Referendum to kill an existing law, popular initiative to propose a new one.
They use different tricks when they're extending their power. This is definitely not one of them.
Laws they suspect could be overturned by voters they create 2 simular but separate ones shortly after each other, so people get tired of fighting it etc.
It definitely doesn't involve guinea pigs.
(There's no alternative, though, so deal with it)
And this kind of government js actually quite a shift from the type of democracy that Enlightenment figures helped developed for us, which gave us so much in the world.
Governments are responsible for most of the evil in the 20th century. Culling that probably starts with thinking about what a legitimate government should be permitted to do in the first place.
Consider another example: what benefit is there in the government spending so much time and money giving due process, health care and other rights to murderers, child predators or terrorists, while free, good people go without healthcare? It's not because the criminals deserve it. If I advocated human rights for these people when we didn't have them, you would say the same thing you are now: "I agree with human rights, but you just picked a really shitty example." The point is this: to consider what constitutes legitimate government.
Doesn't happen in Switzerland.
> If I advocated human rights for these people when we didn't have them, you would say the same thing you are now: "I agree with human rights, but you just picked a really shitty example."
Nope, I wouldn't. In fact I got heavily downvoted on HN before because I advocated for freedom of speech even for terrorists.