Skip to comments.'Annoying' anti-cowbell campaigner denied Swiss passport
Posted on 01/11/2017 10:52:06 PM PST by LouieFisk
A Dutch woman has seen her request for Swiss citizenship refused for the second time by local residents who object to her media campaigning against cowbells and other Swiss traditions.
A vegan and supporter of animal rights, she gained a reputation in her community of Gipf-Oberfrick, in the canton of Aargau, after campaigning against cowbells, claiming they were damaging to cows health.
(Excerpt) Read more at thelocal.ch ...
Good, that is one of the lovely traditions of Swiss pastoral life.
I never quite get some utopian who wants to move into a society because they like it, and then decides they want to reform it. The traditions that make up a people have connections to generations past and effects upon the soul that cannot be seen at first glance.
Get back home, Loretta.
beat me to it.
“I got a fevah...”
> Last November, Holten had her citizenship application turned down for the second time by the residents committee.
> In Switzerland local residents often have a say in citizenship applications, which are decided primarily by the cantons and communes where the applicant lives, rather than federal authorities.
How old fashioned and backwards for citizens to be involved in choosing who comes to their community. These people need a strong central government to decide what sort of people they will just have to learn to live with and how many of them there will be.
The one cure for my fever is more cow bell?
your satire is duly noted. However, it IS extremely backward that the citizens of a town “vote” to grant an applicant citizenship.
An applicant here must have lived in the town for, I believe, 5 Years (not just Switzerland, the town itself) and pass a civics test. Both fine and proper.
Then the citizens of the town get to vote. There are no objective criteria.
Some towns are moving a bit from this practice, as it is, and has often been, easily abused to simply deny someone based on their name.
What they do there is have a town meeting on the matter where the citizens can raise concerns about an applicant, but the town council then decides based on Objective criteria.
An American, who taught for 20 some years at the University in Zurich, has a wife and children born here, decided he wanted to become a citizen and live out his life here. The citizens DENIED him because they felt he was not integrated well enough. One of the reasons given was that he was not in town that often - because he worked in Zürich! His wife and family were above reproach in town and there was nothing negative about him in any way, but ...
why I never
You'd have to have a soul in order to recognize one in others. Progressives are soulless and therefore it's impossible for them to empathize with others. They just want their way.
I used to live in a small development in a rural area surrounded by farms. A new neighbor moved in, fresh from the big city. When fertilizer time came,the air was ripe with manure order. The new neighbor was aghast...he went to the township trustees meeting and demanded that they put a stop to the use of fertilizer....and he was a flaming liberal
Hopefully he was laughed out of the meeting.
Could it be that they take citizenship seriously? It’s like a private club, you let in who you want to let in. Before your let in, it’s none if your business who the members let in.
I lived outside of Zurich for a few years. A most sensible society
” These people need a strong central government to decide what sort of people they will just have to learn to live with and how many of them there will be.”
And to subsidize them so you can enjoy their ‘vibrancy’ and ‘culture’.
Well your "Club" allows new members and publishes a list of criteria you must meet. The applicant must also pay a, rather hefty, application fee (non-refundable of course).
The Applicant meets every criteria, but is denied. No reason is given since the vote is simply yes / no.
Welcome to the Tyranny of Democracy.
I will admit though that the Lady in question has been less than "model" in her dealings with the community / town council. She is the exception that justifies something more that just a checklist. As I made clear in my first post - that the town council should hear arguments for / against naturalization seems to be the fairest way. Such decisions can be appealed if necessary (from both sides!) if it seems apparent that "due Process" was not given.
It is one of those things that "sounds" good because you can keep out the "riff raff" (even though they are already there, pay taxes and otherwise comply with customs and culteral norms). But you know most "voters" (and they are not different here!!) - they see "John Smith" wants to be a citizen and say yes, they see "Al Jankovic" and say no. There is no thinking or research. Simply prejudice.
Now let's talk about our club. We also have rules of entry. But we also have a club president and his followers that defy the rules of our club and let in those that he wants and allows them to even vote in order to solidify his groups control over the club. But enough of us are fed up with his corruption that we voted in another leader, that will reverse the corruption of our clubs rules. Question: what should we members do to that corrupt former leader and his followers?
Sehr gut! :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.