This being HN, I expect most people on here are American and view social topics from an American perspective. Swiss have a level of trust in their governments that Americans could never even dream of. The pros and cons of this debate are not necessarily about whether the current government or a near future one will abuse it. But I feel that Americans on here (as well as folks living in countries with low government trust) are projecting their low trust views onto other countries and thus concluding that the current swiss government or a near future one cannot be trusted with this power.
Swiss here, and I do not agree. We used to be able to trust our government, but more and more, as the years go by, tech-savvy people realize how laws have accumulated into surveillance.
Now there are much worse cases out there, sure. But most Swiss citizens are not even aware of those laws.
Nor are they aware of how much the Swiss government has been trying to hide its incompetence regarding anything IT-related. Like data leaks happening several times per year.
So yes, a big percentage of those almost 50% of "no we don't want this" responses were about lack of trust in the different branches of the government.
But the first time it was due to be handled privately and this time by the state. And that was one of the main arguments against it at the time. So I don't think the GP is that far from the truth.
Point being that government can't just mandate and create anything and people will love it. If it was purely private, why did we vote on it. It took a lot of discussion and many iteration and it barley passed in the end.
Which needs to follow a mandate of properly handling user data (Switzerland has a law that's very close to GDPR) and properly respecting privacy as written in the proposal.
Not doing so is something the citizens can sue the government for - as opposed to US "private company can collect whatever, whenever and do whatever" (see credit ratings).
There are many lessons to be learned from history. One of them is that you should never trust your government to not abuse its power. Even the most progressive welfare states like Sweden end up doing horrible things (see how Sweden sterilized thousands based on eugenics policies (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319507778_Eugenics_...).
If you want some recent examples for Switzerland (beyond the dozens upon dozens the further you go back in History) look up, Verdingkinder, Swiss eugenics after 1945, Holocaust Assets (Volcker Commission Report), Post-War Forced Labor and Slaver Switzerland, Secret Police and Surveillance (Swiss Federal Parliamentary Report of 1990), etc, etc.
Some level of trust is required for a functioning society, but there are so many natural factors (human psychology, evolution, national security, crisis situations, elite capture, economic incentives, legitimizing narratives, etc.) which all lead to the abuse of power and the violation thereof that IMHO you can never limit and check it too much.
The government power abuse is the only one that can be stopped by citizens at large. Making it significantly different from corporate power abuse, where there's no law or mechanism reeling them in.
Without governmental systems, these ID approaches tend to end up in private corporate hands instead.
interesting. I agree that governmental power should be stoppable in a functioning democratic republic. At least, we have some such examples. However, I would think, at least in the examples that come to my mind, it is far easier to end corporate abuse, although I will admit often the two are tightly intertwined with governmental overreach working hand-in-hand with private corporations so its quite commonly a blurred line.
Comments
This being HN, I expect most people on here are American and view social topics from an American perspective. Swiss have a level of trust in their governments that Americans could never even dream of. The pros and cons of this debate are not necessarily about whether the current government or a near future one will abuse it. But I feel that Americans on here (as well as folks living in countries with low government trust) are projecting their low trust views onto other countries and thus concluding that the current swiss government or a near future one cannot be trusted with this power.
Swiss here, and I do not agree. We used to be able to trust our government, but more and more, as the years go by, tech-savvy people realize how laws have accumulated into surveillance.
Now there are much worse cases out there, sure. But most Swiss citizens are not even aware of those laws.
Nor are they aware of how much the Swiss government has been trying to hide its incompetence regarding anything IT-related. Like data leaks happening several times per year.
So yes, a big percentage of those almost 50% of "no we don't want this" responses were about lack of trust in the different branches of the government.
That isnt really the case. We voted on this before and it was rejected. It was a very long journy to pass this.
But the first time it was due to be handled privately and this time by the state. And that was one of the main arguments against it at the time. So I don't think the GP is that far from the truth.
Point being that government can't just mandate and create anything and people will love it. If it was purely private, why did we vote on it. It took a lot of discussion and many iteration and it barley passed in the end.
Note that when the Swiss government says "handled by the state" it means it will usually be handled by the lowest-bidding consulting company.
Which needs to follow a mandate of properly handling user data (Switzerland has a law that's very close to GDPR) and properly respecting privacy as written in the proposal.
Not doing so is something the citizens can sue the government for - as opposed to US "private company can collect whatever, whenever and do whatever" (see credit ratings).
20 years late, but finally.
There are many lessons to be learned from history. One of them is that you should never trust your government to not abuse its power. Even the most progressive welfare states like Sweden end up doing horrible things (see how Sweden sterilized thousands based on eugenics policies (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319507778_Eugenics_...).
If you want some recent examples for Switzerland (beyond the dozens upon dozens the further you go back in History) look up, Verdingkinder, Swiss eugenics after 1945, Holocaust Assets (Volcker Commission Report), Post-War Forced Labor and Slaver Switzerland, Secret Police and Surveillance (Swiss Federal Parliamentary Report of 1990), etc, etc.
Some level of trust is required for a functioning society, but there are so many natural factors (human psychology, evolution, national security, crisis situations, elite capture, economic incentives, legitimizing narratives, etc.) which all lead to the abuse of power and the violation thereof that IMHO you can never limit and check it too much.
The government power abuse is the only one that can be stopped by citizens at large. Making it significantly different from corporate power abuse, where there's no law or mechanism reeling them in.
Without governmental systems, these ID approaches tend to end up in private corporate hands instead.
interesting. I agree that governmental power should be stoppable in a functioning democratic republic. At least, we have some such examples. However, I would think, at least in the examples that come to my mind, it is far easier to end corporate abuse, although I will admit often the two are tightly intertwined with governmental overreach working hand-in-hand with private corporations so its quite commonly a blurred line.