I strongly oppose domestic spying laws like this, AND I oppose uneducated immigration too. There is no party that shares both of these views.

In other words the current system will always boil down to choosing between bad options that will screw you over some way or another. I wish there was an alternative...

Although for direct democracy to be effective you would need a highly educated and politically engaged population

Maybe some Swiss can clarify why their population is so anti-vax, as it boggles my mind.

My point is not to say that such a direct democratic system wouldn't be effective, I'm just saying that correlation != causation, as in the case of Switzerland, I attribute its success as a country more to it being a neutral banking heaven for the world elite for decades and being in a very fortunate geo-political location that was spared the destruction of war which helped it attract tons of foreign talent and capital, rather than to its direct democratic system and domestic educated population. I could also be wrong of course.

In any case not getting the vaccine doesn't make someone uneducated. Switzerland has some of the best schools and universities in the world. In 2018, 44% of 25-64 year-olds had completed a tertiary qualification in Switzerland, compared to 39% on average across OECD countries. [1]

[1] https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance/EAG2019...

Which misinformation did I spread?

>Switzerland is 63.7% vaccinated.

Which I said I find it to be very low in comparison to countries like Spain and Portugal where the rate is nearly 100% so having only 64% points to a large number of anti-vaxers similar to Eastern Europe.

>In any case not getting the vaccine doesn't make someone uneducated.

No? Then what does it make the other 36% who refuse to get vaccinated? En-masse refusal of a potentially life saving vaccine that will help end the pandemic doesn't really scream intelligence and education, does it?

you are also making assumptions that those who aren't yet vaccinated are anti-vax, which again isn't always the case they may have their own reasons for delaying or perhaps are perfectly fine with vaccines in general but distrust this particular one for whatever reason.

A person can be educated person can still be an unreasonable one.

So what does the swiss population know that the scientific and medical communities don't?

[1] https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-m...

[2] https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-m...

Portugal is almost 100% vaccinated, Switzerland is at 64% which puts it closer to the former comunist EU members like Slovakia.

That's a massive difference, and to me, says something about the country's population/society.

Democracy requires compromise. There will never be a party that perfectly matches your views. You prioritize the ones you care about, find common ground and help those who will advance your interests.

I don't like uneducated voters.

It's like the naysayers for anything, such as startups. 'It doesn't work', 'it can't be done', 'nobody will let you', blah blah blah. And all the time you are doing it. What can you say to them?

What are you basing this on? The President of the Commission is, by law, proposed by the European Council and validated or not by the European Parliament. Since there was no single majority party after the election, it's not completely surprising that backroom deals led to a different president than the desire of the party holding the most seats.

> The Spitzenkandidat of the largest party would then have a mandate to assume the Commission Presidency

While this is not de jure, German-speaking media did report on the 2019 election as if the above were consensus. It is my understanding that this was not the case in all EU countries.

once the law is passed future parliaments can't modify or repeal it

and since the MEPs represent the same people who elect governments who then delegate to the commission, it's strange if the commission continues to propose regulations that are unpopular.

the commission can wait for a parliament that will pass its legislation

and once it's passed: that's it, future parliaments can do nothing about it

and if a member state wants it gone: it has to leave the EU entirely

and politically the commission is the same as it has always been (by design)

the whole problem with these security-privacy ideas is that the member governments want to reign in the Internet, just as they did with every other phenomena for the past hundreds of years. (with varying degrees of "success".)

CSAM is especially a big red cloth that catches the eye of governments. It's not like there was less child abuse before the Internet, and if there were absolutely no CSAM on it from tomorrow ther wouldn't be less actual abuse... :/

If we could force somehow politicians to count on the same exact public exposure, from rallies to apparently trivial things such as tweets, that would possibly change something, but to me a similar scenario in this universe is near science fiction.