans all upset with his talk of teledemocracy, which they saw as Direct Democracy, in other words mob rule. I said this to one of them: Anyway, you see teledemocracy = Direct Democracy = Mob Rule, the preferred alternative being the Rule of Law, and, what, the status quo? Somehow I don't think you're that happy with either of those. The bit above ending with the Patriot Act [Now the Homeland Security Bill basically suspends our Constitution under Color of Law, on top of the Patriot Act] is either the Rule of Law at work or shows that it's a weakling, easily
Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth
400 + 300 is 700 :-) I enjoyed that history and all about Switzerland, interesting. You learn something here all the time. Luc - Original Message - From: Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 9:40 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth ...for what it's worth, My grandmother's house is only 400+ years old. Freudian slip? :-) Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi Kieth, There's a lot of stuff you threw out there. To address it all would take a heck of a lot of time -- suffice to say that I agree with most of it. Switzerland: If part of it's government was based on the US constitution, you wouldn't know it. It gained it's Independence over 700 years ago and I think they had it pretty much nailed down before Jefferson put pen to paper. I visited my grandmother two weeks ago as I've done almost every year since I was an infant. Her 700+ year old house is a testament to their cautious attitude toward progress (I'm alluding to housing development). You are right about voting. Before my Aunt could build her new house, it had to be approved by those in her neighborhood. She, in fact, had to build a stick frame of the house to show its size and shape and offer a visual aid for all who would approve it (or not). Presidents: They have seven of them, representing all of the regions of the confederation. Since Switzerland has four national languages, They are usually fluent in two or three of them (German French Italian and Rhetto-Romanish). This makes me wonder about the whole one nation, one language thing. I don't want to go on too long -- especially since I think you already did a great job covering much of this. I just wanted to offer some perspective as a witness to quite another interpretation of democracy. I sometimes see my relatives and the country they live in with envy. This is a country that hasn't experienced war within its borders since the crossbow was the weapon of choice. They have a well organized, cohesive government where you don't have to own a car and you would be hard-pressed to find a hungry child -- all of this while the language (and sometimes culture) can change within a thirty minute walk. Mike Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Michael, Hakan and all Hakan, Thank you for spending the time to point toward better examples of democracies than the US. As a dual citizen, I think that Switzerland is an especially good choice. Are you really? That must make for some interesting comparisons. I posted this before, but I think I'll post it again, seems pertinent right now. What difference does one person one vote make when non-person corporations that are inimical to democracy and the public interest can buy off the entire political apparatus? It's just a meaningless formula now, it obscures the reality as much as reveals it. How many of those increasingly meaningless votes even get cast? - or how few rather? You think that's what democracy means? You have to abandon these formulas and look at what really happens in people's lives. How about a rich country that didn't allow its women to vote until 13 years ago? Probably some backward oil sheikhdom in the Gulf or something, eh? Switzerland, actually. I think it's the oldest democracy in the world, going back to the 13th century, and much admired, though certainly not without its flaws. Everywhere you look you find exceptions to these simplistic formulas, both better and worse. I don't want to interpret what Hakan said, but I believe he was talking about realities, not just empty forms. Switzerland, by the way, modelled its current federal constitution on the US, in 1848. Government there is a very local business, strictly bottom-up, the federal government is tiny and hardly seems to matter. There's no clear division between the governing party and the opposition. The Swiss don't just vote once in four years, they seem to be voting most of the time - in fact they vote whenever they feel like it, it's a citizens' right to organize a referendum on just about anything. Interest and turnouts are high. Not so easy to recognise today's US in that mirror image, is it? Who's the president of Switzerland? The name doesn't spring immediately to mind, does it? Or maybe, does Switzerland have a president or a prime minister, or a chancellor, or what? Don't know? Neither do I. Sounds good to me. It would seem the leaders, if that's quite the word (I think it isn't quite the word), don't have much choice but to abide by the consitution, and anyway nobody seems to take very much notice of them. At the time James had got a lot of Americans all upset with his talk of teledemocracy, which they saw as Direct Democracy, in other words mob rule. I said this to one of them: Anyway, you see teledemocracy = Direct Democracy = Mob Rule, the preferred alternative being the Rule of Law, and, what
Re: [Biofuel] OOPS (typo) -- sorry Kieth
old. Freudian slip? :-) Only. I see. :-) You're to be forgiven Mike, what's a trifling 300 years or so between friends? Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi Kieth, There's a lot of stuff you threw out there. To address it all would take a heck of a lot of time -- suffice to say that I agree with most of it. Switzerland: If part of it's government was based on the US constitution, you wouldn't know it. It gained it's Independence over 700 years ago and I think they had it pretty much nailed down before Jefferson put pen to paper. I visited my grandmother two weeks ago as I've done almost every year since I was an infant. Her 700+ year old house is a testament to their cautious attitude toward progress (I'm alluding to housing development). You are right about voting. Before my Aunt could build her new house, it had to be approved by those in her neighborhood. She, in fact, had to build a stick frame of the house to show its size and shape and offer a visual aid for all who would approve it (or not). Presidents: They have seven of them, representing all of the regions of the confederation. Since Switzerland has four national languages, They are usually fluent in two or three of them (German French Italian and Rhetto-Romanish). This makes me wonder about the whole one nation, one language thing. Seven presidents - no wonder I didn't know his name! LOL! That's extremely civilised, having seven presidents. One nation, one language - another myth? Even if they all call it English, language use is so local, in spite of television. Do New Yorkers speak the same language as Texans and San Franciscans? And it hasn't been all English for some time, has it? South Africa has 11 official languages, officially anyway, though I don't think they've succeeded in implementing that. How much of the EU's budget goes to translation services? Some huge amount - but imagine the outcry if they tried to unify it under any one language! Quite right too. Europeans are really to be envied their language skills - more than a skill, it brings a much easier understanding of other cultures and cultural differences. Which is THE big problem with arrogant and hegemonic English, the world language (apart from the fact that it eats other languages). I don't want to go on too long -- especially since I think you already did a great job covering much of this. I just wanted to offer some perspective as a witness to quite another interpretation of democracy. I sometimes see my relatives and the country they live in with envy. This is a country that hasn't experienced war within its borders since the crossbow was the weapon of choice. They have a well organized, cohesive government where you don't have to own a car and you would be hard-pressed to find a hungry child -- all of this while the language (and sometimes culture) can change within a thirty minute walk. Thankyou Mike, interesting comparisons indeed. I've been to Switzerland a few times, but never for very long - two weeks was the longest, a week up in the mountains and a week at a conference in Basle. Each time I was there I wanted to stay longer, see more, learn more. Another time perhaps. Regards Keith Mike Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Michael, Hakan and all Hakan, Thank you for spending the time to point toward better examples of democracies than the US. As a dual citizen, I think that Switzerland is an especially good choice. Are you really? That must make for some interesting comparisons. I posted this before, but I think I'll post it again, seems pertinent right now. What difference does one person one vote make when non-person corporations that are inimical to democracy and the public interest can buy off the entire political apparatus? It's just a meaningless formula now, it obscures the reality as much as reveals it. How many of those increasingly meaningless votes even get cast? - or how few rather? You think that's what democracy means? You have to abandon these formulas and look at what really happens in people's lives. How about a rich country that didn't allow its women to vote until 13 years ago? Probably some backward oil sheikhdom in the Gulf or something, eh? Switzerland, actually. I think it's the oldest democracy in the world, going back to the 13th century, and much admired, though certainly not without its flaws. Everywhere you look you find exceptions to these simplistic formulas, both better and worse. I don't want to interpret what Hakan said, but I believe he was talking about realities, not just empty forms. Switzerland, by the way, modelled its current federal constitution on the US, in 1848. Government there is a very local business, strictly bottom-up, the federal government is tiny and hardly seems to matter. There's no clear division between the governing party and the opposition. The Swiss don't just vote once in four years, they seem to be voting most of
