No I'm claiming swiss culture is people of 90-95% white euro voting block. Not that 90-95% white skin and magically out of that will dump swiss culture. Whatever white supremacism straw man you think you're arguing against, it's laughably hilarious how hard you are trying to reframe my argument to match it.

Of course I can't prove it, but it was absolutely magical how my comment was flagged the immediate moment after your initial comment posted. So I suspect, this was never a genuine response anyway, you just couldn't help yourself making your little note while flagging mine because if you had reversed the order your fake little straw man argument couldn't have been injected in. And don't bother with "it wasn't me" because it's really only you and I reading at this point and I'm not going be duped.

What we have is a story of direct democracy working in a remarkably insular voting block of 90-95+% white euro voters with a fairly organically evolved direct process going back to in at least various elements the middle ages. And relative neutrality in WWII. When your bullshit argument turned out to be false about varied results (Lichtenstein was consistent when they did the ~same thing) you tried to wash it away as Swiss-adjacent while also claiming swiss are just an indistinguishable mixture of French, German, Italian etc -- defeating your own argument.

The only consistent rebuttal you have is your absurd white supremacism straw man whenever the weaknesses of your argument is pointed out. Which really, just shows how laughably weak of a ground your thoughts stand on. It's pretty clear that the actual facts I presented of the most successful direct democracies (Switzerland, Lichtenstein) have a 90-95% white euro voting block, difficult to naturalize, and neutrality in WWII stand on their own whether they are causal or not and that's why you're so desperate to suppress these facts by flagging them falsely under the bucket of white supremacism because we can't have people objectively witnessing that.

Personally I think it's entirely unreasonable to expect culturally novel political systems to withstand cultural diversity shocks. Africa's stability was totally rocked by the influx of Europeans, as was in the Americas, from the Mongols in Persia, it goes on and on. America's political system developed in the face of absorbing former slaves, absorbing parts of Mexico and former French colonies (Louisiana, and Louisiana purchase), and all sorts of insanely diverse interests that far outpace what Switzerland has tried to absorb. Swiss has been 90-95% euro white citizens.... since a very very long time and has had that stability in which a long history of direct democracy culture to flourish. It would be rather silly to think you can apply the lessons of Switzerland and just drop them in somewhere else. It would also be silly to think the local culture is going to well tolerate direct democracy if they see it as a fast-lane to a rapid immigration channel co-opting their interests (representative democracy slows this down; you basically have to be entrenched to get into high office, and getting entrenched takes time, further favoring the old boy network of established residents).

What we have seen is in culturally stable parts of Europe, with low variance of absorption of non-whites, yes direct democracy has been able to develop and been amazingly effective, but this was in an environment of 90-95% being (in your own words, not mine) "genetically" indistinguishable white Europeans and largely culturally as well -- this is not at all the way people view themselves in place like USA. I'm not asserting it is the actual color of the skin itself that fosters that, although it can be used as way to measure rate of change of absorption of absorption of some other cultures that could complicate the process of unifying votes.