Direct democracy in Switzerland – its history and significance

Over the past 200 years, the citizens of Switzerland have developed democracy into a model that is unique in the world. Direct democracy is an integral part of the political culture and the decisive foundation for the country’s economic success. No other country holds as many referendums every year as Switzerland. On a total of four dates per year, the Swiss population can express their views on a very broad range of issues by means of initiatives and referendums. In principle, this is possible at all political levels, namely at municipal, cantonal and federal level. In the near future, for example, it will be possible to vote on the recently submitted neutrality initiative. The aim is to anchor Swiss neutrality more precisely in the Federal Constitution with a new constitutional article. The collection of signatures and now the realisation of the initiative have already triggered a broad debate that could change a lot politically, regardless of the result. This is what makes Switzerland’s political culture so special and has the effect of breaking the power of established circles such as parties and associations. In addition, direct democracy prevents the media from wielding too much power, thus creating scope for thought processes and concrete change. What are the roots of this successful democratic model?

Natural law, the cooperative principle
and the education system as a basis

With direct democracy, Switzerland developed a foundation at communal and cantonal level even before the founding of the federal state in 1848, which took on very different forms over the course of the 19^th century. This always took place ‘from the bottom up’, i.e., building on the communes via the respective cantonal level up to the federal level; this is how our tried and tested federalist-subsidiary model developed. Natural law and the co-operative principle were fundamental to this process.
  The term ‘natural law’ as a theological-philosophical category has developed since antiquity and means that people think about the timeless norms for living together, about moral behaviour (question of values) and about shaping the political-legal order. The following questions are central to this: What is due to each individual person? What natural rights and duties does he or she have as a person?
  Natural law was put into practice in Switzerland, inter alia, with the co-operative principle and its three ‘selves’, namely self-help, self-determination and self-responsibility. The human being is addressed as a social being, which is expressed in particular in the militia system and the principle of concordance. These principles, which form the personal image of man, contain an integrating force without which Switzerland as a nation of the will, based on freedom and equality, could not have come into being. Numerous forms of pre-modern democratic institutions, such as the variously organised ‘Landsgemeinden’¹ in different cantons, the ‘Freestate of the Three Leagues’ in the canton of Grisons or the so-called ‘Republic of the Seven Tithings’ (Republik der sieben Zehnden) in the canton of Valais, bear witness to this. Such co-operative-based forms have existed in Switzerland since the late Middle Ages, in contrast to the predominantly feudalistic and absolutist Europe.
  Although economic dynamism in the Confederation set in late, it was based on a solid, human foundation. This did not mean conflict-free development, but it usually produced good solutions in the interests of the common good, the bonum commune. Before 1848, Switzerland was primarily rural and agrarian in character, but from the end of the 18^th century until 1848 it experienced its first industrial boom. However, this only affected certain regions of the country and was based on export-orientated light industries such as cotton spinning and weaving, silk weaving and watchmaking. At the end of the 19^th century, other economic sectors were added, which gave Switzerland a continued upswing with a great deal of innovative and creative spirit. One important reason for this is that Switzerland was far ahead of most European countries in terms of its education system, as recent analyses of the so-called Stapfer Enquête show (see www.stapferenquete.ch). In 1799, Philipp Albert Stapfer (1766–1840), minister of the Helvetic Republic, conducted the first empirical enquiry into the Swiss school system. The critical edition of these important sources was only published in 2015, but the first results of research projects are now available, and they are surprising and very illuminating. Around 1800, Switzerland was a veritable ‘education stronghold’ in which almost all children attended school. The initial research findings are able to clearly explain Switzerland’s political and economic success model.
  Recognising the human urge to shape and improve social circumstances themselves, educated contemporaries initiated important changes not only in the economy but also in politics. In this context, the existing education system was important, as were the communal and co-operative forms as ‘schools of democracy’. In addition to other factors, the ‘education stronghold’ contributed to the fact that in the first half of the 19^th century, rural popular movements fought for the first direct democratic popular rights in Switzerland. They pushed these through in the face of sometimes very fierce resistance, primarily from the liberal side. This is shown by various cantonal examples in which rural popular movements became particularly active during the period of Swiss Regeneration (1830–1848), combining conservative-traditional and enlightened-liberal concepts. Two different examples will shed light on this.

Basel-Land and its popular movement

In Basel-Land (Basel-Country), liberal circles pushed for democratic development from 1830 onwards. As a small liberal ruling class, they advocated the principle of representation with regard to democracy. Popular sovereignty was to be limited to the election of the legislature by means of a census and was not to be concretised by further popular rights. An opposition quickly formed from the rural population, the so-called ‘Bewegungsleute’ (movement people). These were radical-minded liberals, some of whom developed in a Jacobin-early socialist direction and argued in favour of more extensive popular rights. In the course of the separation from Basel-Stadt, the ‘Bewegungsleute’ soon enjoyed their first success. In 1832, Basel-Land adopted its first independent constitution, enshrining the legislative veto, a preliminary form of today’s optional referendum. Basel-Land was thus the second canton to introduce this popular right, around a year after St. Gallen. The initial political experience was positive, and direct democracy was subsequently improved step by step. The ‘Bewegungsleute’ were also important promoters of the ‘democratic movement’ in various Swiss cantons during the 1860s and 1870s.

Lucerne and its ‘rural democrats’

The canton of Lucerne adopted its first constitution by referendum in 1831. The ’31 constitution was primarily a product of liberal circles and was a major step forward thanks to its democratic character. However, as in Baselland at the beginning, the democracy was a representative one, meaning that apart from limited elections (census), there was no opportunity for the population to play an active role in shaping politics. For the liberals, this was the ‘most perfect state system’. The Catholic Conservatives, also known as ‘rural democrats’, had a different idea of popular sovereignty. They wanted to give the population a greater say. To achieve this, a rural people’s movement was formed. After an intense political debate, the ‘rural democrats’ pushed for a total revision of the constitution in 1841, which ultimately received a large majority in the referendum.
  The first paragraph of the new constitution designated the canton of Lucerne as a ‘democratic free state’. In explanatory notes, the fathers of the constitution explained that the introduction of people’s rights was crucial, as in a democratic-representative state the “will of the people is ceded to their representatives” and the people themselves are left with “only the shadow of actual sovereignty”. As in St. Gallen and Baselland, the people’s rights included the legislative veto. For Ignaz Paul Vital Troxler (1780–1866), probably Switzerland’s most important philosopher of the 19^th century, the Lucerne legislative veto was ‘the most important new institution’. He demanded popular rights for other cantons as well, so that they would become ‘more orderly and happier’, which is exactly what happened. Direct democracy was further developed in the canton of Lucerne over the following decades. Speaking of ‘happiness’: in recent years, research by economists has shown that the more direct democracy is implemented, the more satisfied and happier the population is. A confirmation of Troxler’s dictum.

Various political movements
were important in asserting
direct democratic rights

After the founding of the federal state in 1848, the liberals set the course for economic development in Switzerland and thus made the second industrialisation possible (including the construction of the railway). However, as the example of Alfred Escher shows, they also cultivated a tendency towards aristocratisation and favoured a utilitarian principle that produced social inequality and injustice. In this sense, the liberals often failed to provide adequate answers to the social question of industrialisation. The ‘movement people’ and the ‘rural democrats’ were among the political losers in 1848 after the Sonderbund War. However, they shaped Swiss history before and after 1848 just as much as the liberals. The liberal victors of the Sonderbund War of 1847 had to endure a long learning process before they accepted direct democracy and abandoned their arrogance towards the ‘people’. Switzerland would not be a federalist and direct-democratic state and would not have the successful economic model it has today if the liberal, anti-clerical and, in some cases, centralist elements had prevailed without resistance. Liberal, early socialist and conservative circles were jointly responsible for the development of the democratic system in Switzerland. A system that introduced the optional referendum in 1874, 150 years ago, and the constitutional initiative at federal level in 1891. As a result, Switzerland is still the only country with direct democratic rights at all levels of state politics, making it a great role model for other countries. What is needed today to preserve and improve this system?

Seriously embed and expand
political education in the school curriculum

Direct democracy in Switzerland is very demanding and requires the population to debate the issues at hand intensively and objectively. It is also necessary for them to have a good knowledge of institutional issues in Switzerland, to appreciate the democratic structure of our federalist country and to be able to place the proposed votes in their historical context.
  All of this requires good civic knowledge and a broad knowledge of Swiss history; this should be laid down in primary school and continued with current references in grammar schools and vocational schools. The subject of history and political education has come under particular pressure in recent years. In many cantons, history was even abolished as part of the introduction of Lehrplan 21 [a very radical reform of the Swiss school system] and replaced by a vague collective subject. This increasing forgetfulness of history and depoliticization is the greatest danger to our democratic community. This obvious dumbing down of the population leaves the individual defenceless against arbitrary state and media propaganda. This must be prevented, because participation in direct democracy requires a fully educated individual with the will to participate and actively help shape society for the common good.  •

¹ The “Landgemeinde” is a public, non-secret ballot voting system operating by majority rule, which constitutes one of the oldest forms of direct democracy. It is still in use in a few places in Switzerland.