No to populism!
Once again, the cultural milieu is directly threatened by a populist initiative that purports to limit the population.
A characteristic of populism is to claim to be able to offer simple or even simplistic solutions to complex problems and to make people believe that these alleged solutions are for the benefit of the majority of the population, even though this is not the case at all. Through the internet, social media and, more recently, AI - massively used to produce and disseminate biased information - populist ideas have become so resonant that they can easily manipulate entire sections of the population, including through psychological techniques based on cognitive distortions. A climate of discontent or fear (caused by inflation and loss of purchasing power, war, pandemic, environmental destruction, etc.) can make many people more susceptible to these insidious techniques that play on their fears. This is how the far right has managed to gain a foothold in most European countries. This is to an extent that would have been considered unlikely at the beginning of this millennium, as many thought that the terrible events of the 20th century and the fall of the dictatorships on both sides of the former Iron Curtain had made the continent's citizens unreceptive to these ideas.
The scapegoat strategy
Naming scapegoats to be sacrificed in order to restore some notion of order has always been part of populist rhetoric. Blamed for all evil, they are driven out, hunted down, condemned to silence, or worse happens to them. No matter what the problem is, they are blamed for it, and the fact that they have to pay for it is supposed to improve the situation of the community. In Switzerland, as in many countries, ultra-conservative circles have been blaming «foreigners» for decades, without specifying in detail who actually belongs to this group. Are they talking about the rich who have moved to Switzerland because of the low taxes or about the workers or engineers that Swiss companies have to recruit in the EU because there is a shortage of qualified workers here? Or perhaps the rejected asylum seekers or the owners of second homes? Or perhaps of cross-border commuters, university students or second or third generation immigrants, regardless of whether they have a Swiss passport or not? In their way of thinking, everything is confused, as «foreigners» are supposed to be collectively and indiscriminately responsible for all or almost all ills, for the rise in the crime rate or that of rental prices, which is partly caused by speculation or partly dependent on mortgage interest rates. For the fact that public transport is overcrowded at certain times of the day - and no finger is pointed at the decades-long underfunding of the transport infrastructure. For the fact that healthcare costs are rising, and the blame is placed on those who, because they are on average younger than the ageing Swiss population, effectively cost the health insurance funds less in statistical terms. It is emphasized that foreign pensioners claim supplementary benefits more frequently, without explaining that this is due to the fact that they were often underpaid as workers or cleaners and were not entitled to a second pillar for a long time. As we can see, the naming of scapegoats also makes it possible to conceal the fact that the same ultra-conservative politicians are partly responsible for some developments that are harmful to the population as a whole through their votes in parliament. Just think of the systematic rejection of tenant protection, spatial planning and measures to combat urban sprawl, the opposition to investment in the rail network, measures to protect the environment, biodiversity and the climate (such as the 2025 motion, which - following the example of the current US president - calls for withdrawal from the Paris Agreement), the deterioration in employee protection, particularly with regard to dumping wages, and the opposition to the minimum wage. Knowing all this, how can we trust them when they raise these issues to promote their initiative? How can we believe that they are suddenly, for once, concerned about sustainability, which they otherwise constantly fight against?
The strategy of chaos
These are the same circles that have largely agreed to tax cuts, which has attracted numerous foreign companies that have certainly created jobs in Switzerland, but have also recruited foreign employees when there were not enough qualified applicants to be found on the Swiss labor market. If the SVP's federal initiative were to receive a majority in the vote on June 14, what would Swiss or foreign companies do if they were unable to develop their high-tech sectors due to a lack of personnel? What would hospitals and nursing homes do if they could no longer find nursing staff? Who would take care of the cleaning tasks? How could we compensate for the lack of qualified staff? It is not just a question of population growth, as the SVP initiative explicitly puts the free movement of persons with the EU up for discussion, and in this case even the current number of jobs could come under severe pressure. This is all the more the case as more people are already leaving the labor market due to retirement age than are joining it. This could not be compensated for by the return of some Swiss nationals living in the EU. They would be at a de facto disadvantage because they would be deprived of the career prospects they had thanks to freedom of movement, as they were not necessarily trained for the jobs that would then be open in Switzerland. These rapid changes in the economy and the labor market would in any case shake the accounts of the AHV and the 2nd pillar and would probably lead to an increase in the retirement age and a further reduction in the BVG conversion rate. All this would happen in a difficult economic environment, as the termination of the free movement of persons as a result of the guillotine clause would trigger a domino effect and lead to the end of all Bilaterals I agreements with the EU, our most important economic partner, at the same time as the current US administration has clearly indicated how it intends to treat Switzerland. Also linked to the free movement of persons, wage protection would be jeopardized and there would be a return to dumping wages and precariousness for workers.
If the opponents call the initiative put to the vote a «chaos initiative», there are good reasons for this... Here is another example of the consequences that a possible adoption could have: Among the treaties that Switzerland would have to terminate as soon as the permanent resident population of Switzerland exceeds nine and a half million people (Art. 197, para. 15, para. 1) would be the Dublin Agreement. As a consequence, Switzerland would be excluded from the EU asylum system. This would mean that any migrant whose asylum application had been rejected in Europe would be able to submit a new one in Switzerland. The country would be completely flooded with a massive influx of migrants who have already been rejected elsewhere. Is this really the way to limit the population?
Consequences for culture and musicians
The free movement of persons between Switzerland and the EU allows for a fruitful exchange and is a significant achievement for Swiss musicians, a considerable number of whom have found their dream job in ensembles, orchestras, music schools and cultural institutions throughout Europe. Conversely, excellent teachers from abroad teach at our universities and Swiss ensembles and orchestras benefit from the talent and skills of exceptional musicians from abroad. This exchange has always been important for the cultural development of the country, and it would be irreparably jeopardized if the initiative were to be accepted. It is safe to assume that if the number of people allowed to settle in Switzerland were strictly limited, those who pursue an artistic activity would certainly not be given priority. Conversely, performances by Swiss musicians in the EU or participation in concerts, stage performances or residencies would become complicated. Another problem: as mentioned above, the bilateral agreements are linked to the free movement of persons and their termination would entail the automatic termination of the six other Bilaterals I agreements, some of whose provisions are essential for culture, such as the land transport agreement for travel, tours and the transportation of stage equipment.
Less collaboration, fewer co-productions, less diversity, less cultural exchange, less international presence, less charisma: the consequences of accepting this initiative could be catastrophic for Swiss culture in general and for music in particular.
