Soapbox.
//
Main:
We should abolish "unlimited" democracy. There. I said it. Why? I'll get to that in a moment.
A little while ago, I was asked "How the Hell did George W. get elected?". Here's what I came up with:
-Firstly, there's always the (strong) possibility of voter fraud (particularly Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004), especially with the new Diebold machines.
-Secondly, voters themselves are more likely to vote against a candidate than they are to vote for a candidate, and John Kerry is one of the most uncharismatic politicians I've seen run for president since Nixon (right up there with pre-An Inconvenient Truth Gore).
-Lastly is the consideration of voter stupidity. First consider how stupid the average individual is, then come to grips with the realization that fifty percent of everyone is more stupid than that. Furthermore, in our generation, an individual is statistically more likely to vote with the less education they have (high school dropouts are more likely to vote than those of us in college). Personally, I uphold that this trend in education holds true for the previous few generations as well (X and whatever the one that came before that was), but it is contradicted by the assertion political science scholars cling to like a fly on shit that the better educated and informed you are, the more likely you are to vote (although they even contradict this themselves by observing that America has never been more educated, nor have we ever cared less about voting). I also noticed people going to the polls because W. "would keep the gays from marrying" than any other reason. Hell, even rational choice theorists point out that the merits of voting to an individual are vastly outweighed by the costs, and stupid people would have more trouble figuring that out than anyone else.
There are, of course, other factors that have to do with the general decline in voter participation as well (such as the incorporation of primaries), but they seem, while relevant in the broader spectrum, insignificant to the specific question as it was framed.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not thrilled that Bush was elected and I'm sure as Hell not happy with what his administration has done, but I'm not suggesting that we abolish unlimited democracy simply because someone like him was elected and individuals such as those in his administration were placed in power as a result.
So why abolish "unlimited" democracy? Simply, it's pretension (not to mention the hypocrisy, hence the quotations around "unlimited"; people under eighteen can't vote, can they, yet they're still expected to abide laws and, if they have a job, pay taxes). The vast, vast majority of voters have never once taken it upon themselves to protect the nation or the body politic, let alone contribute anything to it that didn't benefit them. In short, voting should be a privilege not a right.
For starters, everyone should take the citizenship test (they same one they give to immigrants) when they go to register to vote. No passy, no votey. This makes utter sense as there's no reason we should hold immigrants up to higher standards than we hold our own citizens; the point of the test is to see if they're "good enough" to be an American while a huge portion of existing citizens aren't even "good enough". It would also ensure enough involvement to safely guarantee that a given individual is going to be informed before going to the polls (so I don't have to hear "Well if Saddam didn't have anything to do with 9/11, then why are we in Iraq?!" intended as an argument-stopping rhetorical question from a registered voter).
Just for starters.
Quote:"It is better to learn late than never."-Publilius Syrus
Other:
France opens secret UFO files.
Easily the most interesting piece of news I've read all day, but then again, I've only read CMLife (for those of you that don't go to Central Michigan, CMLife is a notoriously bad newspaper, infamous for misquoting and changing information to suit their whims, that somehow continues to win awards ... although, to their credit, they do tend to stick to stories that concern CMU students, but tend to get ignored in the mainstream media) and skimmed the Internet at this point.
Main:
We should abolish "unlimited" democracy. There. I said it. Why? I'll get to that in a moment.
A little while ago, I was asked "How the Hell did George W. get elected?". Here's what I came up with:
-Firstly, there's always the (strong) possibility of voter fraud (particularly Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004), especially with the new Diebold machines.
-Secondly, voters themselves are more likely to vote against a candidate than they are to vote for a candidate, and John Kerry is one of the most uncharismatic politicians I've seen run for president since Nixon (right up there with pre-An Inconvenient Truth Gore).
-Lastly is the consideration of voter stupidity. First consider how stupid the average individual is, then come to grips with the realization that fifty percent of everyone is more stupid than that. Furthermore, in our generation, an individual is statistically more likely to vote with the less education they have (high school dropouts are more likely to vote than those of us in college). Personally, I uphold that this trend in education holds true for the previous few generations as well (X and whatever the one that came before that was), but it is contradicted by the assertion political science scholars cling to like a fly on shit that the better educated and informed you are, the more likely you are to vote (although they even contradict this themselves by observing that America has never been more educated, nor have we ever cared less about voting). I also noticed people going to the polls because W. "would keep the gays from marrying" than any other reason. Hell, even rational choice theorists point out that the merits of voting to an individual are vastly outweighed by the costs, and stupid people would have more trouble figuring that out than anyone else.
There are, of course, other factors that have to do with the general decline in voter participation as well (such as the incorporation of primaries), but they seem, while relevant in the broader spectrum, insignificant to the specific question as it was framed.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not thrilled that Bush was elected and I'm sure as Hell not happy with what his administration has done, but I'm not suggesting that we abolish unlimited democracy simply because someone like him was elected and individuals such as those in his administration were placed in power as a result.
So why abolish "unlimited" democracy? Simply, it's pretension (not to mention the hypocrisy, hence the quotations around "unlimited"; people under eighteen can't vote, can they, yet they're still expected to abide laws and, if they have a job, pay taxes). The vast, vast majority of voters have never once taken it upon themselves to protect the nation or the body politic, let alone contribute anything to it that didn't benefit them. In short, voting should be a privilege not a right.
For starters, everyone should take the citizenship test (they same one they give to immigrants) when they go to register to vote. No passy, no votey. This makes utter sense as there's no reason we should hold immigrants up to higher standards than we hold our own citizens; the point of the test is to see if they're "good enough" to be an American while a huge portion of existing citizens aren't even "good enough". It would also ensure enough involvement to safely guarantee that a given individual is going to be informed before going to the polls (so I don't have to hear "Well if Saddam didn't have anything to do with 9/11, then why are we in Iraq?!" intended as an argument-stopping rhetorical question from a registered voter).
Just for starters.
Quote:"It is better to learn late than never."-Publilius Syrus
Other:
France opens secret UFO files.
Easily the most interesting piece of news I've read all day, but then again, I've only read CMLife (for those of you that don't go to Central Michigan, CMLife is a notoriously bad newspaper, infamous for misquoting and changing information to suit their whims, that somehow continues to win awards ... although, to their credit, they do tend to stick to stories that concern CMU students, but tend to get ignored in the mainstream media) and skimmed the Internet at this point.