32 ms·

> Unless you're pre-informed on the issues, whoever presents it to you can just pick the side that gets you to the answer they want. This summarizes a good 75%

> Unless you're pre-informed on the issues, whoever presents it to you can just pick the side that gets you to the answer they want. This summarizes a good 75% of modern political discourse.

citilife 4y ago
Ironically, this is why a lot of people argue everyone shouldn't vote. Basically, if you add some minor barriers to voting you'll get only those who know and care about what's going on to vote. Otherwise, you'll have lemmings. Where people with a bit of propaganda will drive everyone else off the cliff.
- Matl 4y ago
  > Basically, if you add some minor barriers to voting you'll get only those who know and care about what's going on to vote. You'll get people with a lot of time on their hands for sure, that's about the only thing one can say with certainty.
- mdp2021 4y ago
  (It's not «everyone shouldn't vote», it's «not everyone should vote».) «Minor barriers» are not the only way to achieve that - you can use sophisticated voting systems -, and the definition of such «barriers» is not trivial on many levels (of effectiveness, of fariness etc).
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- munk-a 4y ago
  "Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time" - Churchill There's a reason this quote gets echoed so frequently. Picking special electors to drive the government in a more informed manner is a dangerous path which includes a lot of danger around how to pick those electors. It might be nice if there was a way to fairly filter out the politically illiterate but then again even the best system is likely just going to result in systemic discrimination against the disenfranchised class... and I think it's pretty damn likely that the filter would be quickly manipulated to shape the voting block in some partisan direction beyond just political literacy.
  - citilife 4y ago
    The argument I've seen is making a national voting day (everyone's off), then they have to travel to a particular area vote. You can combine it with ID checks and/or proof of residency. All of which are minor, but easily doable and universally accessible. You don't need a test, just a little bit of effort to remember to bring your wallet and travel 10-30 minutes.
    - munk-a 4y ago
      > universally accessible Somewhat - these things take money. State IDs aren't free and neither are proofs of residency. ID laws are discriminatory against the poor which is likely somewhat aligned with political illiteracy but through a correlation in our current system. A national voting day coupled with advanced voting would probably help our vote equality quite a bit and having the actual voting day be a holiday would likely discourage folks who'd rather spend a day at the beach.
      - citilife 4y ago
        > ID laws are discriminatory against the poor which is likely somewhat aligned with political illiteracy but through a correlation in our current system. To get public services in the U.S. you need to have an ID, i.e. food stamps. It's a talking point that is not a real problem. Identifiers of who you are, are a requirement for free and fair elections. Otherwise, everyone just cheats and there is no democracy. Further, everyone can get an ID, it costs $5-$10 in most states and most states will waive fees if you cannot afford it. Finally, if people can't get to a voting booth during a pre-designated, national holiday, then they don't care enough to vote. Even the homeless could make it happen, if they wanted to. > A national voting day coupled with advanced voting would probably help our vote equality quite a bit and having the actual voting day be a holiday would likely discourage folks who'd rather spend a day at the beach. The whole point of my statement was to present the argument (without judgement), the goal is to create a less equal and more discouraged voting system, bias towards those who actually care / follow politics. We want to limit it to the politically literate.
- account42 4y ago
  Except the people voting on these laws are not everyone but those that have been chosen to act as informed agents on behalf of the people. How is that working out again?

> Unless you're pre-informed on the issues, whoever presents it to you can just pick the side that gets you to the answer they want. This summarizes a good 75% of modern political discourse.

citilife 4y ago

Ironically, this is why a lot of people argue everyone shouldn't vote. Basically, if you add some minor barriers to voting you'll get only those who know and care about what's going on to vote. Otherwise, you'll have lemmings. Where people with a bit of propaganda will drive everyone else off the cliff.

Matl 4y ago
> Basically, if you add some minor barriers to voting you'll get only those who know and care about what's going on to vote. You'll get people with a lot of time on their hands for sure, that's about the only thing one can say with certainty.
mdp2021 4y ago
(It's not «everyone shouldn't vote», it's «not everyone should vote».) «Minor barriers» are not the only way to achieve that - you can use sophisticated voting systems -, and the definition of such «barriers» is not trivial on many levels (of effectiveness, of fariness etc).
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
munk-a 4y ago
"Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time" - Churchill There's a reason this quote gets echoed so frequently. Picking special electors to drive the government in a more informed manner is a dangerous path which includes a lot of danger around how to pick those electors. It might be nice if there was a way to fairly filter out the politically illiterate but then again even the best system is likely just going to result in systemic discrimination against the disenfranchised class... and I think it's pretty damn likely that the filter would be quickly manipulated to shape the voting block in some partisan direction beyond just political literacy.
- citilife 4y ago
  The argument I've seen is making a national voting day (everyone's off), then they have to travel to a particular area vote. You can combine it with ID checks and/or proof of residency. All of which are minor, but easily doable and universally accessible. You don't need a test, just a little bit of effort to remember to bring your wallet and travel 10-30 minutes.
  - munk-a 4y ago
    > universally accessible Somewhat - these things take money. State IDs aren't free and neither are proofs of residency. ID laws are discriminatory against the poor which is likely somewhat aligned with political illiteracy but through a correlation in our current system. A national voting day coupled with advanced voting would probably help our vote equality quite a bit and having the actual voting day be a holiday would likely discourage folks who'd rather spend a day at the beach.
    - citilife 4y ago
      > ID laws are discriminatory against the poor which is likely somewhat aligned with political illiteracy but through a correlation in our current system. To get public services in the U.S. you need to have an ID, i.e. food stamps. It's a talking point that is not a real problem. Identifiers of who you are, are a requirement for free and fair elections. Otherwise, everyone just cheats and there is no democracy. Further, everyone can get an ID, it costs $5-$10 in most states and most states will waive fees if you cannot afford it. Finally, if people can't get to a voting booth during a pre-designated, national holiday, then they don't care enough to vote. Even the homeless could make it happen, if they wanted to. > A national voting day coupled with advanced voting would probably help our vote equality quite a bit and having the actual voting day be a holiday would likely discourage folks who'd rather spend a day at the beach. The whole point of my statement was to present the argument (without judgement), the goal is to create a less equal and more discouraged voting system, bias towards those who actually care / follow politics. We want to limit it to the politically literate.
account42 4y ago
Except the people voting on these laws are not everyone but those that have been chosen to act as informed agents on behalf of the people. How is that working out again?