If You Needed to Pass an Exam to Vote
-
Being good at your little task, and in this case we’re talking about degrees so it’s just passing a couple courses and schmoozing your boss afterward, does not make you intelligent. I know some profoundly stupid people who barely scrape by, many by just overworking themselves because they lack the ability to grow and learn new, better ways to do things on their own.
The bar for “intelligent” is on the fucking floor, apparently.
Sure, keep believing that "truly intelligent" people are immune to fascism. There's no way that will ever come back to bite you!
-
Can you also verify that the vote it presents to be counted? Can you verify the counting? For every way to verify computerized voting, there are a dozen ways to compromise it.
wrote last edited by [email protected]They do hand-counts when there's an irregularity.
Hand count consists of 1 delegate from each party tallying every single ballet. If they disagree on a ballet (this is less common if a computer prints the ballet), an official agreed on by both parties determines what the voter intended.
The voting system is quite good by international standards, the fix in American "democracy" comes in way before all of this.
-
Thanks, i also think it's a great idea to force people to be involved in the processes that control their lives.
And that's what makes you a tyrant.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
This is always shot down because eventually someone in control will change the test to introduce bias in their favor.
But, what if: Make there be one concrete, completely unchangeable rule. The test must be a math question.
No hypothetical story to make the question 'relevant' (E.g. Bob and Alice each have x and y ... calculate z). Just raw math.
There is no biasing a math question.
Perhaps an integral or differential equation with randomly chosen constants.
Yeah, it doesn't filter for civic education.
Yeah, people could prepare and/or give out targeted explainers for the type of question after first voting/mail-in voting day.
Yeah, it will still let some shitty people vote and deny some good people from voting.
But there is no biasing a math question.
Probably will still have more problems in practice. Big ones being making an 'unchangeable' rule, or it being made ineffective by changing the question to something like simple addition.
Not necessarily saying this should be done or is a good idea. Just putting the thought out there.
-
This post did not contain any content.
It's not all lazy and slow-witted voters, the media presents the news as if we all had a degree in government. That's apparently what they've put in as a filter but it only allows the worst of the bunch to fly by the seat of their pants, getting their vote from impressions and gut feelings.
-
Oh for sure, there are a lot of different areas in education that need to be changed. We need to go back to teaching people how to think rather than prepping them to just memorize for the test. That’s not even mentioning the issue that AI can have on the learning processes.
I saw a video that part of the problem is that there's a whole generation taught to research and form their own opinions, but weren't taught to differentiate facts from bullshit. I think it was by JJ McCullough.
-
And that's what makes you a tyrant.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Waaa oh no the big bads are gonna make me be politically active so i vote in my own self interests and the interests of my community.
The horror
-
That kind of sounds like we won't need it anymore if we're developed enough to be able to implement it well.
Shh...we need the dream of possibility.
-
Nope, it's a terrible idea.
Who defines 'service'? Who assigns 'service'? Who decides you have done enough 'service'? Who decides who is capable or not capable of 'service'? What happens when two different officials have different ideas on the above? What happens when different administrative regions have different ideas on the above? What happens when different regions have different numbers of Voters? What are the health risks of 'service'? What the health risks of the jobs that aren't 'service'? What about people who are incapable of doing 'service'? What about people who choose not to do 'service'? How are resources distributed between Voters and Non-Voters? What about political issues that largely only affect Non-Voters? What happens when the Non-Voters vastly outnumber the Voters and rightfully decide this is a crappy system?
I suggest the game Shadowrun if you want a look at a world where the Certified Citizens are a small minority. It's not pretty.
It's a direct democracy, so generally Citizens decide what constitutes "service"...or at worst "representatives" (if we'd building off the framework of the idea). As far as administrative regions vs. federal..well, assuming we have a system that's not broken and janky like this one, I think we could manage. As far as weighting things like "health risks", yeah that's a serious weakness here...but not an unaddressable one.
What I see is a world where we aren't screeching about "immigrants" because most folks are similarly just residents. And residents have every right and protection as a citizen...aside from voting or holding office. I see a world where the responsibility of such power also comes with commitment to building society...rather than simply being born, whining, and burning everything down in a tantrum...as we basically see now with bourgeoisie white folks.
Don't throw an idea away just because it isn't immediately a panacea to every broken aspect of our current system.
-
It's a direct democracy, so generally Citizens decide what constitutes "service"...or at worst "representatives" (if we'd building off the framework of the idea). As far as administrative regions vs. federal..well, assuming we have a system that's not broken and janky like this one, I think we could manage. As far as weighting things like "health risks", yeah that's a serious weakness here...but not an unaddressable one.
What I see is a world where we aren't screeching about "immigrants" because most folks are similarly just residents. And residents have every right and protection as a citizen...aside from voting or holding office. I see a world where the responsibility of such power also comes with commitment to building society...rather than simply being born, whining, and burning everything down in a tantrum...as we basically see now with bourgeoisie white folks.
Don't throw an idea away just because it isn't immediately a panacea to every broken aspect of our current system.
You're right, they wouldn't screech about immigrants, they'd screech about Non-Citizens. Who all happen to be a certain skin color or ethnicity for some reason. Remember that some official has to sign off on your Citizenry Service. Guess who is going to be judged more harshly?
And residents have every right and protection as a citizen
History is extremely plain. If a group does not have concrete representation in the political process, their rights are trampled - or at best overlooked. Residents would extremely quickly NOT have the same rights. What about this is hard to understand?
Look, bud, what you're talking about is literally the goal of facism. Don't score an own goal for them, yah?
