如今，瑞士和美国可以相互学习什么？
作为姐妹共和国，美国和瑞士曾经相互影响。
社交媒体对公共辩论的影响和日益加剧，世界两极分化愈演愈烈。面对这一现实，所有民主国家都必须自问，要用什么理念来赢得公民信任。
相关内容
瑞士和美国曾是一对姊妹共和国
尽管美国和瑞士处于不同的阶段，但比较往往可以带来收获。如今，这两个民主国家彼此间有什么可以学习借鉴的地方呢？
美国可以认识到，各州应该比联邦政府拥有更多的权力。 瑞士可以学习联邦政府从各州手中夺权的后果：两极分化。 民主不是自由。 它只是投票。 你能投什么票，决定了你有多少自由。 如果我们必须投票决定晚餐吃什么，这就是民主，但不是自由。
The US could learn that states should have more power than the federal government. Switzerland could learn what happens when the federal government takes power from the states: polarization. Democracy is not freedom. It is just voting. What you can vote on determines how much freedom you have. If we must vote for what we shall all have for dinner, that is democracy but it is not freedom.
作为一个支持直接民主的比利时人，我认为直接民主总体上比代议制民主有很多优势，而且我认为我们社会面临的一些问题在某种程度上与美国类似，都是 "缺乏民主 "的产物。
瑞士的政治家们似乎 "更像水蛭"，任何新法律或新项目都有可能被请愿书轻易否决，这对 "掠夺性政治 "起到了更大的抑制作用。比利时的政治在我看来非常任人唯亲，政治家和政党都拿着大笔的酬劳，而且他们是一个人数众多的群体，提高他们的收入是他们在过去几十年的多次国家改革中能够达成一致的少数几件事之一。政党获得 "政党资助 "的 "最低票数要求 "为 5%，这使得老牌政党更具垄断性，比利时公民有投票的法定义务，这似乎也使代议制合法化。
另一个问题是代议制民主中的民粹政治。自称为 "人民拥护者 "的人什么都好，就是喜欢发表反建制的言论，这些言论对部分选民很有吸引力，尽管很多时候这些民粹主义政客也是建制派，他们只是把这种言论当作 "品牌 "来卖。问题是，如果既有制度大多只是公民意愿的产物，我想采用这种政治策略就会困难得多。我认为，组织一场谴责你的职业政治对手的政治运动要比谴责人民做出的选择容易得多，瑞士人就是他们自己的民粹主义拥护者。
值得注意的是，在比利时，语言群体之间的关系是多么的不同，这也是我们的身份认同与瑞士人的身份认同的不同之处。在我的印象中，瑞士人的民族团结程度远高于比利时人，这可能也是由于比利时的代议制民主在文化认同政治中的作用。有时，弗莱芒人很容易指责瓦隆人的政治家，反之亦然。
不只是比利时，许多代议制民主国家都有这样的问题，就像美国一样。特朗普不可能是有史以来最有权利的 "人民卫士"，这太荒谬了，而且这也是同样的谴责政治，目的是将替罪羊作为一种手段，以获得政治上的 "全权"，不管他们实际上想推行什么政策，而选民仍有机会进一步干预，甚至要求罢免政治人物。一切都必须在一场大手笔的选举秀中决定，让人民眼花缭乱。你所得到的实际上是一个在逻辑上更有利于其当权者而牺牲广大选民利益的制度。
不过，任何直接民主社会都需要有足够的政治觉悟、受过良好教育和具有献身精神的人民，这样才能在可接受的程度上取得成功。我认为比利时人普遍受过足够的教育，但我们没有自我统治的 "经验"，如果我们不更多地这样做，我们就学不到什么。
你可以告诉我们 "如果我们选择直接民主，我们就有自我决定的权利"，你可以告诉我们建立和维护直接民主制度需要哪些法律和制度。在一个社交媒体和对社交媒体的控制 "经常成为麻烦 "的世界里，你会使用什么样的社交媒体 "论坛 "来讨论政治。您过去的行为可以让我们了解这一制度的运作方式和选民的行为。
As a Belgian who is in favor of direct democracy, i see many advantages in general over representative democracy, and some of the issues i think we face in our society are similar to that of the US to an extend as being a product of "some lack of democracy".
The Swiss seem to have their politicians "far more on a leech", the possibility that any new law or project could easily be shot down by a petition puts more of a brake on "predatory politics". Politics in Belgium are imho pretty nepotist, the politicians + the party's are payed huge sums and and they are a numerous group, raising their income was one of the few things they could agree on in the many state reforms they had over the last decades. There is a "minimal vote requirement" of 5% for a party to get "party funding" giving the established party's more of a monopoly and Belgian citizens have the legal duty to vote which thereby also seemingly legitimizes the representative system.
Another issue is that of populist politics in representative democracy. Self proclaimed "champions of the people" who are everything but thrive on anti-establishment narratives which become appealing to a part of the electorate, though many times those populist politicians are as much establishment as it can get and they just sell that narrative as a "brand". The thing is, i presume its much harder to employ that political strategy if the established system is mostly just the product of the will of the citizens, It's easier i think to organize a whole political campaign on denouncing your careerist political opponent than it is by denouncing the choices the people have made, the Swiss are their own populist champions.
Its notable also how different the relations between language groups are in Belgium and how that factors into our identity compared to the Swiss. It is my impression that the Swiss have far more national unity than we have in Belgium, and that might also be due to how some cultural identity politics have played out in Belgium trough representative democracy. Sometimes it was just to easy for the flemmish to blame the Wallonian politicians and vice versa.
Its not just Belgium, it's a theme that exists in many representative democracies, just like in the US. Trump couldnt be the most Entitled "champion of the people" ever full stop, its just rediculous, and its just the same denunciary politics aimed at scapegoats a a means to receive poltical "carté blanche" for whatever policy they actually want to pursue withought the electorate still having a chance to further intervene or even to ask for political recall. All must be decide in one big money electoral show where the people must be dazzled. What you actually get is a system that is logically more self serving to its establishment at the expense of the broader electorate.
Any direct democratic society though also needs a sufficiently politically concious, educated and committed people to succeed to a acceptable degree. I do thing Belgians are generally educated enough but we dont have "the experience" of ruling our self and we wont learn much if we dont start doing it more.
You could learn us that "we have the self determinist right to have direct democracy if we choose it", you can learn us what laws and institutions are required to establish and uphold that direct democratic system. What "Fora" you would use for social media to discuss politics in a world where social media and control of it has become "often troublesome". Your past actions can provide insights on how this system works and it's electorate behaves.
感谢比利时的描述--但全民公决当然也会进一步加剧两极分化，至少在个别问题上是这样：当选民在某些领域表达自己的意见时，专业政治家可能会回避的民粹主义决策就会被采纳。
顺便提一下，您是否知道，美国各州的直接民主比瑞士以外的世界其他任何地方都要明显？
https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/demokratie/schweizer-politikwissenschaftler-die-usa-erlebt-diesen-november-einen-rekord-an-abstimmungen-%c3%bcber-abtreibungsrechte/87458700
Vielen Dank für Ihre Schilderung aus Belgien - selbstverständlich können Volksabstimmungen die Polarisierung aber auch weiter zuspitzen, zumindest bezogen auf einzelne Themen: Populistische Entscheide, von denen professionelle Politiker:innen vielleicht eher zurückschrecken, werden getroffen, wenn die Stimmberechtigten in gewissen Bereichen ihre Meinung zum Ausdruck bringen.
Sind Sie sich übrigens bewusst, dass die direkte Demokratie in US-Bundesstaaten ausgeprägter ist als irgendwo sonst auf der Welt ausserhalb der Schweiz?
https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/demokratie/schweizer-politikwissenschaftler-die-usa-erlebt-diesen-november-einen-rekord-an-abstimmungen-%c3%bcber-abtreibungsrechte/87458700
您好
瑞士的政治家们或多或少都会为所欲为，因为我们的联邦宪法 "由于第190条的规定而不是权威性的法律"。
Grüezi
Die Politiker in der CH machen mehr oder weniger was sie wollen weil unsere Bundesverfassung "Dank Art. 190 kein massgebendes Recht ist.
我知道这一点。不过，这主要是在州一级，而联邦政府则完全不同。例如，我曾在公共基础设施方面讨论过这个问题，您可能知道，贵国的铁路基础设施非常好，使用率也很高，而美国却相当缺乏。我曾问过美国人，他们是否有可能在直接民主的层面上决定此类基础设施及其资金来源，就像瑞士人决定修建哥达隧道并为其提供资金那样。不过，这似乎主要是在联邦政府层面上进行，公众几乎无法干预，而且联邦政府对许多美国人来说过于以汽车和飞机为中心。
在联邦层面，民主似乎存在更多缺陷。选举人团的运作方式可以让总统候选人在得票数大大低于对手的情况下成为总统，即使是在二元两党制的情况下也是如此，更不用说还有很多影响选举人团的手段，比如 "选区划分"。此外，美国最高法院的职能和行为在历史上也经常受到质疑、偏袒甚至破坏稳定。
总之，我来这里的主要目的是了解瑞士的直接民主制，以及它如何能为本国带来益处，因此我很感谢大家的反馈，并可能会参与更多的讨论，以了解瑞士人对本国制度及其特点的看法，以及公开辩论是如何进行的。
I was aware of this. Then again, thats mostly on the state level afaik while the federal government is a very different beast. I have discussed this for example in relation to public infrastructure, as you might be aware your country has very good and highly used rail infrastructure while this is quite lacking in the US. I asked people from the US whether they had the possibility to decide over such infrastructure and its funding at the direct democratic level the way the Swiss for example decided to build and fund the Gotthard base tunnel among others. it appears though that this is mostly handled on the federal level where the public hardly can intervene, and the federal government is rather too much car and plane centric for many Americans taste.
On the federal level democracy seems more flawed. The way the electoral college works can allow a presidential candidate to become president trough a significantly lower popular vote count than his opponent even within that binary 2 party option, lest not to speak even about many tricks that influence it like Gerrymandering. Furthermore, the function and actions of the US supreme court have historically often been quite questionable, partizan and even destabilizing.
Anyway, the point of me coming here is mostly to learn about direct democracy in Switzerland and how it could be of benefit for or own country, so im gratefull for the feedback and will likely participate in more discussions here to have a feeling how Swiss feel about their own system and its characteristics and how the public debate is held. though i have to admit i'm also intrigued by this site as to its function as public political forum and the way the debates are held.
感谢您的详细回复，Ringers 先生。如果您需要寻找特定主题的文章，请告诉我们，我很乐意为您提供帮助！
您也可以在这里注册订阅关于瑞士政治体制的时事通讯速成班：https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/become-a-democracy-pro-in-four-weeks-sign-up-now/48719890。
Vielen Dank für Ihre ausführliche Antwort, Herr Ringers. Teilen Sie uns gerne mit, wenn Sie einen Artikel zu einem bestimmten Thema suchen - dann versuche ich Sie gerne zu unterstützen!
Hier können Sie sich zudem für den Newsletter-Crashkurs über das politische System der Schweiz anmelden: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/become-a-democracy-pro-in-four-weeks-sign-up-now/48719890
是的，美国对原住民不好。 如今，许多原住民已成为美国最富有的人，我们正在恢复对土地的管理。 我们还有很多工作要做，但它正在发生。
是的，美国在奴隶制问题上做得不好，虽然没有解决，但正在好转。 现在，我们是最好的朋友，孩子们都穿同样的衣服，说同样的话，现在是同样的文化，我们正在成为一个民族。 这就是为什么这里对任何被认为是种族主义的现象都如此强烈的原因。
我所在的医院会说 170 种语言。 我们是一个种族融合的社会，利用我们的人民使我们在国际上取得成功，我们甚至有多年前移居犹他州的瑞士移民。 我认为我们从瑞士的工作蓝图中学到了如何将文化融合作为一种优势。
是的，美国政治很疯狂，但它们就像美国摔跤一样真实。 这就像安迪-考夫曼（Andy Kaufman）的政治秀，对全世界来说都是绝妙的娱乐......但老实说，我们之所以是我们，是因为我们的政府做了我们的企业需要他们做的事情，这样我们才能在国际上竞争。 实际上，我们非常稳定、合乎逻辑和理性，非常像瑞士人。
当然，我希望我们也能像瑞士一样学会保持中立。 在战争中选边站队几乎总是不光彩的。
我希望我们能像瑞士一样干净、准时、有条不紊。 我希望美国能像瑞士一样散发出迷人的气味，我所在的城市有时闻起来就像下水道。
我希望美国人像瑞士人一样懂得休闲的价值，我们都工作得很辛苦，但我觉得你们比我们玩得更开心。
Yes America was bad to the indigenous people. Today many indigenous people are the wealthiest Americans and we are returning stewardship of the land. We have a lot of work to do but it is happening.
Yes America was bad with slavery, it is not fixed but it is getting better. Now we are best friends, the kids all dress and talk the same, it is now the same culture, we are becoming one people. It is why there is such an outcry over any perceived racism here.
To put it into perspective, my local hospital speaks 170 languages. We are a racially integrated society that leverages our people to make us successful internationally, we even have the Swiss immigrants that moved to Utah many years ago. I like to think we learned how to use our cultural integration as an advantage from the working blueprint in Switzerland.
Yes American politics are crazy, but they are about as real as American wrestling. It is like the Andy Kaufman political show, and it is fantastic entertainment for the whole world . . . but lets be honest, we are who we are because our government does what our businesses need them to do, so we can compete internationally. In reality we are very stable, logical and rational, very much like the Swiss.
Sure I wish we would learn to be more neutral like Switzerland again. Choosing sides in a war is almost always a bad look.
I wish we were as clean, on time, and organized like Switzerland. I wish America smelled as fantastic as Switzerland, my city sometimes smells like a sewer.
I wish Americans understood the value of leisure like the Swiss, we both work a lot but I think you guys have more fun than we do.
非常感谢你的评论--写得像政治家的演讲一样引人入胜！
这么说您不认为美国的两极分化会对社会凝聚力构成真正的威胁？https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/democracy/trump-biden-and-hatred-how-us-polarisation-affects-americans-in-switzerland/84180825
Vielen Dank für Ihr Kommentar - mitreissend geschrieben wie die Rede eines Politikers!
Sie glauben also nicht, dass die Polarisierung in den USA ein echtes Risiko ist für die soziale Kohäsion? https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/democracy/trump-biden-and-hatred-how-us-polarisation-affects-americans-in-switzerland/84180825
他们可以用什么想法来赢得公民的信任？
我认为，直接民主应该是瑞士向包括欧盟朋友在内的任何人积极推广的议程。
令人惊讶的是，人们对此知之甚少（故意的！），而当他们了解到这一点时，却认为应该在他们的国家采用。
我的总体感觉是，人们越来越感到无力做出改变，因为民主机构已经被太多的非民选人士 "劫持"，他们只是为了权力而权力。 我们正被太多的规章制度所缠绕，这些规章制度在日常生活的方方面面制造了太多的摩擦，而 "常识 "正在这些 "非民选 "人士的监督下被破坏。
不信任正在成为 "我们 "对抗他们的战场。
what ideas they can use to win the trust of their citizens?
Well, I think that DIRECT DEMOCRACY, should be an active agenda promoted by Switzerland to anyone including our EU friends.
it is amazing how people know little about it (on purpose!) and when they learn about it, think it should be adopted in their country
My overall feeling is that people are increasingly feeling powerless to make change because the democratic institutions have been "hijacked" by too many un-elected people who just seek power for power. We are getting entangled in a web of too many regulations which create too many frictions in all aspects of day to day life and "common sense" is being trashed under the supervision of those "un-elected" .
The distrust is becoming a battleground of "we" against them.
谢谢您的描述！那么，您认为全民公决可以为日益减少的信任踩刹车？例如，多党制也可以缓和 "我们 "和 "他们 "之间的对比。
美国许多州都实行直接民主公投。尤其是随着 "罗伊诉韦德 "案的终结，他们正迎来新的曙光： https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/democracy/why-the-us-and-switzerland-are-direct-democracy-sister-republics/87536566
Vielen Dank für Ihre Schilderung! Sie sind also der Meinung, dass Volksabstimmungen das schwindende Vertrauen bremsen könnten? Der Gegensatz zwischen "wir" gegen "sie" könnte ja beispielsweise auch über ein Mehrparteiensystem aufgeweicht werden.
Viele US-Bundesstaaten kennen direktdemokratische Volksrechte. Gerade mit dem Ende von Roe vs. Wade erleben sie nun einen Aufbruch: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/democracy/why-the-us-and-switzerland-are-direct-democracy-sister-republics/87536566
我甚至不认为美国是一个真正的民主国家，因为人民并不直接投票选举总统，因为选举人票超过了民众票。这意味着由少数选举人而不是人民来决定谁是总统。如果这是一个真正的民主国家，戈尔和希拉里-克林顿都会就任美国总统。不过，有一点我倒是希望瑞士能借鉴美国，那就是政教分离。在某些方面，我认为瑞士在这方面还停留在黑暗时代。虽然现在看来美国可能正在倒退，因为保守派试图强迫美国人按照自己的宗教意识形态生活。与美国不同的是，瑞士的政体并不局限于两个政党，我认为这很容易造成两极分化和分裂，就像我们在美国看到的那样，人们基本上只能在左派或右派之间做出选择。只要两个对立的政党继续在美国执政，我认为分裂就会越来越多地成为其副产品。这也迫使选民和政客们产生极化思维，而在心理学中，极化思维被认为是一种认知缺陷。(如果有错别字，请见谅，因为我是用手机打的，提交前没有预览功能）。
I don't really even consider the US a democracy since the people don't directly vote for their President because the electoral votes outweigh the popular vote. This means that a handful of electors determines who is President rather than the People. If it was a real democracy, both Gore and Hillary Clinton would have taken office as POTUS. One thing, though, that I do wish Switzerland could take from the US is the separation of church and State. I think Switzerland is still stuck in the dark ages in that regard, in some ways. Although it looks like the US might be taking steps backward now as conservatives try to force Americans to live according to their own religious ideologies. One thing I do appreciate about the Swiss system is that, unlike the US, it isn't limited to only two parties, which I think easily generates so much polarization and division, as we've seen in the US, where people are basically forced to choose between left or right. And as long as two opposing parties remain in power in the US, I think division will increasingly become a byproduct of that. It's also been forcing polarized thinking among voters and politicians, and in psychology, polarized thinking is considered a cognitive defect. (Apologies for any typos, as I'm typing this on my phone and don't see a means of previewing my post before I submit it).
非常感谢您精彩纷呈的发言。您如何看待瑞士的政教分离？
我们还深入探讨了两极分化问题： https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/demokratie/trump-biden-und-der-hass-wie-us-amerikanerinnen-in-der-schweiz-die-polarisierung-erleben/83968569
Vielen Dank für Ihren spannenden und vielseitigen Beitrag. Wie erleben Sie denn die Nähe von Kirche und Staat in der Schweiz?
Mit der Frage der Polarisierung haben wir uns auch intensiv auseinandergesetzt: https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/demokratie/trump-biden-und-der-hass-wie-us-amerikanerinnen-in-der-schweiz-die-polarisierung-erleben/83968569
由于 "觉醒 "亚文化的影响，我在这里几乎只看到可悲的反美（！）言论。他们轻率地忘记了，正是美国激发了法国大革命和人权宪章！随后，瑞士在美国模式的启发下制定了自由联邦宪法。他们还忘记了包括电灯在内的无数美国发明对现代性的巨大贡献。众所周知，感激之情迟早会被吐露，今天的欧洲甚至认为自己在两次世界大战期间解放了自己！遗憾的是，今天的无知和觉醒文化猖獗无边。
Vedo qui sotto quasi solo deplorevoli commenti in disprezzo anti USA (!) dovuti alla subcultura "woke". Dimenticano bellamente che furono gli USA a ispirare la rivoluzione francese e la carta dei diritti dell'uomo! La Svizzera poi si è dotata di una costituzione liberale confederale ispirata al modello USA. Dimenticano pure l'enorme contributo alla modernità dovuto alle innumerevoli invenzioni americane, luce elettrica compresa. Si sa che purtroppo la gratitudine prima o poi la si sputa fuori, e l'Europa oggi crede addirittura di essersi liberta da sola durante le due guerre mondiali! Purtroppo l'ignoranza e la cultura woke oggi dilagano senza più limiti.
我认为下面的评论与 "觉醒 "文化无关，而只是对现实的参考。所写的一切本质上都是真实的。但我知道，有些人，比如你自己，因为不愿接受现实，就很快给某些事情贴上 "觉醒 "的标签。然而，如果过去没有 "觉醒文化"，我们现在可能还在奴役白人、强迫童工劳动、不允许妇女投票。我宁愿被贴上 "觉醒 "的标签，也不愿戴上眼罩。
I think the comments below have nothing to do with "woke" culture but are just references to reality. There was nothing written that isn't essentially true. But I know some people such as yourself are very quick to label something as "woke" simply because you don't want to accept the reality of it. And yet if it wasn't for "woke culture" in the past, we'd still be enslaving white people, forcing child labor and not allowing women to vote. I'd rather be labeled as "woke" than to wear a blindfold.
哎呀，显然是打错了。我在另一条评论中的意思是 "奴役黑人"。
Oops, that was obviously a typo. I meant "enslaving black people" in my other comment.
感谢您的贡献--不管许多评论批评美国的原因是什么，瑞士确实从美国学到了很多东西。
我觉得美国在日内瓦历史上扮演的角色特别吸引人：
Vielen Dank für Ihren Beitrag - unabhängig davon, was die Ursachen für die vielen Kommentare kritisch gegenüber den USA sind, hat die Schweiz tatsächlich einiges von den USA mitgenommen.
https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/demokratie/the-sister-republics-was-die-usa-und-die-schweiz-verbunden-hat/73047092
Besonders faszinierend finde ich die US-Rolle in der Geschichte von Genf:
https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/demokratie/zentrum-des-moralischen-universums-wie-das-internationale-genf-dank-den-usa-entstanden-ist/75840032
我同意你的看法，许多评论只是陈述了现实。但问题是在这里讲述这些现实的动机是什么？
SWI swissinfo.ch 一直在关注殖民主义的动荡：https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/kultur/handlanger-des-amerikanischen-ethnozids/46767796。
类似 "各国不能相互学习，因为...... "的评论几乎偏离了主题。问题是各国可以相互学习什么。
Ich stimme Ihnen zu, dass viele Kommentare einfach Realitäten benannt haben. Die Frage, die sich gleichwohl stellt: Was ist die Motivation dazu, diese Realitäten hier zu erzählen?
SWI swissinfo.ch hat die Verwerfungen des Kolonialismus immer auch thematisiert: https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/kultur/handlanger-des-amerikanischen-ethnozids/46767796
Kommentare im Stil von "Die Länder können nichts voneinander lernen, weil ..." sind ja beinahe off-topic. Wenn die Frage ist, WAS die Länder von einander lernen könnten.
一提到美国的问题，你就会感到愤怒，但这些问题确实存在，尽管美国也是一个反应迅速、鼓励创造力和个人创业的国家。在那里生活过并对政治制度感兴趣的我们只能得出这样的结论：事实上，是大企业和非常富有的人通过向政客们提供资金来决定政策的方向。种族隔离是真实存在的，并给人们带来了切实的后果。最高法院正在干预和支配行政部门的行动，这对于民主制度来说似乎同样非常奇怪。 请解释一下您为什么认为这是 "清醒的陶醉"，以便我们更好地理解您的观点。谢谢
Vous vous fâchez lorsque les problèmes des Etats-Unis sont mentionnés, cependant ils sont bien réels même si c'est aussi un pays qui réagit très vite, qui favorise la créativité et l'entreprise individuelle. Pour y avoir habité et m'être intéressée au système politique, on ne peut que constater qu'effectivement ce sont plus les grandes entreprises et les gens très fortunés qui décident des orientations par le biais de l'argent qu'ils distribuent aux politiciens. La ségrégation est réelle et a des conséquences concrétes pour les gens. La cour suprême s'immisce et dicte les actions de l'exécutif, ce qui parait tout de même très étrange pour un systéme démocratique. Expliquez-nous pourquoi vous assimilez cela à de l'intoxication woke afin que nous puissions mieux comprendre votre point de vue. Merci
没有什么--瑞士无法从美国的财阀制度中学到任何东西，它谎称自己是民主国家，但却是建立在野蛮暴力的基础上，因为它曾对土著人民进行种族灭绝，并实行可怕的奴隶制度；它是一个有许多政治犯的制度，是一个野蛮的私有化监狱系统，并在国外发动了数百次战争，强迫更换政府，实施恐怖主义行为，拥有 1000 个军事基地，并违反国际法对几乎五分之一的国家实施制裁。
Nichts - die Schweiz kann nichts von der US-Plutokratie lernen, die sich fälschlicherweise Demokratie nennt, aber auf brutaler Gewalt beruht, seit dem Genozid an den Ureinwohner:innen und dem schrecklichen Sklavensystem; es ist ein System mit vielen politischen Gefangenen, einem brutalen, privatisierten Gefängnissystem und mit hunderten von Kriegen, erzwungenen Regierungswechseln, Terrorakten im Ausland, mit 1000 Militärbasen und mit völkerrechtswidrigen Sanktionen gegen fast einen Fünftel aller Staaten.
美国民主党人的'觉醒'心态在意识形态上扭曲了极左的观点（！）。至少从 68 年起，欧洲 "知识分子 "就开始憎恨和蔑视美国。他轻率地忘记了，如果没有美国在两次世界大战期间的干预，欧洲甚至可能已经不复存在，因为它屈从于帝国或苏联。他还忘记了，我们的现代生活方式几乎完全来自美国，包括 80% 的最新发明。
我们可以承认，来自他们的暴力和犯罪太多了，但如果你看看欧洲的大都市（banlieues），我们也差不了多少。幸运的是，美国在世界各地有数百个军事基地，这也是为了防御俄罗斯和中国，而我们对此几乎没有任何贡献。然而，特朗普的出现却让我们这些自诩拥有良好社会制度的人获利颇丰，这正是因为我们将国防负担的 80% 留给了美国，而他们却无力承担！
Un visione distorta ideologicamente a sinistra estrema (!) dalla mentalità "woke", pure di provenienza dai democratici americani. Questo odio-disprezzo anti USA, è tipico dell' "intellighenzia" europea almeno dal lontano '68. Costui dimentica bellamente che senza l'intervento degli USA durante le due guerre mondiali, l'Europa probabilmente non esisterebbe nemmeno più, perché sottomessa al Reich o all'URSS. Dimentica pure che il nostro moderno stile di vita proviene quasi tutto dagli USA con l' 80% delle recenti invenzioni comprese.
Ammettiamo pure che da loro c'è troppa violenza e criminalità, ma se si osservano le metropoli europee (banlieues) non siamo poi tanto distanti. E per fortuna che ci sono centinai di basi militari US nel mondo, anche a NOSTRA difesa contro Russia e Cina, a cui però non contribuiamo quasi in niente. Con Trump però saremo costretti a contribuire pure noi approfittatori, che vantiamo un buon sistema sociale proprio perché lasciamo l'onere della nostra difesa per l'80% agli USA, che loro non possono permetterselo!
为什么你把任何批评美国的言论都说成是对美国的仇恨？为什么仅仅因为你不同意，就把一切都贴上 "觉醒 "的标签？你应该就实际所说的内容和提出的观点进行辩论，而不是简单地乱扣帽子，实质上是诉诸 "骂名"。作为世界第一大武器制造商，美国确实从战争中获利。多年前，美国的一位总统（艾森豪威尔）就预测到了美国军事工业综合体的影响。在本能地给某件事贴上 "觉醒 "或 "反美 "的标签之前，请做一些实际的研究，并试着克制自己的偏见。仅仅因为你不希望某件事情是真实的，并不能说明它不那么真实。
Why do you label any critical comments about the US as being hatred of the US? And why do you label everything as "woke" simply because you don't agree with it? You should debate what is actually said and the points that were made rather than simply throwing your labels around and essentially resorting to "name-calling." It's true that the US profits from wars, as the world's #1 weapons manufacturer. The effects of the US industrial military complex were predicted by one if its own Presidents (Eisenhower) many years ago. Please do some actual research and try to put your own biases in check before instinctively labeling something as "woke" or "anti-American." Simply because you don't WANT something to be true doesn't make it any less true.
最重要的一点是不要以美国为榜样。 这不是真正的民主。 无论哪个党派当选，其国内和外交举措都具有显著的一致性。 因为决定政策和结果的是游说团体。
我们可以学习的是如何通过更好的透明度和规则来保护我们的政治进程和当选官员不受游说集团的影响。
The most important thing to learn is to NOT follow the American example. It is not a true democracy. Regardless of which party is voted in, there is a remarkable consistency of domestic and foreign initiatives. Why? because it is lobby groups who determine policies and outcomes.
What we can learn is how to protect our political processes and elected officials from lobby groups by enabling better transparency and rules.
谢谢你描述了你的印象！美国民主如何才能重新变得更加民主？
Vielen Dank für das Schildern Ihrer Eindrücke! Und wie könnte die amerikanische Demokratie denn wieder demokratischer werden?
通过不止两个政党
By having more than just two political parties
首先，取消选举人团，让人民/民众投票真正决定选举结果。还有，消除说客和企业左右政客及其选择的可能性。美国的部分问题在于两极分化，没有客观的监督。这就好比我们被迫坐在一旁，看着两群孩子不断地来回争吵，却没有能力介入其中，试图注入任何理性或中立的因素，试图让他们恢复理智。我们基本上只能眼睁睁地看着他们互相残杀。也许，如果权力更加稀释，不局限于交战双方，那么分裂就会更加稀释，戴着偏见障眼法的人就会更少。
For one thing, do away with the electoral college and let the People / popular vote actually determine election outcomes. Also yes, eliminate the possibility of lobbyists and corporations to sway politicians and the choices they make. Part of the problem with the US is that it's become so polarized between two sides that there is no objective oversight. It's Iike being forced to sit back and watch two groups of kids constantly fight back and forth and not having the ability to step in and try to inject any rationality or neutrality in an attempt to bring them to their senses. We are basically forced to just sit back and watch them try to destroy one another. Perhaps if the power was more diluted and not restricted between two warring parties then the division would be more diluted and less people would be wearing the blindfold of bias.
非常感谢你--你描述了一个我们作为一个社会必须不断努力解决的非常紧迫的问题：观点与事实的分离。
您没有看到任何行动者在反对这一现象吗？例如，在大学、新闻界或民间社会？
您不是唯一意识到这一点并深受其害的人。
Vielen Dank - da schildern Sie ein wirklich drängendes Problem, um das man als Gesellschaft stetig ringen muss: Die Trennung von Meinung und Fakten.
Sehen Sie denn keinerlei Akteure, die dem entgegenwirken? Etwa an den Universitäten, im Journalismus oder aus der Zivilgesellschaft?
Sie sind ja nicht die einzige Person, die das so wahrnimmt und darunter leidet.
姊妹共和国？你们想和美国这样一个到处都是被称为 "保留地 "的集中营的国家成为姐妹国家吗？
Sister Republics? Do you want to be sisters with a country like the USA that is pock marked with concentration camps called Reservations?
正如您在我们的文章中所看到的，这是一个历史术语： https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/demokratie/the-sister-republics-was-die-usa-und-die-schweiz-verbunden-hat/73047092
至于它是否还有生命力，您是否想让它焕发新的活力，这还是个未知数。
Wie Sie in unseren Artikeln lesen können, handelt es sich dabei um einen historischen Begriff: https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/demokratie/the-sister-republics-was-die-usa-und-die-schweiz-verbunden-hat/73047092
Ob er noch Leben in sich hat und man ihn beleben will oder nicht, ist eine offene Frage.
你好，坦率地说，除了 "姊妹共和国 "的问题，你认为美国有什么可以向瑞士学习的，反之亦然吗？
Hi Frankly, apart from the question of "sister republics", is there anything you think the US can learn from Switzerland and vice-versa?
我明白你的意思，但在现代背景下，这种说法颇具争论性，因为如今许多保留地也相当富有，并拥有政治影响力。这更多地与 19 世纪及以前的历史有关，"眼泪审判 "就是一种实际的种族灭绝。但这种事情在今天并没有发生。
不过，美国确实有一些奇怪的海外领土和实体，它们在技术上并不属于美国，其公民权利可能与其他国家有些不同。萨摩亚人就是一个特别的例子，因为他们甚至不能在总统选举中投票。
I get the point but that is rather polemic in the modern context, many of those reservations are also quite wealthy and have political clout nowadays. It's more relating to for example 19th century history and before, where things like "the trial of tears" was a form of practical genocide. Those kind of things dont really happen today afaik.
Otoh the US does have some strange overseas territory's and entity's attached that arn't technically states and who's citizens rights can be somewhat different than that of the rest. The Samoans are a particular example of this as afaik they cant even vote for presidential elections.
或许可以从教育和心态入手：
瑞士可以学习培养适应能力强、能够在有限的资源和有限的时间内完成任务、有战略眼光和目标导向、自信、有成长心态、有创业精神和敢于承担风险等特质，并教授全球化思维、深入教学、支持人才和竞争力、实施社区建设战略和各年龄段的志愿服务。
美国可以学习培养开放妥协等特质，传授高质量的手工艺，确保所有人都能获得扎实的知识、技能和高水平的教育，灌输对质量、耐用性、可持续性、精确性、品位、真实性和美学的欣赏，尊重自然环境和建筑环境，鼓励和弘扬地方文化和特性。
Maybe starting with education and mentality:
Switzerland can learn to foster traits such as being adaptable and capable to perform with limited resources and limited time, being strategic and goal-oriented, being confident, having a growth mindset, being entrepreneurial and risk-taking, and teach to think globally, teach to go in depth, support talent and competitiveness, implement community-building strategies and volunteering for all ages.
The US can learn to foster traits such as openness for compromise and teach high quality handwork, ensure solid knowledge, skills and high-level education for all, instill appreciation for quality, durability, sustainability, precision, taste, authenticity and aesthetics, respect for the environment, both natural and built, and encourage and celebrate local culture and identity.
感谢您的这篇非常平衡的文章！它给人的印象是，双方都有很多东西需要学习。但您难道不觉得志愿工作在瑞士很有影响力吗？从消防队到广泛的俱乐部文化？
Danke für diesen sehr ausgewogenen Beitrag! Da hat man den Eindruck, es gibt für beide Seiten einiges, was sie lernen könnten. Haben Sie denn aber nicht den Eindruck, dass die Freiwlligenarbeit in der Schweiz sehr prägend ist? Von der Feuerwehr über die breite Vereinskultur?
我是美国人。目前在苏黎世，但不会太久。我认为美国有很多值得学习的地方。首先，我希望杂货店能离我家超近，还有有轨电车和非常好的火车。
I'm an American. In Zurich for now, but not for long. I think the US has got a lot to learn. For one I wish grocery stores could be super close to my house back home as well as trams and really good trains.
正所谓 "橘生淮南则为橘，生于淮北则为枳"。就国土面积和人口而言，美国比瑞士大得多。在美国几乎不可能有像瑞士那样的大众运输系统，因为美国是如此巨大和分散。你不可能在每个人的家门口都有一家杂货店。但现在，除非你住在荒郊野外，否则美国基本上到处都有沃尔玛、塔吉特超市、小型购物中心、加油站、快餐店和便利店。
That's like comparing apples and oranges, as the saying goes. America is HUGE compared to Switzerland, in terms of land size and population. It's virtually impossible to have a mass transit system like Switzerland's in the US because the US is so huge and spread out. You can't have a grocery store on everyone's doorstep there. But as it is, there are already Walmarts and Target stores, mini malls, gas stations and fast food restaurants and convenient stores basically everywhere in the US unless you live out in the middle of nowhere.
美国不会向其他国家学习，只会一遍又一遍地重复同样的错误。瑞士可以从美国一贯的错误中吸取教训，永远不要听从美国的指挥，否则就会像美国一样......成为一个流氓国家，即香蕉共和国。
America doesn't learn from others it simply repeats the same mistakes over and over again. Switzerland could learn from US consistent mistakes and not to ever follow the US dictates and end up, well, like the US...a rogue nation i.e. banana republic.
老兄。美国从其他文化/国家学到了一切。包括基督教。再想想生活在美国的许多文化/民族。黑人、犹太人、西班牙裔、亚洲人等等。因此，反美也是种族主义，而不仅仅是共产主义。我们甚至从英国学到了两次战争中拯救欧洲所需的造船技术。你认为希特勒会在瑞士之外的其他地方止步不前吗？不，他也会侵略你们。所以，你们也要感谢美国才没有发生这种事。
Dude. The US has learnt EVERYTHING from other cultures/nations. Including Christianity. Also think about many cultures/ethnicities live in the US. Blacks, Jews, Hispanics, Asians, etc. So being anti America is also racist, not just communist. We even learned the litteral ship building we needed to save Europe in two wars from Britain. You think Hitler would have stopped at everywhere else but Switzerland? Nope, he just would've invaded you too. So you also have America to thank for that not happening.
好样的至少有一个人还能讲道理，因为他知道事情的真相！
BRAVO! Almeno uno che sa ancora ragionare perché conosce la storia vera!
有趣的是，瑞士人之所以变得如此自以为是，是因为过去几百年来他们一直被允许走自己的路。 在过去的大部分时间里，这种自由来自于山区的天然隔绝。 但在过去的一百年里，这种自由来自于主要由美国推行的自由主义世界秩序。 瑞士人真的认为，如果纳粹或共产党控制了欧洲其他地区，他们会允许自己继续快乐地保持 "中立 "吗？美国并非完美无缺，但它的基本价值观与瑞士的利益不谋而合，比瑞士希望遇到的任何其他大国都更符合瑞士的利益。 我们将拭目以待这种世界秩序还能持续多久。
It is interesting how smug the Swiss have become because they have been allowed to follow their own path for the past several hundred years. That freedom was derived from the natural isolation of the mountains for most of that time. But for the last hundred years it came from the liberal world order that has been mostly enforced by the United States. Do the Swiss really think that the Nazis or the Communists would have allowed them to merrily continue with their "neutrality" if they had controlled the rest of Europe? The United States isn't perfect but its basic values coincide with Swiss interests more than any other great power Switzerland can hope to encounter. We will see how much longer that world order lasts.
社交媒体和永远在线的便携式设备彻底改变了社会（也改变了瑞士）。
但这并不全是好事。
Social media and always-on handy have changed societies (also Switzerland) forever.
And it is not all good.
我同意，但进步总是有弊端的。 如果从不尝试新事物，就永远不会有进步。
I agree but progress always has its downsides. If you never try anything new you never have any progress.
非常感谢你们的贡献！瑞士保持中立最初并不是一个完全自由的决定，而是外部强加给瑞士的。
您可以在这里找到更多相关信息： https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/politik/der-tag-an-dem-die-schweiz-neutral-wurde/41322772
历史学家奥利弗-穆瓦利（Oliver Meuwly）说："瑞士是法国和奥地利之间的缓冲地带之一，法国必须对瑞士进行控制。每个人都想控制阿尔卑斯山脚下的领土，这就确保了法国被封锁。
中立最终对所有人都有利。瑞士无法保证稳定，因此决定保持中立。瑞士人接受了这一事实，尽管他们自己并没有宣称中立。中立并不是一个计划，而是由其他国家强加给瑞士的"。
Vielen Dank für Ihre Beiträge! Die Schweizer Neutralität war ja ursprünglich keine komplett freie Entscheidung, sondern etwas, das der Schweiz von aussen auferlegt worden ist.
Mehr darüber können Sie hier erfahren: https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/politik/der-tag-an-dem-die-schweiz-neutral-wurde/41322772
Der Historiker Oliver Meuwly sagt dort: "Die Schweiz war eine der Pufferzonen zwischen Frankreich, das man in Schach halten musste, und Österreich. Alle wollten die Kontrolle ausüben über das Territorium am Fuss der Alpen, das die Abriegelung Frankreichs gewährleistete.
Die Neutralität kam schliesslich allen gelegen. Die Schweiz war nicht in der Lage, Stabilität zu gewährleisten, weshalb entschieden wurde, dass sie neutral sein müsse. Die Schweizer arrangierten sich damit, obwohl sie selbst die Neutralität nicht beanspruchten. Es gab kein Projekt für Neutralität; die Umstände führten dazu, dass die anderen Staaten der Schweiz Neutralität verordneten."
谢谢您的帮助。）
Thank you for this. :)
今天，瑞士没有什么可以向美国学习的。不过，后者并不随意出售个人武器。教育。SBB。瑞士对大多数人的教育。瑞士城市的有轨电车和公共汽车系统。中立......是的。
Heutzutage die CH hat wenig von den USA zu lernen. Diese aber, keine persönliche Waffen frei zu verkaufen. Die Bildung. Die SBB. Die schweizerische Erziehung der Mehrheit der Bevölkerung. Das Strassenbahn und Buse System in den sch. Städten. Die die, also, die Neutralität...... Ja.
那就相当多了！你自己住在美国吗？
Also doch einiges! Leben Sie denn selbst in den USA?
瑞士可以向美国学习如何欺骗友好伙伴！
Die Schweiz könnte von den USA lernen wie man freundschaftliche Partner über den Tisch zieht!
瑞士可以向美国学习，自二战以来，美国以民主的名义制造的战争多于和平。 瑞士需要坚决不成为种族灭绝的伙伴。
反之，美国也应向瑞士学习，不要滥用民主。
我希望更多地了解瑞士作为一个共和国做得如何？ 当然，我并不为美国的共和制感到自豪。
Switzerland can learn from the US which created more war than peace in the name of democracy since WWII. Switzerland needs to be resolute not to become a partner of genocide.
Conversely, the US should learn from Switzerland not to misuse democracy.
I hope to learn more about how well is Switzerland doing as a republic? I am certainly not proud about America as a republic.
感谢您的来稿--您对瑞士作为共和国的哪些方面特别感兴趣？如果我能更多地了解您的兴趣所在，我很乐意为您撰写一些您可能感兴趣的文章。
Vielen Dank für Ihren Beitrag - was interessiert Sie denn besonders im Hinblick auf die Schweiz als Republik? Gerne kann ich Ihnen einige Artikel, die Sie womöglich interessieren, zusammenstellen, wenn ich mehr über Ihr Interesse weiss.
谢谢你的提议，让我了解到了比双子座的回答更多的信息 https://g.co/gemini/share/83f7751e9890。
我有兴趣了解上述内容之外的更多信息，比如我所在的城市几年前出版了一本名为《圣弗朗西斯科》（San FranSicko）的书，但却因为无家可归而惨遭失败！
另一个问题是政党，美国全国有两个政党。 瑞士有多少个？ 如果不止两个，小党如何在全国范围内成为大党？
Thank you for your offer to help me learn more than what Gemini answered https://g.co/gemini/share/83f7751e9890.
I am interested to learn more beyond the above, such as Homelessness that my fair city failed miserably enough that a book named San FranSicko was published a few years ago!
Another issue is political party where nationally, there are two in America. How many does Switzerland have? If more than two, how do the minor ones succeed to become one on the national level?
直接民主
Direct Democracy
这两个国家都在一定程度上承认直接民主--在美国，至少是在州一级。直接民主在哪里实行得更好？
Beide Länder kennen direkte Demokratie in begrenztem Mass - in den USA zumindest auf Bundesstaatsebene. Wo wird die direkte Demokratie besser gelebt?
是：今天，瑞士和美国可以相互学习什么？
但：瑞士和美国（或任何一个国家，甚至单独一个国家）都可以属于一个相互促进的、能够改变整体的临界国家群体。
以及：通过改变激励机制，使主要由真正的专业人士主导的全球相互依存的 "期望不断提高 "方案，脱离主要由金钱主导的国家独立的 "困难时期 "方案。
PD：详情请访问 X/Twitter 平台上的 @gmh_upsa 账户。
Yes: What could Switzerland and the United States learn from each other today?
but: both (or either one, even alone) can belong to a mutually reinforcing a critical mass of nations able to shift the whole.
and: by changing the incentives for the “Rising Expectations” scenario of global interdependence led mainly by true professionals away from the “Tough Times” scenario of national independence led mainly by money.
PD: details are available on the account @gmh_upsa on the X/Twitter platform.
瑞士可以向美国学习如何建立一个更加透明的政府。在美国，联邦和州一级的法规制定通常更加公开和透明。美国公布法规草案，并征求公众意见。监管机构会公布所有意见及其答复。一般来说，还提供当面发表意见的机会。
在美国，《信息自由法》(https://www.foia.gov/faq.html) 也为公众了解联邦一级机构的活动提供了便利。大多数州和地方机构也采用了类似的报告要求。相反，我刚刚读到瓦莱州的几个市政府拒绝公布其辛迪加的工资 (https://www.rts.ch/info/regions/9071771-jusqua-275000-francs-par-an-ce-que-gagnent-les-maires-de-suisse-romande.html)。这样做会招致诉讼和严厉的处罚。
美国在饮用水合规方面的问责制也要好得多。每家为 25 个或更多用户提供服务的公用事业公司都必须遵守严格的报告规定（参见 https://www.epa.gov/ccr）。请参见 https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-quality/water-quality-report-english。瑞士没有类似的规定。
Switzerland could learn from the US how to have a more transparent government. The making of regulations at the federal and state level is generally more open and transparent in the US. Draft regulations in the US are published and comments from the public are solicited. All comments and their answers from the regulatory authority are published. Generally an opportunity to comment in person is also available.
In the US, the Freedom of Information Act (https://www.foia.gov/faq.html) also provides strong access to the activities of agencies at the federal level. Most state and local agencies have adopted similar reporting requirements. In contrast I just read that several municipal governments in the Canton de Valais are refusing to publish the salary of their syndics (https://www.rts.ch/info/regions/9071771-jusqua-275000-francs-par-an-ce-que-gagnent-les-maires-de-suisse-romande.html). Doing so would be subject to lawsuits and severe penalties.
Accountability for drinking water compliance regulations is also much better in the US. Every utility serving a population of 25 customers or more is subject to strict reporting regulations (see https://www.epa.gov/ccr). See an example; https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-quality/water-quality-report-english. There is nothing comparable in Switzerland.
谢谢，这确实是瑞士可以学习的地方。长期以来，宣传原则甚至不适用于某些州的媒体专业人员。
在卢塞恩州，当局在 2025 年 6 月之前甚至没有义务配合新闻界索取信息的要求。届时，公开原则也将依法生效。
Vielen Dank, das ist tatsächlich ein Punkt, wo die Schweiz lernen könnte. Tatsächlich galt lange in einzelnen Kantonen nicht mal gegenüber Medienschaffenden das Öffentlichkeitsprinzip.
Beim Kanton Luzern sind die Behörden sogar noch bis Juni 2025 nicht verpflichtet kooperativ zu sein, wenn die Presse Informationen anfragt. Dann tritt auch dort das Öffentlichkeitsprinzip gesetzlich in Kraft.
我住在英国，但知道即将举行总统大选，并认为美国的制度可以更加民主。
原因是选举人团制度，即在每个州计算选票，并分配一定数量的可允许选票，这可能会导致异常情况，因为各州的选票可能会带来与全国公民个人选票不同的结果。
例如，在 2015 年大选中，希拉里-克林顿获得了 280 万张个人选票，超过了唐纳德-特朗普，但在选举人团制度下，特朗普获得了最多选票，入主白宫。
尽管这是他们的制度，但这听起来并不像真正意义上的民主。
在英国，由于我们采用 "得票最多者当选 "制度，该制度影响了不同政党在议会中的席位分配，结果是席位被两大政党瓜分，只有极少数席位分配给小党，这意味着总体而言，人民并没有获得他们投票支持的代表权。
而如果我们改用比例代表制，席位将根据各政党的得票情况按比例分配。
这可能意味着会有更多的联合政府出现，但这也意味着他们必须学会互相交流，达成共识，以取代目前这种对抗性的儿童乐园。
我坦率地承认，我是欧盟的坚定支持者，并坚信如果十年前我们有了公关，英国脱欧就不会发生。
I live in the UK, but aware of the coming presidential election, and consider that the American system could be more democratic.
The reason being that the electoral college system where the votes are counted in each individual state, to which a certain number of allowable votes are allotted, can cause an anomaly, inasmuch as the votes cast by the state may bring about a differing result to that if it were the individual votes of the citizens throughout the nation.
For example, in the 2015 election, Hillary Clinton gained 2.8 million of the individual votes, over Donald Trump, yet under the electoral college system, Trump gained the most votes and his residency in the White House.
Despite that being their system, that does not sound like democracy in the true sense of the word.
We, in the United Kingdom, because of our use of the First Past the Post system, which affects the allocation of seats for the differing parties in parliament, and as a result the seats are divided by the two main parties, with only minimal seats, are allocated, if at all, to the minor parties, meaning that overall the people do not get the representation for which they voted.
Whereas, if we were to change to a Proportional Representation system, the seats would be allocated in proportion to the votes cast for the different parties.
It would probably mean more coalition governments as a result, but that would also mean that they would have to learn to speak to each other, so consensus, replacing the adversarial kid's playground, we have at the moment.
My position, which I freely admit, is that I am a strong supporter of the EU, and pretty well convinced that had we had PR, a decade ago, that Brexit would not have happened.
关于美国的选举团--它是建国之初的遗留物，当时的政治精英们不信任普通民众对总统或参议员的选择，于是设立了选举团作为缓冲，以便操纵投票，确保极不合格的人不会当选。 在过去的一百多年里，这种情况一直被容忍，因为普选的获胜者也赢得了选委会。 这种情况在2000年大选中发生了变化，当时小布什以50万票之差输给了戈尔，但赢得了选委会。 这种情况在2016年再次发生，希拉里-克林顿以300万张选票赢得普选，却在选委会中输给了特朗普（具有讽刺意味的是，选委会正是为了将这类人挡在总统门外而设立的）。 这种情况几乎在 2020 年再次发生，并可能在 2024 年再次发生。 民主党人希望取消选委会，但共和党人会拒绝，因为这给了他们固有的优势。
至于英国脱欧，我认为这说明了直接民主的危险。 在我看来，将如此重大的决定寄托在一个人的一票（理论上）上是疯狂的。 每当我问起我的英国朋友，他们都会说："嗯，他们确实赢得了大选。
A note on the Electoral College in the US- it is a relic from the founding of the country when the political elite did not trust the selection of the president or senators by the common people and installed it as a buffer so they manipulate the vote and make sure that supremely unqualified persons were not elected. It was tolerated for the last hundred years or so because the winner of the popular vote also won the EC. This changed in the 2000 election when Bush Jr. lost to Gore by 500,000 votes but won the EC. It happened again in 2016 when Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 3,000,000 but lost the EC to Trump (ironically exactly the type of person the EC was created to keep out of the presidency). It almost happened again in 2020 and may again in 2024. Democrats want to do away with the EC but Republicans will refuse because it gives them a built-in advantage.
As far as Brexit, I thought that illustrated a danger of direct democracy. In my opinion it was crazy to allow such a momentous decision be allowed to rest on the vote of perhaps (theoretically) one person's vote. Whenever I would ask my British friends they would all say "Well, they did win the election."
选举团作为在联邦小州和联邦大州之间建立平衡的一种联邦主义手段，尽管其影响要小得多，但与瑞士的大多数州有某种联系--还是说您看不出有什么相似之处？
当然，一种方法是在选举团中按比例分配选举人，如今只有缅因州和内布拉斯加州这样做。
有趣的是，一些州也将在今年 11 月决定是否在国会中引入排序选择制度--这也将创造出一种差异化更大的局面：https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/democracy/why-the-us-and-switzerland-are-direct-democracy-sister-republics/87536566。
Das Electoral College als föderalistisches Mittel, um einen Ausgleich zwischen kleinen Bundesstaaten und den grösseren zu schaffen, ist, wenn auch viel weniger folgenreicher, ja irgendwie auch verwandt mit dem Ständemehr in der Schweiz - oder sehen Sie da keine Gemeinsamkeit?
Ein Ansatz wäre natürlich eine proportionale Vergabe der Wahlleute im Electoral College, wie es heute bloss Maine und Nebraska kennen.
Spannenderweise entscheiden diesen November auch einige Staaten über die Einführung eines Ranked Choice-Systems für den Kongress - dies würde auch ein weit differenzierteres Bild schaffen: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/democracy/why-the-us-and-switzerland-are-direct-democracy-sister-republics/87536566
加入对话