I'm OK with tests for voting privileges, as long as I get to design the tests. For some reason, though, my progressive friends never think that's a good idea.
I was right again. Democracy leads to oligarchy, which leads to dictatorship which leads to totalitarian state.
That's why people shouldn't have allowed the Republic to die and be replaced by a Democracy, especially run by Demoncrats.
For certain reasons that people may or may not understand, democracy inevitably leads to oligarchy, due to the majority rules issue. 51% of 100%. What is 51% of 51%? Follow that line to the end.
Well, as long as we're only going to let the well-informed vote, we don't need an overt test, even one written by Tom. "Well-informed" pretty tautologically eliminates all members of the Progressive-Democratic Party, their non-Party supporters, those who imitate or talk like them, ....
E.Hines: "Well-informed" pretty tautologically eliminates all members of the Progressive-Democratic Party, their non-Party supporters, those who imitate or talk like them...
Progressives will inform us that only those who agree with the Progressive talking points de jour are "well-informed."
Many years ago, there was a long series at Grim's Hall where we talked through the franchise and its limits. Ultimately, there didn't seem to be a better limiting principle than 'citizens, except felons.' I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea in principle, but I think it would be hard to do well.
I do think that Democrats ought to be careful what they wish for here. As the guy admits, having a college degree isn't a good proxy for having the right kind of knowledge to be a good citizen. I expect that those who go to poor public schools won't have it, and lots of kids with BAs won't have it either. The people who are likely to have it will be military veterans, members of civic organizations like the Rotary Club, and people who go to churches that are very interested in the community. My guess is that those categories are disproportionately Republican and conservative.
I do think that Democrats ought to be careful what they wish for here.
Indeed. And so should Republicans and Conservatives. As I've been pointing out, "well-informed" is a two-edged blade, and its importance also depends on who's wielding the blade.
10 comments:
"Ideas so stupid only an intellectual would believe it"
Orwell was right again.
I'd prefer tests run on the candidates, not the voters; but that's just me.
No no no... it's not a poll tax at ALL!
<.<
I'm OK with tests for voting privileges, as long as I get to design the tests. For some reason, though, my progressive friends never think that's a good idea.
I was right again. Democracy leads to oligarchy, which leads to dictatorship which leads to totalitarian state.
That's why people shouldn't have allowed the Republic to die and be replaced by a Democracy, especially run by Demoncrats.
For certain reasons that people may or may not understand, democracy inevitably leads to oligarchy, due to the majority rules issue. 51% of 100%. What is 51% of 51%? Follow that line to the end.
Well, as long as we're only going to let the well-informed vote, we don't need an overt test, even one written by Tom. "Well-informed" pretty tautologically eliminates all members of the Progressive-Democratic Party, their non-Party supporters, those who imitate or talk like them, ....
Oh, wait....
Eric Hines
E.Hines:
"Well-informed" pretty tautologically eliminates all members of the Progressive-Democratic Party, their non-Party supporters, those who imitate or talk like them...
Progressives will inform us that only those who agree with the Progressive talking points de jour are "well-informed."
Progressives will inform us that only those who agree with the Progressive talking points de jour are "well-informed."
Which clearly demonstrates how uninformed Progressives are. [g]
QEFD
Eric Hines
Many years ago, there was a long series at Grim's Hall where we talked through the franchise and its limits. Ultimately, there didn't seem to be a better limiting principle than 'citizens, except felons.' I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea in principle, but I think it would be hard to do well.
I do think that Democrats ought to be careful what they wish for here. As the guy admits, having a college degree isn't a good proxy for having the right kind of knowledge to be a good citizen. I expect that those who go to poor public schools won't have it, and lots of kids with BAs won't have it either. The people who are likely to have it will be military veterans, members of civic organizations like the Rotary Club, and people who go to churches that are very interested in the community. My guess is that those categories are disproportionately Republican and conservative.
I do think that Democrats ought to be careful what they wish for here.
Indeed. And so should Republicans and Conservatives. As I've been pointing out, "well-informed" is a two-edged blade, and its importance also depends on who's wielding the blade.
Eric Hines
Post a Comment