Should those who are not intelligent be allowed to vote?

[Distruzio]

The United States already promotes this policy nation-wide. Children are restricted from the franchise because of an arbitrary line drawn in the proverbial sand - that line being age. They are told that they are too immature to be aware of their own interests - too stupid, that is.

In order to be a true democracy, America needs to extend the franchise to all. Infants, toddlers, children, young adults - even ex convicts.

Until then, Americans should stop being so hypocritical about their democratic idealism and accept that their authoritarian preferences in democracy differ from Mousilini and the Fascists only in degree - not in definition.

(and yes, I'm saying that Fascism is a variation of democracy. And authoritarian variation.)

Especially ex-convicts. But if voting once every couple of years is the beginning and end of your "democracy", opening up the franchise is a little more than symbolic at best.

Oh no. If a nation is to be democratic (which we know I oppose) then I'm with you. It must open any and all political initiatives to public vote.

[Forster Keys]

Especially ex-convicts. But if voting once every couple of years is the beginning and end of your "democracy", opening up the franchise is a little more than symbolic at best.

Oh no. If a nation is to be democratic (which we know I oppose) then I'm with you. It must open any and all political initiatives to public vote.

Indeed, if you call yourself a democracy why not go Athenian? Put everything to a vote. Decide who holds public office by lot. Otherwise you're just an oligarchy that plays musical chairs every four years.

[Ifreann]

Does not mention maturity or stupidity. Who is it who is telling children that they're too immature/too stupid to be aware of their own interests?

Anyone suggesting children not enjoy the franchise in a democratic nation. What reason could they have to deny citizens their rights other than ridiculous and arbitrary reasons?

I thought it was because being a minor meant being immature meant being stupid. Are you now attributing other motivations to these people?

Anyone endorsing the 26th Amendment.

It sure it nice of you to tell all those people what they think and why they think it.

[Distruzio]

Anyone suggesting children not enjoy the franchise in a democratic nation. What reason could they have to deny citizens their rights other than ridiculous and arbitrary reasons?

I thought it was because being a minor meant being immature meant being stupid. Are you now attributing other motivations to these people?

Anyone endorsing the 26th Amendment.

It sure it nice of you to tell all those people what they think and why they think it.

It's no more offensive than telling all those people that they have to pass an arbitrary age limit before they're "real" citizens. Amirite?

I mean, what was it that women and racial minorities complained about all those years ago? "Second-class citizenship" or some nonsense like that? Ha! What morons, amirite? It's not as if they weren't told that they were too stupid or immature or simply weren't worthy of the franchise, right? It's not as if the same arguments they articulated apply in the exact same way to children and ex-cons, right?

Nope. Second class citizenship is a-okay with Americans and any "democratic" nation with an arbitrary age restriction for precisely the reasons I've outlined.

Either they have the vote or they're assumed not to know what to do with it if they got it- which suggests a skepticism about their intelligence and/or their maturity.

[Norstal]

That's my belief on the issue. But what say of you NSG? What do you think on the issue?

PLEASE NO:
Trolling
Baiting
Flaming
Spamming
Trollnaming
Any other illegal stuff

You don't need to be intelligent to want to take an action on an issue you're having. Consequently, you don't need to be intelligent to know something is just plain stupid to oppose it, e.g building a million dollar bridge in Alaska that goes no where.

It's no more offensive than telling all those people that they have to pass an arbitrary age limit before they're "real" citizens. Amirite?

I mean, what was it that women and racial minorities complained about all those years ago? "Second-class citizenship" or some nonsense like that? Ha! What morons, amirite? It's not as if they weren't told that they were too stupid or immature or simply weren't worthy of the franchise, right? It's not as if the same arguments they articulated apply in the exact same way to children and ex-cons, right?

Nope. Second class citizenship is a-okay with Americans and any "democratic" nation with an arbitrary age restriction for precisely the reasons I've outlined.

Either they have the vote or they're assumed not to know what to do with it if they got it- which suggests a skepticism about their intelligence and/or their maturity.

Forcing your kids to do chores is slavery and is a violation of the 13th amendment! EMANCIPATE ALL CHILDREN! FREEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!

[Distruzio]

It's no more offensive than telling all those people that they have to pass an arbitrary age limit before they're "real" citizens. Amirite?

I mean, what was it that women and racial minorities complained about all those years ago? "Second-class citizenship" or some nonsense like that? Ha! What morons, amirite? It's not as if they weren't told that they were too stupid or immature or simply weren't worthy of the franchise, right? It's not as if the same arguments they articulated apply in the exact same way to children and ex-cons, right?

Nope. Second class citizenship is a-okay with Americans and any "democratic" nation with an arbitrary age restriction for precisely the reasons I've outlined.

Either they have the vote or they're assumed not to know what to do with it if they got it- which suggests a skepticism about their intelligence and/or their maturity.

Forcing your kids to do chores is slavery and is a violation of the 13th amendment! EMANCIPATE ALL CHILDREN! FREEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!

Well... yeah, if you support democracy then you would do well to argue such silliness.

[Ifreann]

I thought it was because being a minor meant being immature meant being stupid. Are you now attributing other motivations to these people?


It sure it nice of you to tell all those people what they think and why they think it.

It's no more offensive than telling all those people that they have to pass an arbitrary age limit before they're "real" citizens. Amirite?

I mean, what was it that women and racial minorities complained about all those years ago? "Second-class citizenship" or some nonsense like that? Ha! What morons, amirite? It's not as if they weren't told that they were too stupid or immature or simply weren't worthy of the franchise, right? It's not as if the same arguments they articulated apply in the exact same way to children and ex-cons, right?

Nope. Second class citizenship is a-okay with Americans and any "democratic" nation with an arbitrary age restriction for precisely the reasons I've outlined.

Either they have the vote or they're assumed not to know what to do with it if they got it- which suggests a skepticism about their intelligence and/or their maturity.

So either you're shoe-horning your opposition to democracy into a thread where it doesn't really fit by conflating intelligence and maturity and by ignoring any other reason anyone might have for supporting an age limit on voting, or you're doing something else to round out my illustrative false dichotomy.

[Norstal]

Forcing your kids to do chores is slavery and is a violation of the 13th amendment! EMANCIPATE ALL CHILDREN! FREEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!

Well... yeah, if you support democracy then you would do well to argue such silliness.

And if you support monarchy, you obviously support the Japanese effort to free China and Asia at all costs. Including but not limited to, testing biological weapons on them to increase war efforts.

For a former politician, you should know that this is not how our country works. There are limits to democracy. Just because a democracy is limited doesn't mean it's not a democracy.

[Ifreann]

Oh no. If a nation is to be democratic (which we know I oppose) then I'm with you. It must open any and all political initiatives to public vote.

Indeed, if you call yourself a democracy why not go Athenian?

Because people do not typically act out their political beliefs in the stupidest possible manner for the convenience of those who oppose those beliefs. Kinda like why Distruzio isn't waging open war to see a libertarian monarchy instated somewhere.

[Norstal]

Indeed, if you call yourself a democracy why not go Athenian?

Because people do not typically act out their political beliefs in the stupidest possible manner for the convenience of those who oppose those beliefs. Kinda like why Distruzio isn't waging open war to see a libertarian monarchy instated somewhere.

Posting on NSG is part of his war efforts though. *nods*

[Aeternabilis]

Well, it's illegal for idiots to vote in New Mexico, and they seem to be doing well.

[Distruzio]

Well... yeah, if you support democracy then you would do well to argue such silliness.

And if you support monarchy, you obviously support the Japanese effort to free China and Asia at all costs. Including but not limited to, testing biological weapons on them to increase war efforts.

I wasn't aware we were done talking about political structure and the institutionalization of that structure. How do WMDs institutionalize monarchy?

For a former politician, you should know that this is not how our country works. There are limits to democracy. Just because a democracy is limited doesn't mean it's not a democracy.

Oh I know. America isn't a democracy. A republic can be democratic but a democracy is not republican. You know this. I didn't address the structure of the American republic. I commented on the structure of American democracy as expressed. Since our government isn't a democracy, then I'm obviously saying that if we're expected (by some posters) to take offense to the thought experiment that the less intelligent be prohibited from the franchise, then perhaps we'd better take another look at who it is that the franchise is currently excluded from - because if the less intelligent deserve representation, certainly the previously convicted and under-18 year olds among us do?

I'm neither endorsing democracy or the expansion of it nor am I opposing it.

I'm not making a comment at all about that.

**edited because I forgot to finish a goddamned sentence**

[Distruzio]

It's no more offensive than telling all those people that they have to pass an arbitrary age limit before they're "real" citizens. Amirite?

I mean, what was it that women and racial minorities complained about all those years ago? "Second-class citizenship" or some nonsense like that? Ha! What morons, amirite? It's not as if they weren't told that they were too stupid or immature or simply weren't worthy of the franchise, right? It's not as if the same arguments they articulated apply in the exact same way to children and ex-cons, right?

Nope. Second class citizenship is a-okay with Americans and any "democratic" nation with an arbitrary age restriction for precisely the reasons I've outlined.

Either they have the vote or they're assumed not to know what to do with it if they got it- which suggests a skepticism about their intelligence and/or their maturity.

So either you're shoe-horning your opposition to democracy into a thread where it doesn't really fit by conflating intelligence and maturity and by ignoring any other reason anyone might have for supporting an age limit on voting, or you're doing something else to round out my illustrative false dichotomy.

Not at all. I'm not commenting on my opposition at all except to clarify my non-support. I'm not elaborating on the reasons or taking the opportunity to wax arm-chair philosophically about its (general) failures. So.... try again?

Why don't you provide me with a reason anyone might support an age limit? I've seen no reason (although I might have missed one).

[Distruzio]

Because people do not typically act out their political beliefs in the stupidest possible manner for the convenience of those who oppose those beliefs. Kinda like why Distruzio isn't waging open war to see a libertarian monarchy instated somewhere.

Posting on NSG is part of his war efforts though. *nods*

Curse you for being correct sir!

Well... actually it's more akin to clarifying my own thoughts on certain matters... and to pass the time talking about shit I know (and/or might be corrected about).

[Forster Keys]

Indeed, if you call yourself a democracy why not go Athenian?

Because people do not typically act out their political beliefs in the stupidest possible manner for the convenience of those who oppose those beliefs. Kinda like why Distruzio isn't waging open war to see a libertarian monarchy instated somewhere.

I really wouldn't call the Athenian methods stupid. And I'd say they were a fundamentally different creature than the "democracies" we have today, which are basically the oligarchies of old with a plebiscite or two every couple of years to keep the liberals happy.

[Norstal]

And if you support monarchy, you obviously support the Japanese effort to free China and Asia at all costs. Including but not limited to, testing biological weapons on them to increase war efforts.

I wasn't aware we were done talking about political structure and the institutionalization of that structure. How do WMDs institutionalize monarchy?

You mean tradition? The Japanese are just defending their homeland from Western Barbarians. They clearly have the right to defend their private property. This is not about WMDs. This is about how we should stick to our guns no matter what!

Oh I know. America isn't a democracy. A republic can be democratic but a democracy is not republican. You know this.

No. Political scientists have classified the U.S as a liberal democracy. To deny this is to deny science.

I didn't address the structure of the American republic. I commented on the structure of American democracy. Since our government isn't a democracy, then I'm obviously saying that if we're expected (by some posters) to take offense to the thought experiment that the less intelligent be prohibited from the franchise, then perhaps we'd better take another look at who it is that the franchise is currently excluded from - because if the less intelligent deserve representation, certainly the previously convicted and under-18 year olds among us do?

I'm neither endorsing democracy or the expansion of it nor am I opposing it.

I'm not making a comment at all about that.

No, but you are grasping at the straws as to why the U.S isn't democratic. We don't let monkey votes. Taking power away from certain groups can be reasonable if the reason isn't stupid.

[Norstal]

Because people do not typically act out their political beliefs in the stupidest possible manner for the convenience of those who oppose those beliefs. Kinda like why Distruzio isn't waging open war to see a libertarian monarchy instated somewhere.

I really wouldn't call the Athenian methods stupid. And I'd say they were a fundamentally different creature than the "democracies" we have today, which are basically the oligarchies of old with a plebiscite or two every couple of years to keep the liberals happy.

It's pretty stupid considering it fails everywhere it was tried. If it didn't work for Athens and if it didn't work for California when we tried it, it won't work for anyone.

[Distruzio]

I really wouldn't call the Athenian methods stupid. And I'd say they were a fundamentally different creature than the "democracies" we have today, which are basically the oligarchies of old with a plebiscite or two every couple of years to keep the liberals happy.

It's pretty stupid considering it fails everywhere it was tried. If it didn't work for Athens and if it didn't work for California when we tried it, it won't work for anyone.

Doesn't it work in Switzerland?

[Forster Keys]

I really wouldn't call the Athenian methods stupid. And I'd say they were a fundamentally different creature than the "democracies" we have today, which are basically the oligarchies of old with a plebiscite or two every couple of years to keep the liberals happy.

It's pretty stupid considering it fails everywhere it was tried. If it didn't work for Athens and if it didn't work for California when we tried it, it won't work for anyone.

I seriously had to run that past myself twice to check if it was satire.

[Twilight Imperium]

Why don't you provide me with a reason anyone might support an age limit? I've seen no reason (although I might have missed one).

Because children do lack the capacity to make an informed choice? I'd support lowering it, say to 16, but no further than that.

[Distruzio]

Why don't you provide me with a reason anyone might support an age limit? I've seen no reason (although I might have missed one).

Because children do lack the capacity to make an informed choice? I'd support lowering it, say to 16, but no further than that.

So... you agree with me? That the less intelligent should be disenfranchised?

[Mavorpen]

I really wouldn't call the Athenian methods stupid. And I'd say they were a fundamentally different creature than the "democracies" we have today, which are basically the oligarchies of old with a plebiscite or two every couple of years to keep the liberals happy.

It's pretty stupid considering it fails everywhere it was tried. If it didn't work for Athens and if it didn't work for California when we tried it, it won't work for anyone.

To be fair, California is pretty damn big. Large states have a significantly more difficult time implementing direct democracies.

[Norstal]

It's pretty stupid considering it fails everywhere it was tried. If it didn't work for Athens and if it didn't work for California when we tried it, it won't work for anyone.

Doesn't it work in Switzerland?

First, I don't live there so I don't know if they have any gripes on it or not. Second, it's still not a fully Athenian democracy considering it has some partial representative democracy.

[Forster Keys]

It's pretty stupid considering it fails everywhere it was tried. If it didn't work for Athens and if it didn't work for California when we tried it, it won't work for anyone.

Doesn't it work in Switzerland?

I'd say this sort of direct democracy might be distorted by mass capitalist society. When people are too busy and disconnected, consciousness and enthusiasm waver, and a small and active minority can subvert votes. But this sort of decentralisation and the level of participation are definitely progressive.

[Norstal]

It's pretty stupid considering it fails everywhere it was tried. If it didn't work for Athens and if it didn't work for California when we tried it, it won't work for anyone.

I seriously had to run that past myself twice to check if it was satire.

Alright, fine, maybe it'll work under some very specific circumstances.