Lost of course they have not, the basic income activists. How could they. Who knows that he is on the wrong side, sees himself always as a winner. No matter how a crash fails to defeat. And so cheered the cash-for-all-Recke Daniel Häni: “I find it amazing and sensational”. It was Sunday afternoon and he had he just learned that just over one-fifth of the Swiss have agreed to his initiative. So that everyone living here person receives a monthly CHF 2,500. Unconditionally.
There was an annoying proxy fight. Not because he was particularly rude not because he was out unusually emotional; since Switzerland experienced in the recent past, very different. Annoying was that it would actually gone about to see an exciting, controversial issue. The future of work, the future of the welfare state. And the question of how we want to live in this transitional period, from analog to digital, in which we find ourselves at the moment?
insults the opponents
But the opponents packed from the beginning the verbal two-handed from. The Neue Zürcher Zeitung abused the initiators as “wayward Moon rider ‘. Your editor swore in his editorial on the “propagandists of socialism with pseudo-market economic face” – and called such a referendum “occupational therapy for citizens”. His counterpart from the NZZ am Sonntag opened today morning his readers who were sitting over coffee and butter twist, it now needed a “revision of the Swiss People’s rights with the aim of limiting the number of unnecessary initiatives and referendums.” (With all due respect, gentlemen, but it we would, the citizen, then like to have a say.)
However, the basic income advocates were no discussions about. They made their concerns a marketing point jazzed faith. They distributed 10-franc notes to passersby, unfurled in Geneva, the World’s Largest Poster. Hurrah, we are in the Guinness Book of Records! Yes, they hired even on the “Straße des 17. Juni” in Berlin for their cause. Main attention, mainly headlines, mainly air time. From the “Financial Times” on the “Economist” to the “Wall Street Journal” – all reported.
proponents refused financing Talk
But in Switzerland itself never was a real debate. (Here moving especially the revision of the asylum law in a referendum, the SBB, Post and Swisscom again wanted to move closer to the state.) They knew that was the concern not stand a chance. There was not even a decent counter-committee.
The Swiss have not recognized the importance of the basic income template? Or they are simply too afraid to kleinkariert to bünzlig? Maybe. But that alone does not explain the clear defeat. The is also due to the proponents themselves. They could not deal with opposition. They had not understood that politics is not a competition of arguments of beliefs. On public podium events they commented loudly the interventions of their opponents – or booed them right from the stage. In the televised debates, they refused to discuss the financing of their idea. That was too banal them. Finally, they presented nothing less than “The biggest question the world”, because there is no time for fiscal Pipifax.
But who an idea, be it good or bad, dragged out of the salon, the university or a think tank in the political arena, which must they be judged. At their feasibility and their financial sustainability. Then it is not enough that it is actually interesting. Then it is no longer just a matter of kicking off a discussion. Then it comes to technical details to legal drudgery. Democracy is a damned hard, dry Büez!
For those that his opponent represents as people who simply enlightenment missing, never win a majority. He needs to approach them, the undecided shake hands and on his side. The only way to Switzerland, the world can actually change. Necessary it had both!
No comments:
Post a Comment