Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook

reads.

The Federal Council prefers the EU hässig as the people

a Hundred years had to Say in Switzerland, the same four parties. 20. October joined the Green in this League. This is the end of an Era?
For such a statement, it is too early. Especially in the case of Non-Federal Council-parties in Switzerland there are always large swings. The victory of the Greens and green liberals is a clear Signal, but this character must first be confirmed.

This means that the Greens are not entitled to a seat in the Federal Council?
Even if I would welcome it personally, to see a Green in the Bundesrat – the Swiss logic, this is not a question at the moment. The SVP also had to wait a long time until she had a second Federal Council seat to secure.

"who is the Green should form a government?" Thomas Maissen at the UniS in Bern, Switzerland. Photo: Franziska Roth Buhler

After the left's electoral victory of 2011, they called for the transition to a coalition government and the expulsion of FDP and SVP of the Federal Council. Are you have become gentle, Mr Maissen?
Maybe a bit ... coalition governments have the advantage that you do not apply for a clear program responsibility. The same provocation from the time when the center won, Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf had in the government of sass and the SVP of a Federal Council, in the current Situation, no sense: With whom the Greens should form a government? The SVP was trimmed back, but is still very strong. The real losers of the options the FDP, the BDP, the CVP and the SP are. This is not a Basis, in order to test a new form of government.

in these elections, but the Trend is that the large, established parties. Assuming this trend continues: when is it necessary to change the composition of the Federal Council?
In the 19th century. Century was the Federal Council long only free direction, although only a minority of the population chose to be free intimately. The Catholic-Conservative is not found, the not funny, the socialists, either. And yet it worked, because of the majority vote to the right. Also with regard to other States, I don't think there is such a thing as a natural limit of representativeness.

"The European people's parties were parties to the economic miracle. And those times are over."

The SP has long believed that the European Malaise of social democracy relates to you. Why is it so difficult to keep your base at the bar?
We no longer live in the industrial class society. The SP has adapted to by you has become more urban, intellectual, and environmental. It is still a potential of 15 to 20 percent. This is not in the international comparison, not so bad. You think of France, where the socialists, quasi, or in Germany, where the weakness of the SPD harmful to a system Dimension has been reached. The SP Switzerland is also removed after this defeat far.

Why keep the people's party in Switzerland is comparatively well?
The European people's parties were parties to the economic miracle. And those times are over. The promise, it will no longer is always better for all of us. While people try parties, the System with careful reforms to make the populists still the promise of at the time: lower taxes, higher and earlier pensions, more social benefits. Although this is unrealistic, but politically successful. In Switzerland, the distribution is not fighting so hard. We are a very rich country. So rich that you can make, even in principle, critical thoughts about economic growth. Do we really need this all? The post Matera list are trends that do not want to afford many other countries.

not it Has to do with the fact that the populist SVP is also in the responsibility?
Yes, that is a good point. The SVP is involved in spite of their fierce and sometimes ugly rhetoric, in principle, in the System. It is rules with regard to the direct democratic game in an international comparison, quite a system of loyalty.

Summary: Switzerland is better off than neighbouring countries because we are rich, and the SVP have.
Ha! You have brought the SVP into the game! Switzerland is fine because she is rich and because we have been able to find a System in which parties such as the SVP or the Greens, in principle, a consensus. This works well, as long as we can distribute the profits. The problems start when we need to distribute losses.

"The main problem with Europe remains the anxious attitude of the Federal Council and the Parliament."

The System is stable – at the same time, it is unable to develop a viable attitude to the EU. You have to this election on Sunday, the hope is that this will change?
I would be very surprised. The only party that stands and behind a framework agreement, is the GLP. She has also won. But it was about the Ecology, or the clear commitment to Europe? The main problem with Europe remains the anxious attitude of the Federal Council and Parliament. You will know that a framework agreement would be before the people no Chance. That's why you play for time. The Federal Council prefers the EU hässig as the Swiss people.

Why the attitude in Switzerland actually, so Europe is hostile?
It is usual to define Switzerland in the demarcation from the other. The other, the EU is today. It can hardly be rational combat. If you look at what has led other countries in the EU, were either a political break with the System, such as in Eastern Europe, Spain or Portugal, or an economic crisis in the 90s in Austria, Sweden or Finland. I Switzerland you do not wish to, but: If you were to fall into a severe economic crisis, would be the positive dependency of Europe.

"If you ask a historian whether something could change, he will always say Yes."

It seems, sometimes, as the younger Generation have, embodied, for example, by the green liberals, a more relaxed relationship with the EU. Takes place because a value change?
If you ask a historian whether something could change, he will always say: Yes. But it must change quite a bit. The SVP of advance is more than three times as much as the green liberals and the young people certainly far.

When they started out 2013 in Paris, in France a socialist government. Today, the party is in ruins. What this means for French politics, the institutions?
The big Surprise is not that it looks like the right side better. Also, the Republicans are down in 2017 due to internal small wars and Affairs dramatically. Until now, the party has not recovered from it.

the hour of the populist hits of the most.
Yes, to the Left and to the Right. They're often without a precise program, but with very clear images of the enemy. In France has turned to the frightened centre and the bourgeoisie Macron. This is problematic, as La République en Marche movement remained. It is not a party with an internal democracy and a clear program. It is a movement for Emmanuel Macron.

Can operate a political System in the longer term, if it is only worn by a movement?
Yes, monarchies can.

How, please?
In the 19th century. Century there are examples of this. I think of Napoleon III and Wilhelm I. The monarch with an ultimately non-partisan mission: modernization and unification, Expansion, and prevention of a civil war, of social compensation. Then, too, there were parliaments, but the last word of the strong man in the state had. I see Parallels to today. I'm not saying that France is on the way to an authoritarian state. But in comparison to its predecessor, François Hollande, Macron often makes what he wants, with little respect for Parliament, for the regions and other institutions. He ruled in a Top-down, together with a well-trained management. This tends to lead to a bureaucratic elite rule. Such is very vulnerable, but to a certain extent, the Tedium, compared to the large people's parties.

Which System works better: Broad-based and democratically legitimized or from the top down?
When it comes to redistribution, is to have the broadest possible base. You are guaranteed justice and equality. Then the people have the feeling to be taken. If it goes bad, it can gives rise to the call for a strong man who is efficient, procedure abbreviated, security. I'm clear for the difficult, long negotiation processes of democracy. But if the world develops so, as my preferences would be, I don't know.

Created: 04.11.2019, 21:45 PM

Avatar
Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.