[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_suffrage_in_Switzerlan...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_suffrage_in_Switzerlan...
Progressivism != democracy. Athens as of 500AD were technically utterly democratic, and had slavery, let alone no voting rights for women.
Progress can also be quite un-democratic. E.g. Soviet Union in 1920-30s progressed quickly to afford universal education, equal rights for women, let alone science and industry (especially military industry). It was quite anti-democratic, though, with fake elections (having just one "contender" in the bulletin), those who happened to be born into former "bourgeoisie" having severe restrictions in civil rights, let alone incarcerating and executing lots of people without any due process.
The downside is that progress is slower, but the upside is that the system remains stable and there are no backlashes against a perceived "liberal hivemind" or whatnot.
Democracy does not mean that sensible things happen, it means the people govern themselves, for good or for worse.
Switzerland has found a feedback cycle that works exceptionally well. So you voted to spend lots of money on a football stadium? Well sorry, we can't afford free kindergarten anymore. People learn from this and retain identification with the political system.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign...
Milk the hatred and distrust for the benefits (Always double-check on foreign science! ) and name it to everyone falling for it as what it is: Ancient Ape bugs. So mild mockery would be the best reaction i guess.
Social suppression seems to have failed on a large scale recently.
There's definitely other forms of xenophobia here, though. There are a lot of negative stereotypes about some of the refugees that have come to Switzerland over the years, and many Swiss I talk to dislike the idea of refugees coming to Switzerland and choosing not to work (being unable to work is a different story).
I'm sorry, but who actually likes that idea?
Depends. Most are not, but in some cases, they are (e.g. islamic terrorism in France and Germany).
But the main reason is that some peoples/places have developed their own culture over centuries, and don't particularly appreciate some large rush of newcomers bringing their own stuff and messing the nice thing they have got going.
With respect to culture.... I don't know what to say to that. It strikes me as very xenophobic and more than a little naive. The way to get your culture to remain is by showing others what is to celebrate about it, not by forbidding them from living around you. It's not like any culture can exist long unchanged while children have access to the internet anyway.
For example, let's say you choose to eat unhealthy food, become obese, and land in the hospital. You might say "who cares what other people eat" while you are using a limited, shared resource.
If you're able to not work indefinitely because you're consuming a limited, shared resource like the money of other people that live in a country, why should they think that's fair if it's supposed to be a safety net?