Who's brilliantly dumb idea was it to have the only two referendums ever also immediately after a disaster? That is what you'd do if you want an overwhelmingly biased referendum playing off people's rash and short term panic based decision making.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2016/07/13/are-f...
There's people in this very thread enthusiastic about nuclear power because it will help Italy develop nuclear weapons. So hard to argue that they were wrong.
They are wrong, but who cares? As long as Russia and China have nuclear weapons, disarming Europe isn't going to help anyone. Not to mention now North Korea and pretty soon Iran will have them too.
Arguably, if Germany wasn't so reliant on Russian gas, the war in Ukraine wouldn't have started. The "peace" in Greenpeace is more Orwellian than anything.
Well-timed populists.
not really. The referendum was planned long before Fukushima, but then Fukushima happened at just the right time, reminding voters just in time to vote against nuclear.
The second one was an unfortunate coincidence.
By the way, Italy had several nuclear reactors, but they were shut down after the first referendum.
For some nebulous and often politically-charged definition of safety.
See, your definition of safety seems to actually be "what feels safe to me". As such, it happens to be exactly opposite to what the data tells us.