Should those who are not intelligent be allowed to vote?

[Cannot think of a name]

It's not like this doesn't have a history of abuse in the US or anything...

[Spartan Philidelphia]

All citizens should be allowed to vote.

Intelligence is nearly impossible to concretely define, and even then, many "intelligent" people make very dumb decisions.

[Constantinopolis]

Continuing from my previous post: The only possible argument against allowing people to vote is that they're too stupid to know what is best for their own good. This may indeed be the case for some people, but there is no objective way to determine who those people are, and in any case this kind of attitude is incredibly patronizing and elitist.

[Margno]

Continuing from my previous post: The only possible argument against allowing people to vote is that they're too stupid to know what is best for their own good. This may indeed be the case for some people, but there is no objective way to determine who those people are, and in any case this kind of attitude is incredibly patronizing and elitist.

And like, particularly because IQ is closely correlated with education, job, and wealth. It's kind of a deal of: we're gonna deny you the means to learn how to read, and then put our policies to a vote and disqualify you because you can't read.

[Constantinopolis]

Continuing from my previous post: The only possible argument against allowing people to vote is that they're too stupid to know what is best for their own good. This may indeed be the case for some people, but there is no objective way to determine who those people are, and in any case this kind of attitude is incredibly patronizing and elitist.

And like, particularly because IQ is closely correlated with education, job, and wealth. It's kind of a deal of: we're gonna deny you the means to learn how to read, and then put our policies to a vote and disqualify you because you can't read.

Yes. This. Precisely.

[Meridiani Planum]

The idea of testing people before allowing them to vote is something I explore in my roleplaying of the nation "Meridiani Planum".

I can see problems with the concept. If people can't vote, what representation will they have in government? Will their interests be ignored? Will their rights be taken from them?

Then again, it's easy to see the potential positives, although we have little empirical evidence that politically knowledgeable people truly vote more wisely.

The fictional compromise I came up with is to have one branch of a bicameral legislature be the one with the knowledge test, and the other the "populist" branch that only has a low age requirement. In the context of the United States, perhaps the Senate would be the one with the knowledge test.

I have no idea if this would actually improve anything. I tend to be doubtful. It could even arouse resentments between different groups of people, be charged with racism, etc.

[Margno]

The idea of testing people before allowing them to vote is something I explore in my roleplaying of the nation "Meridiani Planum".

I can see problems with the concept. If people can't vote, what representation will they have in government? Will their interests be ignored? Will their rights be taken from them?

Then again, it's easy to see the potential positives, although we have little empirical evidence that politically knowledgeable people truly vote more wisely.

The fictional compromise I came up with is to have one branch of a bicameral legislature be the one with the knowledge test, and the other the "populist" branch that only has a low age requirement. In the context of the United States, perhaps the Senate would be the one with the knowledge test.

I have no idea if this would actually improve anything. I tend to be doubtful. It could even arouse resentments between different groups of people, be charged with racism, etc.

Heh. It'd be interesting if you let people choose which branch's laws they were subject to.

[Lemanrussland]

All citizens should be allowed to vote.

Intelligence is nearly impossible to concretely define, and even then, many "intelligent" people make very dumb decisions.

This, anything else is veiled authoritarianism.

[Sun Wukong]

I would much rather have unintelligent people voting then further empower the government to disqualify citizens.

[AiliailiA]

Every citizen and legal resident should be allowed to vote. Including children and felons.

I voted Yes, obviously.

[The Scientific States]

No, that's Un-democratic.

[Libertarian California]

My political ideology says that all adults have the right to vote (as they do).
My emotional response though is that idiots ought to be disenfranchised (among other things).

[Avenio]

I personally think "not intelligent", in the USA, should be classified as anyone who:

Doesn't know what 2+2 is
doesn't know who the first president is
doesn't know who the current President, and Vice President are
can't find the USA on a world map
Doesn't know what the 1st amendment is (it's the amendment that provides Freedom of Speech, Religion, Assembly, and Press)

If you're going to go full Goebbels on the issue, at least have the intellectual stones to commit to it. Go for the full IQ test and phrenological exam, not test their competency at Trivial Pursuit.

[Libertarian California]

I personally think "not intelligent", in the USA, should be classified as anyone who:

Doesn't know what 2+2 is
doesn't know who the first president is
doesn't know who the current President, and Vice President are
can't find the USA on a world map
Doesn't know what the 1st amendment is (it's the amendment that provides Freedom of Speech, Religion, Assembly, and Press)

If you're going to go full Goebbels on the issue, at least have the intellectual stones to commit to it. Go for the full IQ test and phrenological exam.

dats wasist

[Libertarian California]

We should abolish voting, and let the minorities that want to do different things do different things.

Hmm...

[Senyosu]

I am inclined to agree, but this is not how you solve problems.

The problem is the politician. They must be qualified. They are to be tested, properly.

[Torisakia]

I think people should at least be able to tell the difference between a Democrat and a Republican. They don't have to be Ph.D qualified to check off a little box.

[Estado Paulista]

I'd like to say no, but the "unsmart" are citizens with constitutionally granted rights, just like you and me. In the end, only those who are interested in politics end up voting, so this means they supposedly know at least a bit about politics.

[McCatsonia]

Well first of all I'm not sure how someone that does not have intelligence could possibly vote unless another person psychically manipulated their body to do so, so that's not a problem. Second of all, no one should be able to vote.

[Albrante]

I'd say the point of popular democracy is to provide a stable source of power for the government, ie the people, and to provide a cyclic refresh of the regime as a safety measure against bad leaders, no matter how much you dislike the US president you can just wait him out. Neither of these core bonuses require an intelligent electorate. Don't get me wrong an intelligent electorate can make a democracy incredibly potent. If I had my way they'd have compulsory epidemiology and economics taught in schools. Failing that, no removing the unintelligent, even as you define them, is not in the best interest of a democracy.

[AiliailiA]

I'd like to say no, but the "unsmart" are citizens with constitutionally granted rights, just like you and me. In the end, only those who are interested in politics end up voting, so this means they supposedly know at least a bit about politics.

Wait, I thought Brazil had compulsory voting, with some kind of penalty for not voting. Has that changed?

[Tekania]

Wait, hold on... you mean NJ to date is the result of the idiots not voting? Oh shit.

[AiliailiA]

I think people should at least be able to tell the difference between a Democrat and a Republican. They don't have to be Ph.D qualified to check off a little box.

The Democratic candidate should be required to dye their hair blue during the campaign, and the Republican to dye their hair red. Then people would always be able to tell the difference between a Democrat and a Republican.

[Priory Academy USSR]

I think people should at least be able to tell the difference between a Democrat and a Republican. They don't have to be Ph.D qualified to check off a little box.

The Democratic candidate should be required to dye their hair blue during the campaign, and the Republican to dye their hair red. Then people would always be able to tell the difference between a Democrat and a Republican.

[AiliailiA]

The Democratic candidate should be required to dye their hair blue during the campaign, and the Republican to dye their hair red. Then people would always be able to tell the difference between a Democrat and a Republican.

That does look rather dapper. The UK has red and blue the right way 'round too.