The Problem With Democracy..

Sadly, there really isn't a practical solution. There will always be too many or too few allowed to vote. I just wanted to make that point and felt like drawing it out a bit to see where you went with it =P I agree that something should be done, but on the other hand I can't see a system that even approaches sufficient ever being allowed to reach fruition if the current system is allowed to continue on.

I would rather the government do "nothing at all" than start arbitrarily deciding who gets to vote and who doesn't. The idea that corrupt politicians could tell me that I can't vote because I don't fit their preconceived notions of who -should- vote is terrifying, really.

Would you feel the same if, for example, they came up with a policy that didn't allow you to vote?

There is a huge difference between disenfranchising somebody with no understanding of political affairs and disenfranchising Sevourn, so let's not go there.

For the record, I didn't recommend doing nothing at all, I was just responding to both arguments.

Honestly, I feel I neither have the amount of political awareness nor experience to be saying "what we ought to do."

If they came up with a test that i wasn't smart or informed enough to pass, that only allowed people demonstrably more intelligent and more informed than me to vote, i cannot describe how emphatically and unequivocally i would be in favor of it.

...or you could just completely disarm me by rolling with it. Bravo.

That's arguably oligarchy though, which has its own set of problems.

i think it would be closer to a meritocracy(that's not quite the right word for it, but it's the closest i can come up with), since you'd be earning your right to influence events through your performance on a standardized event.

That likely does have its own set of problems, but i think i would prefer them to the problems we currently face.

yea i realize that the patriot act was enacted while bush was in office, i was just pointing it out in this post, because its a big deal. it allows the government to search your home with out warrant, tap phone lines without warrant, hold you for an indefinite length of time. now what obama has done is essentially illegal, and many presidents before him have also... appointing czars is unconstitutional, but prior to obama, many of the czars really didnt do anything. these czars are illegal because they totally bypass congress, and can do whatever they want and only have to answer to the president, essentially allowing him to do whatever he wants without congressional control. its basically like a second government within the government. they are currently in the works of re-writing the constitution, and bypassing our bill of rights, to make it so people cant speak out against the government. they are regulating things without approval of congress, like how much money is spent on budget items, how much people make who recieve government money, and so forth. also this whole bail out thing that they did with the automotive industry and the banks, gives so much control over our financial system its unreal. just a few thoughts there, alot of civil liberties were taken away with the patriot act. not alot has been done in the obama government but its in the works, like i pointed out

It's a bit of both, since you earn the right but power is still in the hands of a small elite. The power distribution in a true meritocracy scales somewhat (plus there's no real rule about representation or lack thereof in its definition), whereas most of the population essentially has no power at all in an oligarchy.

Heh...well, apparently we will have to agree to disagree, because I am not the type to allow someone else to lump me into a "not smart enough to vote" category. I would question the intelligence of the person who would make such a statement. And actually, it would never get that far, because I would beg in the streets if I had to in order to fly to Washington, D.C. and join every protest possible to make sure such a ridiculous law would never be passed in the first place.

In short, I don't recognize anyone's authority to tell me whether or not I'm "smart" enough to be able to make decisions about the future of my country, period. I have to live here, after all...something we're all forgetting. Anyone living in this country should have the right to have a say in it's future. 8)

yea, i agree, almost like the movie I robot, (best example i can give) where the robots basically took control to protect people to the point of enslaving them. basically thats what our government is coming to also. i dont think they are waking up saying how i can screw the american people over, i do think they are working alot for themselves though, and we as the american public are a close second on the table,

I do not see a debate as something to look upon in such a negative light.

It seems like you've been fed by too many trolls and nay-sayers.

I for one enjoy exchanging ideas and viewpoints with different minds from all over the world.

From whence does your sense of entitlement spring?

If Obama is attempting to limit freedom of speech, then shame on him. Shame on all politicians who try to subvert the Bill of Rights, including Bush, when he had people thrown out of his campaign rallies for wearing T-shirts with anti-Bush slogans. So much for freedom of speech.

(And just for the record, Bush authorized a number of bailouts. I hope you complained as loudly when he was in office, and haven't waited until just now, with a Democrat in charge.)

I noticed you've not offered any personal opinions on your original statement, that not everyone should be represented equally. Care to elaborate now?

From the Constitution. 8)

i'd love to talk about how well either of us understand the link between the size of our debt and the value of our currency, or how i don't think anyone on this thread(including me) could give a truly accurate synopsis of the health care bill, but i'll leave it at this.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/yeehaw-my-vote-cancels-out-yalls,11030/

Some people with the addition of basic education never even reach that level of saturation that, in my opionion , is required to be "allowed" to vote.

Some people just have no business voting.

See; >> Birthers

I did... I am not a democrat or republican, i always vote independent. Last time I voted for Ron Paul, who is a republican but he is very liberal and a straight shooter, and ran on an independent ticket this last time around.

I'm independent, also. However, I did vote for Obama during the past election, because frankly, the idea of "President Palin" gave me the chills... >,>

yea not a fan of palin either, mccain is ok but he's a good ol boy, though he didnt agree with like 80% of what bush did when he was in office, Obama not a fan but i do like Joe Biden.

Give me quotes and I'll show you how shaky the ground you stand on really is.

For instance, your right to vote? Nowhere in the Constitution is the value of that vote protected. It's completely within the law for your representative in the Electoral College to vote against their district, for instance - it's even happened once or twice, but it's frowned upon. Similarly, it would be completely legal for the votes of all who do not pass to be taken and then simply discarded. If you really want to get into it, there's nothing stating that you can't be disenfranchised for reasons other than those disallowed in the Constitution and the corresponding amendments.

I'm not going to be as arrogant as to draw the lines myself, but with so many people that are basically unfit to vote, so to say the political factions will be deeply flawed as well.(Suppose they already are)

You don't have to know rocket science to understand that political factions within democracy need votes and they'll do pretty much anything in their campaigns to tie down votes, from ANY group of voters.

Oh, don't get me wrong...I personally know people who shouldn't be allowed to vote...I just recognize that it's impossible in a democratic republic to impose such standards, and would literally open a Pandora's Box that would almost certainly lead to a complete dictatorship.

Our system isn't perfect, but it sure as hell is better than a lot of governments out there.

to be fair, the electoral college system outlined in the constitution was intended to prevent the exact thing you seem to be so staunchly against.

like many other ideas in the constitution, though, it's since fallen rather out of favor, and any power it holds is largely vestigial.

oh damn, beat me to it lol

I can't argue with you on this. However, as a nation, we have become enamored of our "rights", and one of those that is accepted as a truism is the right to vote. Attempting to take away that basic right, after the incredible struggle that women and minorities endured to secure it, would simply not go over in modern society.

I don't deny that it wouldn't go over well - I even stated so previously (first post page 2). I'm just pointing out that your sense of entitlement is unfounded.

so we've gone from drawing our sense of entitlement from the constitution to drawing it from... well, uh, that's just the way it is!