shouldn't vote?

[//\/\/]

i've noticed the right starting to get very uppity about voter ignorance - the feeling being that the majority of those voting for obama don't know anything about politics and therefore shouldn't be voting.

so; they're willing to go to war to spread democracy; but not preach it at home?

this was linked from malkin

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2...5985719&page=1

[cacophony]

the left said the same thing about republicans who voted against obama because they thought he was a muslim. "if you're that stupid, you shouldn't be allowed to vote."

the left also said the same thing about rednecks who voted for bush and his cornball down home mannerisms.

the right has not cornered the market on this kind of rhetoric.

[dubman]

Originally Posted by cacophony

the left said the same thing about republicans who voted against obama because they thought he was a muslim. "if you're that stupid, you shouldn't be allowed to vote."

the left also said the same thing about rednecks who voted for bush and his cornball down home mannerisms.

the right has not cornered the market on this kind of rhetoric.

this a thousand times over.

[Deckard]

Originally Posted by cacophony

the left said the same thing about republicans who voted against obama because they thought he was a muslim.

Indeed some of us did (although I'll dispute the term left). In my case, only half-jokingly: meaning that while I recognize it to be instinctively problematic, I have to admit I've occasionally asked myself whether there might be some benefit in making voters have to pass some sort of exam before they're allowed to vote.

I don't put that out as a concrete belief or wish to defend it as such - I've not spent much time seriously considering the implications or how we might resolve the likely resultant discrimination (economic, disability, etc) to do that. And I agree with bass in that that if Joe the Plumber believes that Roe v. Wade is actually about segregation, it doesn't automatically follow that he doesn't have an opinion about abortion. On the other hand.... aren't there correlations to be acknowledged here?

I recognize the draconian nature of it, as well as (for something intending to improve democracy) the intrinsically undemocratic nature of it. But no-one can deny that democracy isn't currently being ill-served by the downward pull from morons, and politicians having to mould legislation to appease the least informed - certainly in my country anyway, where the reactionary tabloid press seem to hold so much sway over Parliament, and stupidity (and sounding tough - on immigration, etc) is almost worn as a badge of honour.

I suppose, yet again, like just about everything else, it can only come down to improving education. It's just that I have this fear - perhaps it's unfounded - that people in the democractic western nations are gradually becoming more and more stupid.

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by Deckard

I have to admit I've occasionally asked myself whether there might be some benefit in making voters have to pass some sort of exam before they're allowed to vote.

POLL TAX!

it's what kept african americans disenfranchised for so long.

[bas_I_am]

Originally Posted by cacophony

POLL TAX!

it's what kept african americans disenfranchised for so long.

actually poll tax is only outlawed for federal elections.

Amendment XXIV


Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Deckard

I suppose, yet again, like just about everything else, it can only come down to improving education. It's just that I have this fear - perhaps it's unfounded - that people in the democractic western nations are gradually becoming more and more stupid.

Which is why Malkin's comments are possibly more dangerous than we imagine. You can do two things here. You can lament the voter intelligence as a premise to rigging the democratic process for your own ends, or you can support a general culture of education. I wonder which one will actually strengthen our democracy and which one she's afeared of. hmmmm. tom jefferson had a lot to say about this. want an educated voting mass? don't proscribe education as elitist. don't place stupid meat head american muscle in cultural value over a girl reading a book. stop finding it cute to be willfully ignorant, like its something to be proud of. When people start talking thus, you know they are really interested in the strenght of our democracy, not whining sour grapes about a particular outcome.

there's a whole page of this shit here.
"Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories. And to render even them safe, their minds must be improved to a certain degree." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XIV, 1782. ME 2:207


"The most effectual means of preventing [the perversion of power into tyranny are] to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts which history exhibits, that possessed thereby of the experience of other ages and countries, they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt to exert their natural powers to defeat its purposes." --Thomas Jefferson: Diffusion of Knowledge Bill, 1779. FE 2:221, Papers 2:526



"The information of the people at large can alone make them the safe as they are the sole depositary of our political and religious freedom." --Thomas Jefferson to William Duane, 1810. ME 12:417

[bas_I_am]

Originally Posted by //\/\/

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2...5985719&page=1

haha! Too funny.

heres the homepage of the economist he used as the basis of his interview

http://economics.gmu.edu/bcaplan/

here is the fundamental fallacy of his view point -

He contends that if one doesn't know the name of something an idea or a person then they are illequipped to make a viable decision with regard to it.

This is completely untrue and can be proven with this truth:

Most people do not know what the the term 'Marginal Utility' means but they use it everyday when they make purchasing decisions.

Reductio Ad Absurdum: Caplan contends that people who do not know what Marginal Utility means should not be allowed to shop on their own.

[Sean]

I've said - only half kidding - that maybe a pop quiz at the door of every polling place might be a good idea to weed out the crazies and the stupids. But really, rather than encouraging anyone not to vote, we should probably be focusing on getting the people of this country better educated. The sad thing is, I don't know how that'll happen in a society where a show like The Hills is as popular as it is.

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Originally Posted by bas_I_am

Reductio Ad Absurdum: Caplan contends that people who do not know what Marginal Utility means should not be allowed to shop on their own.

Man I wish they'd let me learn Latin when I wanted to.

The Hills? Never heard of it. The Hills Have Eys, now that's some scary stuff.