3 ms·
Your argument is that this proposition is valid notwithstanding the very real power struggle in society. Why would one want to even put someone through someth
by zghst 10y ago
Your argument is that this proposition is valid notwithstanding the very real power struggle in society. Why would one want to even put someone through something as humiliating as an intelligence test to determine their rights. It reminds me of the reading tests during segregation to suppress black voters. If we would have implemented this test then, tell me would they have a fair chance in society?
At least from my perspective, the government is fair game for everyone. Already our best and brightest are working for us, however power is incredibly corrupting. The issue isn't the voter, it's the system that seeks to suppress and deny the will of the voter. The voter should have full responsibility, just like someone who decides to take unsanctioned drugs
- Moshe_Silnorin 10y agoWhy would you put someone through something as humiliating as a college education, and their final exams? Presumably you want a measure of their knowledge and capability. In my system, no one has the right to become a representative. It's a job like any other, that requires non-standard admissions procedures (namely random sampling) to avoid corruption. I'm unsure if traditions could be enshrined to make my system stable, as it doesn't have a fiction as beautiful as the people's will to justify its existence. But I do think it's worth considering.
- zghst 10y agoSo how do communities gain appropriate representation in your system? Does everything come down to a test?
- PKop 10y agoMaybe there could be 2 parallel branches, like the House and Senate, one of which uses this random sampling / testing system. The other uses something resembling a popular vote.