Seeing all the stupid people around me (rednecks on the news, idiots in class, et cetera), I wondered if it's really right for anyone to vote. How can a gun-toting lazy redneck who spends his welfare checks on beer and NASCAR be allowed to choose the future of the country? Although the majority of people aren't extremely stupid, there is a large percentage of the American population who don't know much (or anything) about economics and government. There are angry idiots who put out conspiracy theories and the "sheeple" flock to them. And those people are the ones voting for the next leader of one of the most influential nations in the world.

So my question is, is it right to let all citizens vote, regardless of intelligence? Should there be a voting qualification test that allows only people who understand the workings of the government be allowed to vote? How can the average idiot know what's best for the nation? It seems many campaigns turn into a popularity contest filled with empty rhetoric rather than based on pure substance. For example:

-African Americans supported Barack Obama because he is half-black. I have nothing against Obama ("both candidates were equally incompetent for the job"), but being a part of a particular race doesn't qualify a person to be a national leader. This same argument could be applied to women and Sarah Palin.

-One of my teachers in 2008 believed John McCain was qualified for presidency BECAUSE HE WAS IN THE MILITARY. The ignorance of this (I'm not saying my teacher was stupid, possibly just "misinformed") is terrible. A Communication Applications teacher thinks that a general is more fit to lead a country than a governor or senator.

-A democracy is the only form of government where a fool's opinion has the same weight as Einstein's.

I'm not trying to bash anything or anyone. I'm just considering the possibility that there is a way for stupid people to screw less things up for the rest of us.

[Deleted. I was very young and very, very stupid when I originally posted this.]

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jul 3 2018, 5:47 am by DavidJCobb.

Are you kidding? No, just no. Who's the one saying who can and can't vote? I want freedom, not control. It is a nation ruled by people. Who says intelligent people know what's best?

[deleted]

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jul 3 2018, 5:51 am by DavidJCobb. Reason: abhorrent

Because an intelligent person would better weigh the options. If you let someone who is less intelligent vote, he or she may not weigh the options well let alone understand the options.

I do not think people should be denied the right to vote by some intelligence test because it seems too controlling. I like the idea of fixing the education system but Bush made a huge mess so I do not see that happening very soon.

I agree. However, most people can do things just fine if they can speak, and understand more than 1500 words (Which is much less than the vocabulary of an average 1st grader).

Intelligence? What's that?

Intelligence to me, is a vague, and usually unmeasurable form of addressing one's thinking capabilities. But people usually choose to stereotypically view one's thinking organic hardware capabilities- the cerebrum with numbers, and is usually confused with how much knowledge one possesses, which usually is advantageous to thought processes- in which they can choose to carry out logic with more pool of knowledge. I view it as having more Lego pieces to build bigger, complex and more varied 'shit'.

And because intelligence is such a vague idea, it may be too controversial to be a standard of granting the right to vote. Plus, it would go against everything the United States stood for, and Americans would be called as hypocrites by every nation in the world.

This is, merely my opinion. What I think is not the people, but the environment the U.S. is currently making. They're trying to make themselves stupid, when they can be much more. They don't try to surpass their limits, but instead, set a limit to what they can be. They make lines where they will never cross. For most 'stupid' Americans, knowledge is forbidden. Knowing is pain, and knowing will never do you good. They never try to think, because thinking is hard and painful. What's good is what you feel, your senses are everything. And the media supports their current logic. And so, 'idiocracy' expands due to this 'evil' process circulating through the society.

Honestly, Come up with a better ruler to measure intelligence than the IQ standardized test system (Which isn't even standardized) and PROVE that someone is unintelligent.

Freedom to vote is an extension of freedom of speech. Not letting people vote because they are less intelligent is a foot in the door. In order to maintain the type of freedom that this country has, we cannot allow any sort of voting requirement to pass. However, I think that knowing English is a good requirement. Many of the debates that are televised live are critical to understanding a politician's point of view (Or at least, what they TELL you their point of view is.) Almost always they are in english.


Indeed. Also, electing a politician demands an array of qualities. Political decisions aren't strictly "Intelligent" ones. Some political decisions have to do with Morality, and Custom. These types of things may not apply at all to the high class intelligent person.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Apr 4 2010, 5:28 pm by ProtoTank.

A decision fails when it is decided by those who are not actively aware of the subject. This is not the same as intelligence, however.
A test about the proposition or official being elected would be more sensible than a general IQ test.
However, the very things for which the public votes for are rather biased to begin with, because they are told what to select.

I would say I have disliked every presidential candidate I have ever seen, but I can't vote for who I want (with the chance that they would be elected.)

The options for voting should be ruled out, instead a written answer would be more appropriate. (NO MORE YES/NO QUESTIONS)
This obviously makes the task of counting ballots much more difficult. In my opinion, democracy should never be used for a group of over 30 people.

Well, your opinion no longer matters. Your elected official (You hope) will speak for you now. No opinion for you.

Is that what you want?

I don't think it's the education system that is failing so badly, rather than the American work ethic. The Asian/Indian work ethic is stronger than the American one. Try reading about Chinese/Japanese culture, especially students and the "Salary Man." Even the top ten percent of students at my school is dominated by mostly Asian, Indian, and Middle Eastern immigrants. Out of the top ten students in an AP class (the one where the teacher publicly displays the top ten in his class per grading period), only one is Caucasian.


Change the words in red to "people who understand the viewpoints and plans of the candidates" and a more viable test is created (as long as the current government doesn't make it biased).


Agreed, that's what voting for individual issues like Proposition 8 is for.


You make me chuckle. That's how it is with the current system. That's how it will ALWAYS be in a democracy, or ANY government for that matter. I must say that I'm NOT a US citizen, so I don't get an opinion anyway.

You made a very good argument, thats all I got out of it though. Woo, I make people chuckle!

Its funny you bring up intelligence and African Americans in the same introduction. You do realize that one of the major ways of keeping blacks from voting was by making them pass an intelligence test - usually swayed in a way that would indefinitely restrict them from voting.

Also, most of what you said was kinda an all or nothing scenario - are you saying *all* blacks voted for him because *all* blacks felt race was more important than other reasons?

I don't think he meant all of them... Just one reason why black people could relate to Obama.

I would like to take the time to consider the opposite point of view, where the stupidest people should have the most important say in a decision. Now at first, this may seem ridiculous. However, I can tell you that there are plenty of times when the simplest and best answer for a problem is given by the lower classes. Those who are often times at the forefront of the problem. Those with higher intelligence often times have no significant troubles in comparison, and are usually richer. The insight intellectuals would have on the problems of the poor would therefor be theoretical, or at most observational.

If one were to give the lowliest workers power, they would rid the country of disparaging working conditions. Sure they might screw over the economy, but that is something that the rich, intelligent, people care about. Quality of life for most would improve.

This course of action would of course not apply for every situation, but would be effective on most fundamental domestic issues.

I do not think political decisions should ever have to do with morality and customs because this type of thinking could potentially lead to a dystopian society. Even if a decision needed to do deal with morality and custom, it should be backed up my philosophical and scientific value. (like Sociology).

I really disagree with this. You can have as many hard working people as you want but I see lots of students unable to get the classes they want and it is not because they do not want to take these classes but because of the budget cuts and the failure of the current education system.

This is inescapable. When problems arise, you must deal with them. Sometimes they are moral problems, and problems dealing with people's customs.

It doesn't matter what he meant, its how he said it... it makes this whole topic seem very racist.

Racism is very prevalent in American society. There's no reason not to discuss the effect of racism on voting, and anyone who voted can tell you that it was definitely a major factor in the African American vote for Obama. This is of course a generalization, but also perhaps a particularly accurate one. Which is the very reason that rayNimagi brought the issue up: if people are going to vote for someone because they're black, should they be allowed to vote? An individual's race has little to do with their competency in office.

The definition of intelligent.

You can be an intelligent person, but lack morality. You need a dip of both in order to be a ruler.

There are intelligent people that think about things two different ways. It's not like all intelligent people believe in communism or socialism or democracy.