Switzerland About To Vote On Minaret Ban

[Subotan]

are you discriminating against my 140-something IQ

There is more to intelligence than just IQ, or EQ. I know people who have flunked all their exams, yet are extremely intelligent. Not letting the 50% of people who are below average intelligence vote sounds like a recipe for disaster. And smart people can be wrong sometimes.

[Strike For The South]

I'm not saying that less-intellegent people don't try to do what's best. but when they try, they often fail, and it is easier for a more intelligent person to think out what is truly best, than what is best at the moment.


Meh, I've always been Pro-Roman-Government-Style: Not Elitist; I hate people who are too rich, but I like the idea of intelligent people running the government, with some lower-class representatives to advise on what they are thinking.

I've been brought up in NC, where you will not find many good minds to help lower your ego. I usually see people of lesser intelligence below me, but what can I say?

Intelligence is pracitcally useless unless you can apply it to dealing with people.

You can be the stupidest person on the face of the Earth but if you have allot of friends chances are you'll be successful.

Not to say books smarts or brain power is useless, but the same guys who usually postulate these ideas are usually the same ones who end up contribuiting nothing to socitey

[Ser Clegane]

I'm not saying that less-intellegent people don't try to do what's best. but when they try, they often fail, and it is easier for a more intelligent person to think out what is truly best, than what is best at the moment.

So the bottomline is that, to make sure that a referendum does not - based on subjective fears - yield any results that could be seen as discriminating against a group of people, you suggest that we discriminate against people who do not meet a certain IQ bar ... based on the subjective assumption that these people are not capable to decide what is best.

[Louis VI the Fat]

less-intellegent people

[seireikhaan]

There is wisdom in that.

Instead of the usual yelling and screaming about "this is our land; in Swiss do like the Swiss. Our tradition! We! We! We!" vs. "Our fundamental rights and freedoms! We should be allowed to build [insert religious building], no matter how misplaced it is in your landscape! Our freedom! Ours! We! We!", why can't it be treated as adults?

How about the muslim community saying: "Well ok, we understand you don't like minarets" vs. the Swiss saying "You can have freedom of religion, but we simply don't like minarets; can't you build something that fits better into the landscape?"

To which the muslim community could propose to build a tower on their mosque which resembles the typical Swiss church towers, but has a half moon instead of a cross on top of it?

That way the muslim community shows that they are not fundamentalists, but are adult people prepared to compromise and adapt to local customs and the Swiss would have the opportunity to prove that they are not racists but simply don't like the look of minarets.

A nice compromise and everybody lives happy together.

Wouldn't that be better than the confrontation, yelling and hammering on one's rights? Clearly, there's a conflict of interests. Adult people don't keep yelling and demanding and being unreasonable when such a conflict happens; adult people take a deep breath, swallow some pride, negotiate and compromise.

Does this look like the sort of minaret you were thinking of?





Agreeing with Drone, I don't see it really sticking out so terribly, aside from the vibrant blue...

If compromise was/is going to be reached, the Swiss had many alternatives to further "swiss-ify" future minarets, or offering different "variations" of minarets that would be more appealing. However, instead, they turned it into "us vs them" by hopping straight to the ban-hammer. Doesn't seem terribly mature to me.

[KukriKhan]

Shush, you. I was enjoying that. In a very quiet, French, Jerry Lewis kinda way.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Building regulations are one aspect. No free pass for religions is another. I can relate to both. Sadly, this is but the civilised façade of a movement with rather different origins and motives.

The political climate in Switzerland occupies itself mostly with other considerations. Here are the posters of the largest(!) political party in Switzerland, the party behind the initiative for the referendum:

















And the poster used for the ban on minarets:

[Subotan]

Black, White and Red?


Hmmm......

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Black, White and Red?


Hmmm......

Just like Die Linke! Who would've thought.

[Subotan]

Touché.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Black, White and Red?


Hmmm......

And red, white and black are also the colours of Arabian nationalism...


Anyway, just to be clear:
The white cross on a red background is the Swiss flag. Portrayed in the contour of Switzerland. This is in a consistent style portrayed as under siege from 'something black', an undefined menace, taking many shapes and forms.

Never is the menace given an actual name, but always the visual code is more telling than a thousand words. These are posters that make immediate sense to a Swiss. Their can be no mistake about their meaning.
(In fact, I thought they were so clear that I didn't bother with translating)

'Black' is the foreigner, portrayed as ravens picking on Switzerland. (The raven is a bird that lives of theft).
Or as a single Black Sheep that is kicked out of the country. Or as hands in various shades of brown who are helping themselves to Swiss immigration permits.

[KukriKhan]

Even I, an American bereft of irony appreciation, get it.

The posters are sooo... pre-1960's. I'm surprised they resonate at all with Swiss voters.

[Subotan]

Yeah, I got them as well, I was just making a point.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Yeah, I got them as well, I was just making a point.

Now I get those posts above about colours.

The old German colours. To which Maniac then made the clever rebuttal that these are also the colours of the German Die Linke.

[drone]

[Samurai Waki]

That looks like cold war propaganda

[miotas]

but no. because in something like this, where it is an issue of "for Muslim rights" or "against Muslim rights" a 95-IQ'er would be worse, as there is not much to be informed about. rather than take into account the reactions that people could take depending on the decision, a less-intelligent person would simply vote what they want, not what is best.

Who would make a better decision do you think, a considerate, open minded "95-IQ'er" or a racist, xenophobic, genius who hates everything about those dirty Muslims?

I'm not saying that less-intellegent people don't try to do what's best. but when they try, they often fail, and it is easier for a more intelligent person to think out what is truly best, than what is best at the moment.

I'm pretty sure these intelligent people thought they were doing what was best. http://comicism.tripod.com/iq.html How do you think they would do in an issue "for or against Jewish rights", hmm?

Meh, I've always been Pro-Roman-Government-Style: Not Elitist; I hate people who are too rich, but I like the idea of intelligent people running the government, with some lower-class representatives to advise on what they are thinking.

I've been brought up in NC, where you will not find many good minds to help lower your ego. I usually see people of lesser intelligence below me, but what can I say?

No, what you are proposing is a new elite, I'm pretty sure that one day, one of the proles you dismiss so easily is going to pop that ego swelled head of yours and you will realise that a few numbers at the end of a test doesn't make you any better than anyone else.

And smart people can be wrong sometimes quite often.

Fixed.

[Prussian to the Iron]

i cant keep up with this thread any longer. i leave for a few hours and its a new page i dont have time to read. sorry guys, wish i could :(

[Major Robert Dump]

I thought those posters were about veal. I really need to learn to read Spanish.

[CrossLOPER]

The thing about this ban is that it's specified against one particular type of building.

And that's idiotic on every level
...."There's no Minaret on that mosque, my good sir! That's a very beautiful Winaret we built!"

That sums up my feelings.

[miotas]

i cant keep up with this thread any longer. i leave for a few hours and its a new page i dont have time to read. sorry guys, wish i could :(

But, but, but... You have an IQ of 140! If an average idiot like me can keep up, but you can't then...

[Hax]

I don't see the correlation between experience, wisdom and intelligence.

In Japanese Shin Buddhism there is something called Myokonin, mostly uneducated but very wise and religious Buddhists.

[Fragony]

I'll take #21, to take away

[Subotan]

But, but, but... You have an IQ of 140! If an average idiot like me can keep up, but you can't then...

The only logical explanation is the higher your IQ, the less common sense you have.

[Husar]

The only logical explanation is the higher your IQ, the less common sense you have.

I don't find that logical at all because common sense would tell you that the higher the IQ the more common sense you have.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Seriously though, that was a clever thing to say of you as common sense would be the average sense and thus be the sense of people with an average IQ, thus the higher your IQ the farther you'd be away from common sense. Now I might be captain obvious but it took me a second or two to arrive there.

[Andres]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Building regulations are one aspect. No free pass for religions is another. I can relate to both. Sadly, this is but the civilised façade of a movement with rather different origins and motives.

The political climate in Switzerland occupies itself mostly with other considerations. Here are the posters of the largest(!) political party in Switzerland, the party behind the initiative for the referendum:

















And the poster used for the ban on minarets:

It's good to keep in mind that the largest Swiss party does not hold an absolute majority. They had 29 % in the elections of 2007 (which is still enough to give me an uncomfortable feeling, given the nature of their methods).

Quid can correct me if this is wrong, but a Swiss told me that it's the first time that a referendum on the iniative of the SVP has resulted in a "yes" in favour of the SVP viewpoint.

All previous attempts to get a "yes" for their viewpoint in a referendum (for which those other posters have been used by them) have failed.

I have also been told that the SVP is losing its' support and the original party has split because of internal struggles.

Also, it seems like the camp of those who were opposed to a ban on minarets didn't do much effort to campaign for their viewpoint, because they expected the SVP would get another "njet" as usual; quod non.

If the "no against banning minarets"-camp took things for granted and didn't do much effort to get their point accross, then they carry part of the blame (that is, if you're convinced that there is something to blame on somebody).

[Fragony]

The only logical explanation is the higher your IQ, the less common sense you have.

Oh really. I had a test that borders on the absurd, I guess I am pretty smart. Doesn't change the fact that I am a complete idiot.

[Furunculus]

The only logical explanation is the higher your IQ, the less common sense you have.

that tallies with my experience; i know of more than one very intelligent idiot. i.e. PhD with no common sense.

[caravel]

[Andres]