How dumb are we?

[Skybird]

And do dumb people really deserve the right to vote in a democracy? Aren't the the established outcomes of such elections -alwaqys the same habits, the same names and faces, the same parties - time after time just an expression, a correlate of our dumbness?

I say "we" although the article is about America. If you take such a quiz in Germany, you do not get much less discouraging results - especially amongst the young ones. The phenomenon is not limited to just one or two Western nations.

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/03/20/h...-we.print.html

[gimpy117]

well people in my state were dumb enough to elect Rick Snyder. Hopefully were smart when the recall election happens.

[GoldenRivet]

I dont think it is a matter of how stupid people are or are not.

i think it is more a matter of information being distorted to favor one candidate over another.

and no matter how intelligent a person might be, people are wired to make decisions either based on the information they have or based upon their emotions... thus, if you control the information they have, or if you can create an emotional reaction - you just swayed their vote.

There is an interesting documentary about this very subject... i dont recall the name, but it is compelling.

man has not become unbiased and unselfish enough for Democracy to function flawlessly... nor has he become responsible enough for any other form of government to function flawlessly.

[tater]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

well people in my state were dumb enough to elect Rick Snyder. Hopefully were smart when the recall election happens.

I guarantee you'll get remarkably dumb survey answers if you go to certain demographics that vote democrat as well. Places where over 90% of the people on the street you interview are guaranteed democrats... say north of 125 st in NYC (note that you'd get the same % democrats south of 125th street in NYC, but the education level would be higher—though many university grads these days have no history background at all*).

People in general are idiots. I'd be perfectly fine with a "civics" test required every few years to be allowed to register to vote.


*there was an interesting article by our former Representative, Heather Wilson. She's been on the Rhodes selection committee for years, and she said that the candidates are getting more and more narrow. They specialize as undergrads from the start, and might be brilliant in their major field, but are utterly clueless outside it. She'll ask why they say they are for something, what's the history, etc, and they get a deer in headlights look. Sad, really.

Found the link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...012104554.html

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by Skybird

And do dumb people really deserve the right to vote in a democracy?

People, even dumb people, have the inalienable right to self-determination. Saying anything contrary to that is to demean their status as human beings, and in turn to demean your own.

Yes, dumb people get to vote, as well as make a lot of other decisions that can affect others. Whole political platforms across multiple nationalities are based on people being dumb to one thing or another. I don't like it any more than you do. But you're not really thinking about that, are you?

Like me, you are dissatisfied with what you perceive as "dumbness" amongst the electorate. Few are not. What separates us is that you think that certain groups are beneath you, whereas I think that we should not allow any group to gain primacy through your rationale. I much prefer free, honest, and more or less mutually beneficial trade when it comes to measuring "dumbness".

Aren't the the established outcomes of such elections -alwaqys the same habits, the same names and faces, the same parties - time after time just an expression, a correlate of our dumbness?

Of course they are. Everyone already knows that, more or less. Everybody who has the time and freedom to do so complains about the representative government structure, no matter where they are from, and often with good reason. What's really dumb is that you don't look at the mechanics behind it, instead preferring to proffer your view as a fiat solution whilst ignoring everything that created the situation in the first place, including the ideal of self-determination.

I say "we" although the article is about America. If you take such a quiz in Germany, you do not get much less discouraging results - especially amongst the young ones. The phenomenon is not limited to just one or two Western nations.

Of that I have no doubt. Where we differ in opinion is that you think some kind of superior, enforced system might be employed to correct the inefficacy of the democratic system, and I would argue that a constitutional system with strict limits upon the power you hope to create is the better solution.

Ultimately, what it boils down to is the argument between power and limitation of power. You think that power granted to the "proper" individuals through some yet-undetermined means will fix the problem. I argue that to do so is to simply invite abuse of power, which is precisely what created this issue in the first place.

And do dumb people really deserve the right to vote in a democracy?

People are dumb, its part of being human.
So which idiots get to decide which other idiots are too idioic to vote?
I suppose the best test would be to only exclude the biggest idiots, the biggest idiots of course being the people who think they are not idiots.

What separates us is that you think that certain groups are beneath you, whereas I think that we should not allow any group to gain primacy through your rationale.

Hey at least this time he is only on about removing voting rights of those who don't measure up, its not like he is off on his eugenics line for lower humans again

[tater]

Most (all) modern democracies have some form of public education. In the US, this system is the primary budget element in every single state by a wide margin. It's ~80% of the NM State budget, for example—and cities spend in addition to State funding.

The rationale is presumably to create an educated (minimally) electorate. If it fails this most basic requirement, it shows how useless it is as a public expense.

[MH]

Whos saing was it ?
"In democracy people get the government that they deserve"

[tater]

Everyone gets the government they deserve

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

People are dumb, its part of being human.
So which idiots get to decide which other idiots are too idioic to vote?
I suppose the best test would be to only exclude the biggest idiots, the biggest idiots of course being the people who think they are not idiots.

Tribesman, you are a terrible writer and not in the least capable of conveying a point effectively. I see your point but are you so far above the rest of us that you can't be bothered to just take the time to spell things out? Vagueness is the mark of a weak debater.

Hey at least this time he is only on about removing voting rights of those who don't measure up, its not like he is off on his eugenics line for lower humans again

No, he isn't. He's toting the same line but in a different form, as I'm sure you've perceived.

[Oberon]

"In America, anyone can become president. That's one of the risks you take." - Adlai Stevenson

[August]

I've come to believe that the only thing that should be done (or in this case not done) is to just not encourage people to vote.

The way I see it if a person is too dumb or self absorbed to see the importance of voting then I really don't want them participating. Pushing ignorant people into voting only produces ignorant votes.

Leave voting to those who care enough to make the effort without being pushed into it.

[tater]

Originally Posted by August

I've come to believe that the only thing that should be done (or in this case not done) is to just not encourage people to vote.

The way I see it if a person is too dumb or self absorbed to see the importance of voting then I really don't want them participating. Pushing ignorant people into voting only produces ignorant votes.

Leave voting to those who care enough to make the effort without being pushed into it.

I agree. Yet we consistently see one party pushing incessantly for weakening the controls on who votes (pro-voter fraud stances, like being against ID requirements to vote, or being in favor of driver's licenses for illegals*), and also making it automatic to be registered (motor-voter, etc).

*In the last week here in NM, the new administration (Governor Martinez) compared the DL roles for illegals with voter registration (and voting)... what a surprise, there is overlap.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by August

I've come to believe that the only thing that should be done (or in this case not done) is to just not encourage people to vote.

The way I see it if a person is too dumb or self absorbed to see the importance of voting then I really don't want them participating. Pushing ignorant people into voting only produces ignorant votes.

Leave voting to those who care enough to make the effort without being pushed into it.

yep, I also agree.

There was a referendum in our country, about a very serius issue (really, not being sarcastic) and my grandmother had no idea was she for or against, while a certain catholic radio station, which was right wing biased told her to vote against. And so she voted against, just because the radio told her. Now that was a vote that shouldnt be there.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Betonov

yep, I also agree.

There was a referendum in our country, about a very serius issue (really, not being sarcastic) and my grandmother had no idea was she for or against, while a certain catholic radio station, which was right wing biased told her to vote against. And so she voted against, just because the radio told her. Now that was a vote that shouldnt be there.

And most likely most who voted "for" were also told by someone in one way or another.

There was a student vote at the university a long time ago regarding changing the styrofoam cups at the Student Union cafe to ceramic. They claimed to be acting in the name of the environment, and handily won the vote. I knew people in student government, and asked a few (over coffee in styrofoam cups, lol) to "show their work" and demonstrate to me that the total environmental cost-benefit (the cost to "the earth" not money) demonstrated that the ceramic cups (that would need washing) were better. They looked at me like I had asked them what the airspeed velocity of a sparrow was. They had no "work" to show, and no reference to anyone else who HAD done the work (because no one had). Unthinking votes cross political lines.