Subscribe
Two more referendums took place on Sunday, September 27, in Switzerland, the Central European country famous for its system of direct democracy and citizen participation in major decisions. The vast majority of news headlines focused on toughening Switzerland’s policy of neutrality, which was rejected by an overwhelming majority of citizens. But on the same day, another referendum took place on a topic that attracted less public interest outside the Swiss confederation. This was an initiative titled “For food security – through increased sustainable domestic production, more plant-based food and clean drinking water”, promoted by some environmental activists. An emphatic and catchy title that, under the guise of a legitimate goal, actually concealed a radical ideological agenda.
In fact, the “Food Initiative”, as it was commonly referred to, the subject of the second referendum, called for enshrining in the Constitution a very ambitious target: increasing the net food self-sufficiency rate from 42–46% to at least 70% over the next ten years. This way, according to the initiators, Switzerland could ensure its food sovereignty and no longer rely on imports to feed its population. What a noble endeavor, at first thought! According to its leftist proponents, in the event of a major crisis, food security for the entire population cannot be guaranteed; for this reason, it is imperative that agriculture stop relying on meat and “evolve” from animal-based products to plant-based ones. In essence, it was a “climate-friendly” agricultural policy stressed a significant reduction in the use of pesticides and fertilizers, as well as stricter regulations that would have protected water, soil, and biodiversity. As good as it sounded in theory, the Swiss society’s reaction was just as vehement, as people considered it a utopia. In the September 27 referendum, 72.5% of Swiss voters voted “no,” compared to just 27.5% who voted “yes,” with a voter turnout of approximately 47%.
None of Switzerland’s 26 cantons supported this “Food Initiative.” This pro-vegetarian proposal was rejected by both the Federal Council and the Parliament, with all members of Parliament voting against it. Even though it viewed the increase in food self-sufficiency favorably, the Swiss government considered that the proposed measures to achieve such a goal were wrong and that the ten-year timeframe was totally unrealistic.
The outcome of the vote was quite clear. Swiss society strongly rejected the initiative. Not because Swiss citizens don’t want safer and better food, but because the chosen method – forcibly imposing a certain course of action – was considered inappropriate. With the exception of certain left-wing groups, no one else associated their name with supporting such an unreasonable and reckless initiative. Perhaps the most accurate description came from the Swiss Farmers’ Union, which, along with representatives of the meat and dairy industries, characterized this initiative as a “vegan diktat.” Had it become a reality, such a measure would have posed a terrible threat to animal farms, as well as to consumer habits and, in fact, to people’s very freedom of choice. Instead of focusing on increasing domestic production through realistic mechanisms, such an initiative would have led to severe state intervention in both production and consumption in order to achieve, within a far too short period of time, such an absurd goal.
Why did an initiative that promised food security and food independence fail so badly? Mainly because society feared – and rightly so – that the government would end up dictating what is produced and what is consumed. Who would want to be told what they are allowed to eat and what they are not? The answer is pretty obvious. It’s no coincidence that the campaign’s slogan was “Hands off our plates!” By rejecting such an initiative, Swiss citizens have shown that food security cannot be achieved through state surveillance and the imposition of what they are and are not allowed to produce and eat, but rather through real support for existing agricultural production.