Sure, in Europe we don't because we already have databases of all citizens, also recording attributes like race, skin color, religious affiliation or political leaning in a database is highly illegal, both for the government and for private use.

▲

throw-the-towel 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Wait, are you saying Europe doesn't have censuses?

▲

brainwad 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In my European country (Switzerland), it's mandatory to notify the government whenever you move. There is thus no universal census and also no voter registration. There's still subsampled surveys though, for e.g. economic data, that might come by mail (addressed to you by name, because they know where you live!).

▲

drysine 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Just like in the USSR

	▲	brainwad 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		As I understand it, in the Soviet Union you had to get government permission before moving. Whereas here the right to move is guaranteed, you just have to update your details.
	▲	Peanuts99 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Perhaps on that one axis. On the other hand Switzerland is probably about as far opposed as the USSR as you can get.

▲

generj 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Many countries effectively have a live registry of where people live, updated to within a few weeks. A door to door census isn’t needed because they can do something like:

SELECT a.province, COUNT(DISTINCT b.id_num) FROM registry a INNER JOIN national_id b ON a.nat_id_num = b.id_num WHERE timeframe = 2026-01-01 GROUP BY 1

▲

gpvos 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Correct. At least, not that I know of. On the other hand, when you move, you must deregister with your old municipality and register with your new one. The exact system differs a bit per country.

▲

pessimizer an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> recording attributes like race, skin color,

The only reason we ever started doing this was to track ex-slaves and their descendants, and after-1965 every other possible grouping of people started begging for a category that it could use to get government grants in some way.

The irony is that now, when censuses somehow desperately need to figure out if you're Armenian or not, they don't count the descendants of slaves at all, preferring to lump them in with every dark-skinned person of partial African descent, but sometimes not the Spanish speakers(?!).

The US Supreme Court made a good decision (on admissions, not on the need for the approval of redistricting maps in places that have continuously attacked slave and Jim Crow descended voters.) The government needs to get out of the race and religious science business. Elected and appointed officials are openly claiming jihadi eschatology as the reason that they're supporting Israel, and openly explaining how the culturally varied mix of people who happened to live in land that Zionists wanted, or the Chinese, are inhuman races that are a threat because of their inhuman behavior and their inhuman values. We've woven church and race deeply into the government again.

The idea that preferential admissions to elite schools was going to somehow offset slavery was laughable anyway. It was just a grievance engine that gave people on top an excuse to feel downtrodden during the one of the most and the first vulnerable times in their lives - when they find out they're too stupid or boring to get into the college they want. I've always been partial to the libertarian solution to the problem of US slavery - Murray Rothbard and others said that according to the Libertarian homesteading principle, slaves should have been awarded the land and the factories that they worked. That it was an injustice that would lead to (what was in his view) catastrophe, such as how the freeing of Russian serfs in 1861 without any of the land still controlled by their ex-masters led to the Russian Revolution 50 years later.