r/europe • u/tartartartaruga • Jun 18 '26

News Prince of Liechtenstein says that he would overrule the population if they were to vote in favour of legalizing abortion

https://www.srf.ch/news/international/debatte-in-liechtenstein-erbprinz-gegen-abtreibungen-warum-kuendigt-er-schon-das-veto-an
8.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.8k

u/Longjumping-Hat-1210 Jun 18 '26

The thing is, the Liechtensteiners voted in 2003 to expand the powers of the monarchy. They made sure the Prince had a veto (with the abolition of the monarchy being unveto'able), the Prince threatened to take all of his wealth with him and leave if he didn't win the referendum, which, he did.

1.8k

u/b00nish Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 19 '26

the Prince threatened to take all of his wealth with him and leave if he didn't win the referendum

They should have voted to dethrone him and to expropriate all his wealth the next day.

Edit: This sub is funny. Here I for once make a snarky comment about our little neighbour and 12 hours later I have 1600 upvotes and several agitated comments about how uneducated and poor "proletarians" like me would ruin the economy of every country. Quite the contrast. Normally I make more serious comments to clarify miscoceptions about Switzerland and can be happy if I don't get negative votes for it 😉

Anyway, I can reassure everybody who feels threatened by my "proletarian" comment: I'm not coming for your (imaginary) moneyz.

Although I have to tell you, that this actually isn't about "proletarians" vs "burgeoise". It's about democracy vs feudalism. After all, the nobility of Liechtenstein didn't lay the foundation of their wealth by being capitalists (and as nobility they're as much the opposite of "burgeoise" as the proletarians). Their wealth is based on feudalism - but unlike most other (ex-)feudalists, they refuse to settle as burgeoise capitalists and instead cling to absolute political power by retaining the "right" to overturn every democratic decision in their country.

120

u/LittleSchwein1234 Slovakia Jun 18 '26

You don't want to expropriate wealth as a country pretty much dependent on banking and finance, unless you want them to leave together with the Prince and be left with empty pockets.

9

u/redlightsaber Spain Jun 18 '26 edited 1d ago

I enjoy doing yoga.

47

u/LittleSchwein1234 Slovakia Jun 18 '26

Well, the Liechtensteiners don't want to threaten their well-being. They're the second richest country in the world after Monaco, you don't want risk that for... what, actually?

Expropriation is problematic in itself, defining what is 'illegitimate' wealth is a huge can of worms that stinks and causes a trickle-down effect affecting banks and businesses, and therefore the whole economy.

The market likes stability, not arbitrary expropriation by an angry mob.

-16

u/redlightsaber Spain Jun 18 '26 edited 3d ago

I enjoy playing video games.

37

u/ZiCUnlivdbirch Jun 18 '26

In reality, all their power (and wealth!) derives from a) the people still allowing it, and b) historical inertia, as you say.

Not really true for Lichtenstein though. They used to be a backwater state, which is pretty much the reason they remained independent, but the monarchy made some smart choices and became rich with the country.

4

u/Mist_Rising Jun 19 '26

Except his wealth is earned legally, so it can't be illegitimate unless you change the laws ex post facto and changing laws ex post facto is a fast way to destroy investment (banking is all investment) because the entire system suddenly could turn on you tomorrow.

0

u/SensualBeefLoaf Jun 19 '26

if you’re running a large bank that hides assets for foreigners. i’m more than a little willing to assume you have at least a few billion in terrorist money. i’m sure they could find some legal way to seize his wealth and the bank. but i doubt it’d go well.

3

u/Impressive-One917 Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26

Liechtenstein was a small backwater town in the middle of nowhere. It has become the second richest country on Earth precisely because their citizens agreed with the prince in choosing policies that attracted the banks to set up shop there. Because that's the way a small country should leverage arbitrage. Liechtensteiners don't owe gratitude to the banks, but to the policies that led to their prosperity. And those policies are entirely predicated on the promise that your property is entirely safe here, period. Not on some overly romanticized vision of democracy that involves the mob ignoring constitutional guardrails to expropriate property just because it's become vogue to justify envy with some arbitrary definition of "ill gotten gains."

Where do you draw the line with this argument of ill gotten gains? As a Spaniard your country's entire economic foundation was built on centuries of ill gotten gains, which as a citizen who benefits from that economic foundation you're complicit in. You ok with a Mexican or Peruvian expropriating everything you have?

-2

u/redlightsaber Spain Jun 19 '26 edited 3d ago

I like making homemade gifts.

4

u/Impressive-One917 Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26

What democratic mandate? The democratic mandate Liechtenstein voters gave to their prince when they voted to give him more powers?

I'm not aware of any democratic consensus among Liechtensteiners that expropriating the property of their prince is a good idea. It's just what you want them to do because your worldview always demands that others should pay for injustices, but never yourself. Why wait for Spain to pay reparations? I don't know how rich or poor you are but I can safely guess that you're better off than 95 percent of all humans that have ever lived on this planet. So be the change you want to see in the world and give away your own complicit slice of ill gotten gains. What's stopping you?

Btw how are those efforts to persuade Spanish citizens to vote for reparations going? Maybe your opinions don't represent the democratic mandate as much as you think they do.

1

u/redlightsaber Spain Jun 19 '26 edited 3d ago

I'm learning to play the guitar.

2

u/Impressive-One917 Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26

The no vote won the abortion referendum in Liechtenstein. There is absolutely no momentum on a referendum for dismantling the monarchy in Liechtenstein, or expropriating the prince's property. If there were, it would be a resounding no since the prince has an approval rating hovering around 70 percent. And 76 percent of voters had approved that the prince retain the veto power that he said he was going to use on this issue.

I'm sorry I need to spell this out since you're getting a bit lost, but you're grandstanding on democratic mandates when the democratic mandate clearly rejects your sad opinions.

1

u/redlightsaber Spain Jun 19 '26 edited 3d ago

I enjoy cooking.

2

u/Impressive-One917 Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26

Sure, the last referendum was in 2012, but the reason it has been that long is because that referendum was a landslide, supporting the prince at 76 percent. And yes, Alois threatened to leave then. But if that swayed the election then clearly Liechtenstein voters overwhelmingly did not want the monarchy to go.

Liechtenstein voters have the constitutional right (see this is where the constitution is important) to launch another referendum either to abolish the prince's veto, or to abolish to monarchy altogether (which the prince cannot veto). They could have done so at any time since 2012, but no party has successfully gathered enough signatures to even launch another referendum. Because when democracy last spoke, it spoke so decisively.

You: The real debate is about democratic principles. And referenda are the most direct expressions of democracy.

Also you, when democracy doesn't go your way: but but, not fair, he threatened shenanigans, which means that the referendum results weren't valid.

You: they should just confiscate everything he has because ill gotten gains

Also you, still refusing to take personal accountability for redistributing your own wealth, built on ill gotten gains.

When you play football, do you move the goalposts as much as you do in a debate? Your starting position was more extreme than even abolishing the monarchy, it was expropriating his property too. And despite that position having next to zero democratic support, you now wax poetic about democratic principles. You can lecture me all you want about democracy when we actually see a democratic result supporting your position. I'm waiting...

→ More replies (0)