Elitism discussed
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-12-2010, 11:51 AM
RE: Elitism discussed
Restrictions of intelligence in the right to vote? No thanks, the 'stupid ones' who wouldn´t have the right to vote would just get pissed and I think that a revolution of rednecky idiots wouldn't be much fun.

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2010, 12:03 PM
RE: Elitism discussed
(29-12-2010 11:51 AM)Kikko Wrote:  Restrictions of intelligence in the right to vote? No thanks, the 'stupid ones' who wouldn´t have the right to vote would just get pissed and I think that a revolution of rednecky idiots wouldn't be much fun.

Agree 100%. Discrimination based on intellegence.

Starting to wonder if the name of this thread should be changed from "Elitism Discussed" to "Elitism Disgust".

Just visiting.

-SR
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2010, 12:10 PM
RE: Elitism discussed
Sorry Stark Raving but I don't get if you're trying to be sarcastic or not ?! Sad
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2010, 12:17 PM
RE: Elitism discussed
I'm not being sarcastic at all. I think restricting voting based on intellegence is a horrid concept. The reason we vote is so that the public has a say in who our leaders are. Restricting that voting to a certain level of "intellegence" means that people below that magic mark are not represented. No, I don't think the system works as it is now, but descrimination is not the solution. Not to mention, like Kikko said, the rebellion that would bring about could be potentially catastrophic.

To be clear, my commentary is on the idea of voting based on intellegence, not on elitism as a broader subject.

Just visiting.

-SR
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2010, 12:33 PM
 
RE: Elitism discussed
Besides, there is no accurate way to measure intelligence, especially as concerned with the intelligence needed to make sound judgments.

However, how would you guys feel about a little quiz of sorts when you get registered to vote (or sometime before the vote)? You have to be aware of a certain amount of current events and political knowledge to vote. And if you aren't, you can go and educate yourself and take the quiz as many times as you want before election day. Nothing major, just enough to prove you aren't walking there and picking based on which name sounds the nicest. It might be open to a fair bit of fraud, but we are speaking theoretically here.
Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2010, 12:42 PM
RE: Elitism discussed
(29-12-2010 12:33 PM)TruthAddict Wrote:  Besides, there is no accurate way to measure intelligence, especially as concerned with the intelligence needed to make sound judgments.

However, how would you guys feel about a little quiz of sorts when you get registered to vote (or sometime before the vote)? You have to be aware of a certain amount of current events and political knowledge to vote. And if you aren't, you can go and educate yourself and take the quiz as many times as you want before election day. Nothing major, just enough to prove you aren't walking there and picking based on which name sounds the nicest. It might be open to a fair bit of fraud, but we are speaking theoretically here.

That idea has some merit. A simple questionaire, asking the voter what the basics of each canditates platforms are. At least that would be a step towards informed voting. It's just not up to a select group to decide what everyone wants. It already happens enough. By informing voters, instead of demanding they meet a certain level of intellegence, at least they will have cast a vote for someone that somewhat represents them, instead of just "voting because it's their right".

Perhaps this is a good place to define our terms. I'll leave that up to the dictionary links, but what's important here is the difference between intellegence and knowledge.

Just visiting.

-SR
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2010, 01:26 PM (This post was last modified: 29-12-2010 01:32 PM by Kikko.)
RE: Elitism discussed
Addict Wrote:However, how would you guys feel about a little quiz of sorts when you get registered to vote (or sometime before the vote)? You have to be aware of a certain amount of current events and political knowledge to vote. And if you aren't, you can go and educate yourself and take the quiz as many times as you want before election day.
How many of the people, who just go to pick the nicest name, would vote if they would have to get into the political hot topics?

I'd prefer a VAA.
But it has it's problems too. To make a very accurate VAA, a lot of different questions would be needed and then it might take too much time to take the test. And the questions would have to be pretty even between all of the topics and it would still be hard to get just the right candidate for the person.
But a forced VAA wouldn't be good, 'cause making an accurate VAA and ensuring that it's unbiased would be very complicated, and I don't like the idea of politically active people having to take a forced test before voting.
Stark Wrote:A simple questionaire, asking the voter what the basics of each canditates platforms are.
Maybe in elections in which there are only a few candidates, but in elections with multiple candidates from multiple parties, like parlamental elections, it would be very tough to verify that the voter is voting for a candidate that represents the voters opinions without breaking the election secrecy.

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2010, 03:51 PM
 
RE: Elitism discussed
We don't have that problem in the US though, with only 2 parties. Not that politicians in the US really stand for anything except vague "family values."

I really wouldn't mind if less people voted, if those people were more informed. The problem then shifts not to a lack of an aware voting population, but to a group of inadequate politicians to vote for who can simply be bought off.
Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2010, 09:46 PM
RE: Elitism discussed
We have more than two parties, if Americans would pull their heads out of their asses and look at the third parties, like the libertarians, we wouldn't be having all these problems we do today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-12-2010, 12:53 AM
RE: Elitism discussed
The 2 party system is pretty flawed. It's collapsed into a my team vs your team thing. Most people in America know who they're voting for before the candidates are even announced. If Jesus-D ran against Hitler-R , he would still get that built-in 25% of the vote from party loyalists. I mean, for god's sakes, Christine "I used to dabble in witchcraft and sacrificial alters, masturbation is adultery, I don't understand evolution or socialism, I've heard the audible voice of God" O'Donnell still got 40% of the vote.

I blame network news and the education system... and the deep south.

Still though, as impossible as it would be to regulate and maintain, I would still like to see the outcome of a country that only admits Mensa members as citizens. Perhaps the smartest man in the country is president/king and every 2 years, a test is given, designed by a Counsel of the Wise, and the next smartest man takes over.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: