Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

So I am rereading Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind and I am really thinking hard about the idea of universal suffrage, in the context of the USA of course. Why is this necessary? Does everyone really deserve a voice? Or should we restrict it to those who bother to pay attention, learn about the issues, etc? I have no hard feelings against universal suffrage at this point but sometimes I think I would be more comfortable with a more restrictive system. Again, no strong feelings against the current model, just trying to stir up some debate.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

One of the problems with limited sufferage is that those in power have an incentive to keep those who would vote against them out of the system. There were plenty of local laws aimed at keeping blacks from voting in post civil war america, and situations like those should be avoided.
On the other had i do think that some ability to identify the candidate you are voting for would be a good thing. Nothing strenuous, but each section of the ballot has four multiple choice questions- easy stuff, and you get to choose which two you answer. If you chooose right your vote counts. The questions would be along the lines of-
Which position has this person held- senator, govoner, mayor, none of the above.
Has this person had military service- yes, no
Crap just to show that they could identify thier candidate.

Song of the beggar
 

[ QUOTE ]
Does everyone really deserve a voice?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, of course they don't. Let's cut off the voice of the downtrodden, the iliterate, the born sick, the deviants, the insubordinate, the beggars.

I am always going from door to door,
whether in rain or heat,
and sometimes I will lay my right ear in
the palm of my right hand.
And as I speak my voice seems strange as if
it were alien to me,

for I'm not certain whose voice is crying:
mine or someone else's.
I cry for a pittance to sustain me.
The poets cry for more.

In the end I conceal my entire face
and cover both my eyes;
there it lies in my hands with all its weight
and looks as if at rest,
so no one may think I had no place where-
upon to lay my head.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

People are not stupider then they used to be.
Despots are not less selfish and deranged then they used to be.

All that has change in this country is the limits on governmental power.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

How would you determine who gets suffrage and who doesn't?

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
People are not stupider then they used to be.
Despots are not less selfish and deranged then they used to be.

All that has change in this country is the limits on governmental power.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does this have to do with universal suffrage? And what time periods are you comparing here?

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

There seems to be this idea that people today are stupider then people in the past and are thus voting for worse candidates leading to our current problems. Thus, vulturesrow assertion that only letting smart people vote would fix this problem.

People aren't any smart know then any other time in this countries history. Voting is probably the least important aspect of our government. Constitutional controls over governmental power (not letting the mob force itself on minorities or hurt itself) is really what makes America successful.

If you want a bunch of people to vote for something go to Iraq, it just isn't the important part of government.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

I think the electorate is probably actually more knowledgable now than in the past.

I believe your example of Iraq is quite illustrative, but not necessarily of the point you are making. The problem there is not enough state power and legitimacy, not insufficient controls on that power.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

What state controls should Iraq have?

A read of thier constitution makes one wonder how it's going to be different from Iran.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]

People aren't any smart know then any other time in this countries history.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but this really made me laugh for a long time.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

Excellent topic ^_^

I assume we're ignoring issues related to the constitution, and implementing a new voting structure, ab initio, in a theoretical vacuum.

I feel that different people should have different voting weights, depending on how knowledgable they are regarding the issues relative to the vote. A high school dropout who's done nothing with his life or education should not have the same voting power as someone with a PhD in political science and economics. Perhaps the doctor's vote should count as ten votes, or something like that. How exactly this voting weight should be determined, I don't know. It would take years of expert research.

What's your opinion, vultures?

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

Was it the typos or something deeper.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
What state controls should Iraq have?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know. But the state right now has very little power, and that is precisely the problem.

[ QUOTE ]
A read of thier constitution makes one wonder how it's going to be different from Iran.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I don't think it had to be this way, but right now I don't see it going any other direction.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

Iraq should have a loyal standing army, but that is far from an arguement for state involvement in cultural, personal, and business affairs.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

The typos, of course.

But seriously, I agree with you that the importance of voting is negligable.

No major change by the people of this country has ever come about as a result of the vote.

The vote didn't get us out of Vietnam.

The vote didn't establish worker's rights.

The vote (ironically) didn't enable women and blacks to vote.

The vote didn't end slavery.

The vote didn't enable women to have legal abortions.

The vote won't end the Iraq war or the War on Terror.

Not only is voting relatively unimportant, it can even be said to be counter-productive when it comes to democracy.

Imagine two people. One of them is politically inert pretty much all the time except when they vote. The other never votes but is active politically in their daily lives.

Which one has more political power?

Voting gives people the illusion of democracy. It is neither a necessary nor a sufficient property of a democratic government.

So, my feeling is that it doesn't matter if you only let rich people vote, or smart people, or people who know more trivia about candidates. Change doesn't come about through voting. Pissed off people willing to risk their lives and their livelihoods have ALWAYS been the ones to bring about change, in this or any other country.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The typos, of course.

But seriously, I agree with you that the importance of voting is negligable.

No major change by the people of this country has ever come about as a result of the vote.

The vote didn't get us out of Vietnam.

The vote didn't establish worker's rights.

The vote (ironically) didn't enable women and blacks to vote.

The vote didn't end slavery.

The vote didn't enable women to have legal abortions.

The vote won't end the Iraq war or the War on Terror.

Not only is voting relatively unimportant, it can even be said to be counter-productive when it comes to democracy.

Imagine two people. One of them is politically inert pretty much all the time except when they vote. The other never votes but is active politically in their daily lives.

Which one has more political power?

Voting gives people the illusion of democracy. It is neither a necessary nor a sufficient property of a democratic government.

So, my feeling is that it doesn't matter if you only let rich people vote, or smart people, or people who know more trivia about candidates. Change doesn't come about through voting. Pissed off people willing to risk their lives and their livelihoods have ALWAYS been the ones to bring about change, in this or any other country.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but this really made me laugh for a long time.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The typos, of course.

But seriously, I agree with you that the importance of voting is negligable.

No major change by the people of this country has ever come about as a result of the vote.

The vote didn't get us out of Vietnam.

The vote didn't establish worker's rights.

The vote (ironically) didn't enable women and blacks to vote.

The vote didn't end slavery.

The vote didn't enable women to have legal abortions.

The vote won't end the Iraq war or the War on Terror.

Not only is voting relatively unimportant, it can even be said to be counter-productive when it comes to democracy.

Imagine two people. One of them is politically inert pretty much all the time except when they vote. The other never votes but is active politically in their daily lives.

Which one has more political power?

Voting gives people the illusion of democracy. It is neither a necessary nor a sufficient property of a democratic government.

So, my feeling is that it doesn't matter if you only let rich people vote, or smart people, or people who know more trivia about candidates. Change doesn't come about through voting. Pissed off people willing to risk their lives and their livelihoods have ALWAYS been the ones to bring about change, in this or any other country.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but this really made me laugh for a long time.

[/ QUOTE ]

A typical rseponse (ie. ridicule, with no substance).

Care to tell us specifically what I said that you disagree with?

Oh, and please don't disappoint me with the old "if you don't vote, you have no right to complain" argument.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Excellent topic ^_^

I assume we're ignoring issues related to the constitution, and implementing a new voting structure, ab initio, in a theoretical vacuum.

I feel that different people should have different voting weights, depending on how knowledgable they are regarding the issues relative to the vote. A high school dropout who's done nothing with his life or education should not have the same voting power as someone with a PhD in political science and economics. Perhaps the doctor's vote should count as ten votes, or something like that. How exactly this voting weight should be determined, I don't know. It would take years of expert research.

What's your opinion, vultures?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what vultures' opinion is, but I think yours and other peoples' idea of limiting the voting rights of "uneducated" and "less qualified" people smacks of gross elitism and stems from the mistaken idea that poor and uneducated people are incapable of determining what their own interests are and that therefore smarter, more educated individuals ought to make certain choices for them.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

On the plus side, if their horribly myopic ideas were somehow implemented, the vast majority of highly educated people act according to interests far closer to my own--no stupid religiously motivated social policy, none of the false economics of the so-called "conservatives," and less of the idiocy of the current Republican party.

Repeal Suffrage!

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
People are not stupider then they used to be.


[/ QUOTE ]

In regards to political knowledge they sure are. Politics is becoming more complex and people working longer nowadays, people generally have less time to worry about politics.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

Compared to when, and politics on which scale? Claiming anything in this regard IS STUPID unless you define the terms, and even then, its slippery, speculative, and probably erroneous.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
poor and uneducated people are incapable of determining what their own interests are and that therefore smarter, more educated individuals ought to make certain choices for them.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why is this so mistaken? You haved judst rephrased the poster's point with pejorative adjectives and seem to assume it was some type of effective counter-arguement.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

So you discount both Incoate and Lehigh's opinion then?

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

With or without the pejoratives, why would, in your model, "more educated individuals" make choices FOR these imbecilic peons? And how would these dirty stinking masses improve their lot in life if their interests conflicted with the more educated individuals? And how does "education" equal intelligence? I know of at least one trained monkey who achieved an incredibly high station in life, and graduated from Harvard and Yale. I certainly wouldn't want him determining my best interests.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

I know of at least one trained monkey who achieved an<font color="red"> unknown </font> station in life, and graduated from <font color="red"> an unknown institution</font>. I certainly wouldn't want him determining my best interests.

************************************************** ***************

There, I like my version better.

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

Your indefinite articles scream for pluralization.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Your indefinite articles scream for pluralization.

[/ QUOTE ]
Scream away.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

You realize you are asking your use of "an" to scream? Okay, just checking.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
poor and uneducated people are incapable of determining what their own interests are and that therefore smarter, more educated individuals ought to make certain choices for them.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why is this so mistaken? You haved judst rephrased the poster's point with pejorative adjectives and seem to assume it was some type of effective counter-arguement.

[/ QUOTE ]

You actually want me to argue why poor and uneducated people are capable of determining their own interests?

If that is the case, no amount of arguing will do the trick.

Do you also believe that the life of a poor and uneducated person is worth less than the life of a rich, educated one?

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
On the plus side, if their horribly myopic ideas were somehow implemented, the vast majority of highly educated people act according to interests far closer to my own--no stupid religiously motivated social policy, none of the false economics of the so-called "conservatives," and less of the idiocy of the current Republican party.

Repeal Suffrage!

[/ QUOTE ]

I knew someone was going to make this post, shouldve laid odds on it via PM with someone.

Anyhow, on to my thoughts. Truth is, I didnt have any in particular, hence my post. I explicitly stated that I wasnt against universal suffrage. So there are a few people that posted in this thread that can safetly unbunch their panties now.

To those that actually bothered to read the post and make thoughtful responses, thanks. Sorry I dont have more to contribute.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You actually want me to argue why poor and uneducated people are capable of determining their own interests?

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that was the OP's point.

[ QUOTE ]

If that is the case, no amount of arguing will do the trick.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok

[ QUOTE ]

Do you also believe that the life of a poor and uneducated person is worth less than the life of a rich, educated one?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think some lives add more value to the rest of humanity than others. In general those people tend to be more educated. But it is not necessarily true in all cases.

Flame away.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
With or without the pejoratives, why would, in your model, "more educated individuals" make choices FOR these imbecilic peons?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have a model.


[ QUOTE ]
And how would these dirty stinking masses improve their lot in life if their interests conflicted with the more educated individuals?

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said, I don't have a model, but I think it is silly to make the effort to post at all if you are only going to rephrase the OP'statment using sarasm or pejoratives without attempting to aruge the point.

[ QUOTE ]
And how does "education" equal intelligence?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said it does? I'll go out on a limb here and say that while it may not equal intelligence, it is safe to presume that there is some correlation.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Iraq should have a loyal standing army, but that is far from an arguement for state involvement in cultural, personal, and business affairs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless it has a state that can involve itself in personal and business affairs, like extracting taxes from the population and keeping people from killing each other, then I wouldn't put too much hope in its long term viability as a democratic regime.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

This is a really good thread.

The only thing here that I might have to add is that this sort of system where certain demographic blocks of people would be silenced or spoken for would lead to something like the old Stalin era Soviet system. What you would end up with was a top heavy, mob impregnated graft ridden society. While cretain institutions in America are already like this, the New Orleans and LA Police Departments and Democratic Party, for example, the present way of doing things does provide a counter balance which keeps things from going totally down the toilet, no matter how hard some treasonous beuracratic corrupt scum try.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

"Does everyone really deserve a voice? Or should we restrict it to those who bother to pay attention, learn about the issues, etc?"

unfortunately everyone does deserve a vote.

the big problem is that restricting voting in any way would shatter the foundation of freedom that america is defined by. fatal corruption would now be possible.

democracy is a difficult business indeed.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
"Does everyone really deserve a voice? Or should we restrict it to those who bother to pay attention, learn about the issues, etc?"

unfortunately everyone does deserve a vote.

the big problem is that restricting voting in any way would shatter the foundation of freedom that america is defined by. fatal corruption would now be possible.

democracy is a difficult business indeed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. My post, which suggested that more knowledgeable people should have more weight to their votes in major economic/political decisions than the average joe. Practically, there's more that could go wrong than could go right because it's so open to corruption.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Voting gives people the illusion of democracy.

[/ QUOTE ]

much like alcohol gives the illusion of drunkenness.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

Really?

Take this example:

You work for a large corporation. Every four years you and your coworkers get to pick your own boss by a vote. The only thing is, there are only two candidates and the owner of the company gets to choose them.

Would you call this a democracy?

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Would you call this a democracy?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. The owner of the business has every right to select individuals any way he wants.

Re: Universal suffrage a good thing?
 

[ QUOTE ]
How would you determine who gets suffrage and who doesn't?

[/ QUOTE ]

Literacy tests would be a good place to start. If one cannot read, one cannot educate himself/herself. If one cannot make educated decisions, one should not have a voice in the decisions made for everyone else.