Living in Japan for a while now has opened my eyes not only to the cultural richness of this country but also to how different nations organize themselves politically. Coming from Switzerland, and having also lived in the Netherlands as an immigrant, it feels natural to compare these three countries—not just out of curiosity but out of a genuine desire to understand the system I live under today.
In this post, I’ll walk you through how each country’s government works, highlight the key differences, and reflect on what these differences mean for citizens—and immigrants—like you and me.
🇨🇭Democracy in Its Most Direct Form
Switzerland’s political system is often described as one of the most decentralized and participatory in the world.
Key Features:
- Federal Directorial Republic: Switzerland has 26 cantons (states), each with significant autonomy. The federal level shares power with them.
- Collective Executive: Instead of a single president or prime minister, Switzerland is governed by a 7-member Federal Council. Each year, one of them serves as the ceremonial president, but real power is shared equally.
- Bicameral Legislature: The Federal Assembly consists of the National Council (by population) and the Council of States (by canton).
- Direct Democracy: This is Switzerland’s hallmark. Citizens can launch popular initiatives to propose constitutional amendments or call referenda to challenge new laws. Swiss citizens vote several times a year at the federal, cantonal, and communal levels.
Personal Note:
Although I grew up in Switzerland, I left the country at the age of 15—before I was old enough to vote. I was born in 1977, and at that time, the legal voting age was 20 (it was only lowered to 18 in 1991). As a teenager, I wasn’t interested in politics and don’t recall anything about voting materials or public debate. But in retrospect, I recognize how uniquely participatory the Swiss system is—one that gives citizens an active role in shaping national direction.
Voting From Abroad:
Now, as a Swiss citizen living in Japan, I retain full voting rights in Swiss federal elections and referenda. As long as I’m registered with the Swiss embassy or consulate in Japan and entered in the electoral register of my commune of origin or last residence, I can:
- Vote in federal elections and referenda
- Participate in some cantonal or municipal votes, depending on the policies of the specific canton
Voting materials are sent by mail, and some cantons also offer online voting (e-voting) for citizens abroad. It’s empowering to know that even while living overseas, I still have a voice in how Switzerland is governed.
🇳🇱 Pragmatism and Coalition Politics
The Netherlands is known for its pragmatism, openness, and consensus-based governance. It functions as a unitary parliamentary constitutional monarchy, with a highly fragmented political landscape.
Key Features:
- Parliamentary Monarchy: King Willem-Alexander is the ceremonial head of state, while the Prime Minister leads the government.
- Bicameral Parliament (Staten-Generaal):
- The Tweede Kamer (House of Representatives) wields most legislative power.
- The Eerste Kamer (Senate) reviews laws after they pass the lower house.
- Coalition Governments: Due to the large number of political parties, coalitions are always necessary, making Dutch politics heavily negotiation-based.
- Limited Direct Democracy: The Netherlands experimented with advisory referenda, but this mechanism was abolished in 2018. Today, citizens influence national decisions primarily through elections.
Personal Note:
During my time living in the Netherlands, I was there as an immigrant without Dutch nationality. This meant that I was only allowed to vote in municipal (local) elections, not in national parliamentary ones. Local voting rights are granted to non-citizens who have lived in the country legally for at least 5 years. So while I could help elect my city council, I had no say in who formed the national government. This showed me a different side of democracy—where legal residency gave me some say, but not full representation.
🇯🇵 Order, Stability, and Centralized Power
Japan’s political system is also a parliamentary constitutional monarchy, but with a more centralized structure and long-standing institutional traditions.
Key Features:
- Unitary Parliamentary System: The Emperor serves as a ceremonial figure, while the Prime Minister exercises executive power.
- National Diet: Japan’s parliament consists of:
- The House of Representatives (lower house) with primary legislative power.
- The House of Councillors (upper house) as a moderating chamber.
- Dominant-Party System: The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has held power almost continuously since 1955, shaping Japan’s political tone.
- No Tools for Direct Democracy: Citizens vote in national and local elections, but there are no popular initiatives or national referenda.
What It Feels Like as a Resident:
Compared to Switzerland or the Netherlands, Japan’s politics can feel more distant and top-down. Citizens vote only every few years, and most decisions are made by elected representatives and civil servants. The government values continuity and administrative stability over rapid change.
No Voting Rights for Foreign Residents:
As a foreign national in Japan, I have no voting rights—not even at the municipal level. Only Japanese citizens aged 18 or older can vote. Even permanent residents, or foreigners married to Japanese citizens, cannot vote unless they undergo naturalization. This legal boundary defines clear limits on political participation as a resident immigrant.
🔍 Three Systems, Three Approaches to Democracy
| Feature | 🇨🇭 Switzerland | 🇳🇱 Netherlands | 🇯🇵 Japan |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Type | Federal Republic | Unitary Parliamentary Monarchy | Unitary Parliamentary Monarchy |
| Head of Government | 7-member Federal Council | Prime Minister | Prime Minister |
| Head of State | Rotating Federal President | King (ceremonial) | Emperor (ceremonial) |
| Voting Age (in 1980s) | 20 (now 18) | 18 | 20 (now 18) |
| Citizen Power | Very High – Referenda & initiatives | Moderate – Elections only | Low – Elections only |
| Local Autonomy | Very High (cantons) | Moderate | Low |
| Coalition Government | Yes, consensus-driven | Always | Usually |
| Immigrant Voting Rights | Swiss abroad can vote | Municipal only (non-citizens) | No rights without citizenship |
| Political Culture | Participatory, bottom-up | Pragmatic, coalition-driven | Bureaucratic, stability-focused |
🧠 Reflections on Living Between Systems
Having lived in all three countries, I’ve come to appreciate that democracy is not just one thing. It reflects the history, identity, and values of a nation.
- Switzerland places remarkable trust in its citizens, empowering them to vote directly on laws and constitutional changes multiple times a year—even from abroad.
- The Netherlands relies on negotiation and pragmatism, offering partial local voting rights to immigrants but reserving national decisions for citizens.
- Japan values stability and hierarchy, maintaining a streamlined electoral system—but with strict limits on who gets to participate.
Each system has its strengths and trade-offs. In Switzerland, democracy is highly participatory but slower due to consensus. In the Netherlands, it’s inclusive but fragmented. In Japan, it’s centralized and efficient but more exclusive.
Understanding these systems helps me engage more meaningfully with the one I live under today—and helps me reflect on the values I carry with me from one country to another.
Have you lived under different political systems too? How did they shape your view on democracy and citizenship? I’d love to hear your story
Experiences - Life - Inspiration 🇨🇭🇯🇵 
Leave a comment