Culture Privilege and Voting

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder
Could you expand on that? I'm not aware of what exactly you're talking about, Crow policies were quite extensive.
Back in the Bad Old Days. The racist poll workers would employ such tests to weed out Black People from voting. Even if the Black person in question aced the test. It was still counted as a failure. Because the Poll Worker could literally fudge the numbers. The same can happen here. Do you really think a far left leaning Poll Worker is gonna say a Moderate or a Conservative person passed the test. No they would do the same as the Jim Crow racist did.
 

PeliusAnar

Well-known member
I'd also include education-that is college or graduate school.

Anyway, that's just me. NEETS definitely should not have the vote.
I disagree with this. Trade school is a viable alternative. Higher education clearly isn't all its cracked up to be, Women Studies...... Even someone that graduated high school and started their own business.

Here is an interesting alternative. Treat the government like a corporation and limit share ownership to any individual to %0.001 at most. The number of shares available is based on the number of people in the country. Have an open marketplace where people can sell or buy shares. No private trading either or inheritance. Everything goes into an open marketplace to buy or sell. People put bids in for a share, add a transaction fee to support the system.

That way people who care can buy up the shares and people who don't are out of luck. You want to get into politics and have a say, you literally have to invest more money to buy out shares. Everyone will always have at least one share, but the useless people will sell it, while the smart people will buy up the shares.
 

Yinko

Well-known member
Here is an interesting alternative. Treat the government like a corporation and limit share ownership to any individual to %0.001 at most. The number of shares available is based on the number of people in the country. Have an open marketplace where people can sell or buy shares. No private trading either or inheritance. Everything goes into an open marketplace to buy or sell. People put bids in for a share, add a transaction fee to support the system.
Consider how the system can be broken. Let's say I'm rich, all I have to do is find someone who agrees with me politically but who is poor and give him the money to buy shares for himself. Or, even if he doesn't agree with me, pay him a wage to act as a proxy vote.
 

PeliusAnar

Well-known member
Consider how the system can be broken. Let's say I'm rich, all I have to do is find someone who agrees with me politically but who is poor and give him the money to buy shares for himself. Or, even if he doesn't agree with me, pay him a wage to act as a proxy vote.
That is why shares are limited to 0.001% per person. You would have to rope A LOT of people in to have enough of a block. That also risks defections, deaths, ect.

EDIT: That would mean that 100,000 people could control the entire nation, theoretically. But if each person gets a single share at majority, then it isn't as simple.
 
D

Deleted member 88

Guest
I disagree with this. Trade school is a viable alternative. Higher education clearly isn't all its cracked up to be, Women Studies...... Even someone that graduated high school and started their own business.
We need an intellectual class. Those who know shit and don't merely build it. Ideally everyone would be a philosopher of their own.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Yinko

Well-known member
Ideally everyone would be a philosopher of their own.
That was the ideal of Founding Fathers (more or less), an educated population that could make sound, rational, political decisions. It never worked for the majority. The reasons why could be argued, but I would say that it is mainly due to human nature rather than anything to do with the benefits of an irrational populace for the parties.
 

Hlaalu Agent

Nerevar going to let you down
Founder
No just no. Because that would disenfranchise disabled people who can't join the military. Aka Blind and def citizens. Then you have people who are decent people but are pacifists. Not to mention if you are a citizen and pay Federal, State and Local Taxes. You damn well have a right to voice you opinion and pick the person you want to be elected.

Actually real Starship troopers had it just as Federal Service, if you are willing they'll match a role to you, and it can be civilian, or somewhere in between. Canonically, in the book, they literally made up busy work studying the sensation of caterpillars (which probably does have some esoteric scientific merit) because some ultra-disabled man genuinely wanted to serve. Just wanted to clear things up. But I agree with you, though I'd say the book has it reversed. Citizenship is birthright, but as a right it has intrinsic responsibilities towards the country and towards fellow citizens.

We need an intellectual class. Those who know shit and don't merely built it. Ideally everyone would be a philosopher of their own.

Probably not possible. But dipping into Aristotle what is possible is that most citizens can be taught the necessary virtues.
 

Certified_Heterosexual

The Falklands are Serbian, you cowards.
One household, one vote.

Married people raising their own genetic offspring are consistently the people who have the most stake in making sure society is set up for the future, as opposed to instant gratification—i.e. degeneracy, consoomerism, and government handouts.

My logic is based on the ground that the family, and indirectly then marriage, is the building block of society. Single people really aren’t a part of that building block in a meaningful way. They may be useful contributors to society, but they’re not nearly as important, in general, as the family unit.

Married people DO vote differently than non-married. Look it up.

No question that you can be unmarried or single and still want the best for future generations, but it's not as sure of a thing. Whenever you see someone pushing for insane, unsustainable, or wicked policies, they are almost universally single. That is the norm. Well-meaning and low time preference singles are the exception, and you shouldn't set up your society based on exceptions. This is true even if I don’t like the results of the voting, and even if this system disqualifies me myself from voting, but at least it's honest in what it's selecting for.

One household, one vote.
 

Yinko

Well-known member
One household, one vote.

Married people raising their own genetic offspring are consistently the people who have the most stake in making sure society is set up for the future, as opposed to instant gratification
In defense of this idea, if you made it so that you had to be married and have children (ideally with your spouse) to vote, then that would weed out the vast majority of people who would try to cheat the system. Some people may be willing to sign a marriage certificate in order to vote, some may be willing to have a kid, but the number of people willing to do both and stick by it for years and decades... not enough to matter.

One potential wrinkle would be that it would give a stronger argument for every form of non-traditional marriage as you would essentially be depriving people of their ability to vote for things ostensibly beyond their choice.
 

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder
I will point out that being married and having children does not mean you make good ideas for society. "Points at the current crop of well to do SJWs that came from two parent middle class homes." Being married does not make you a better decision maker for society. Because if that was the case Blue States and Blue cities would not be so fucked up. So no that idea will not work either.

My suggestion is do what was done for Gen X. Have educational commercials that appear on TV to educate young people. Back when I was young we had School House Rock. It taught the basics of how government functions and what citizenship is. It is the reason why many people say Gen X is the Sane Generation. Have a set of programs that appear on TV and as commercials on the internet that teach civics. If it worked for Gen X it will work on the new crop of idiots being born now.
 
Last edited:

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
I will point out that being married and having children does not mean you make good ideas for society. "Points at the current crop of well to do SJWs that came from two parent middle class homes." Being married does not make you a better decision maker for society. Because if that was the case Blue States and Blue cities would not be so fucked up. So no that idea will not work either.

My suggestion is do what was done for Gen X. Have educational commercials that appear on TV to educate young people. Back when I was young we had School House Rock. It taught the basics of how government functions and what citizenship is. It is the reason why many people say Gen X is the Sane Generation. Have a set of programs that appear on TV and as commercials on the internet that teach civics. If it worked for Gen X it will work on the new crop of idiots being born now.

WHO chooses what's to appear in those programs though? They may decide introducing all sorts of Marxist bullshit should be part of it
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
No, and here's the reason we can't have restrictions on who to vote: because the second we have any, who ever is in power will make a new law restricting the right to vote to their supporters. Then they are in power forever. Instead of limiting who can vote, limit what people can vote for. If they vote for politicians, limit what the politicians can do. That's the point of the constitution: to limit what the government can do.
 

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder
WHO chooses what's to appear in those programs though? They may decide introducing all sorts of Marxist bullshit should be part of it
It will be programs that just tell you how each branch of the government works and what citizenship is. All you need to do is give the old School House Rock Cartoons a visual update and you are golden.
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
It will be programs that just tell you how each branch of the government works and what citizenship is. All you need to do is give the old School House Rock Cartoons a visual update and you are golden.

That can somehow be twisted still, though that's better than nothing and if things go really crazy and you can't change things via voting, well nothing's perfect
 

King Krávoka

An infection of Your universe.
No, and here's the reason we can't have restrictions on who to vote: because the second we have any, who ever is in power will make a new law restricting the right to vote to their supporters. Then they are in power forever. Instead of limiting who can vote, limit what people can vote for. If they vote for politicians, limit what the politicians can do. That's the point of the constitution: to limit what the government can do.
Democrats are magicians in the art of vote manipulation as @Sailor.X pointed out. They must have entire cabinets on how to alter the vote count of various systems. This is an especially bad one since the Democrats have also enthroned themselves as the ultimate arbiters of sane and intelligent, and would probably be the ones to design this Sane And Intelligent And Not Cooties Enough For Represenation test. Y'know, I got a new question, why do all these Final Solution To The Femoid Question posters keep coming up with shit that would make us beholden to the neoliberals? Is this forum a testing bed for mind control programs? Is that the malware people were talking about?
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
Democrats are magicians in the art of vote manipulation as @Sailor.X pointed out. They must have entire cabinets on how to alter the vote count of various systems. This is an especially bad one since the Democrats have also enthroned themselves as the ultimate arbiters of sane and intelligent, and would probably be the ones to design this Sane And Intelligent And Not Cooties Enough For Represenation test. Y'know, I got a new question, why do all these Final Solution To The Femoid Question posters keep coming up with shit that would make us beholden to the neoliberals? Is this forum a testing bed for mind control programs? Is that the malware people were talking about?

You don’t need government to solve the problems of government

There’s a limit to how much the government can have bureacracy and a hold over things like education and opinions

People will turn to a black market or use stuff from the internet as their education

It’s not as if schools are places that everybody loves to be in to begin with
 

Senor Hortler

Permanently Banned
Permanently Banned
I'm against the idea of democracy anyway; I think it's a weak and abuseable system when globalisation and rootless megarich people exist. But if you have one, then citizens should be able to vote. It's not an issue of 'who can vote' it's an issue of what you are teaching and showing people before they can vote.
 

CarlManvers2019

Writers Blocked Douchebag
I'm against the idea of democracy anyway; I think it's a weak and abuseable system when globalisation and rootless megarich people exist. But if you have one, then citizens should be able to vote. It's not an issue of 'who can vote' it's an issue of what you are teaching and showing people before they can vote.

That depends on who does the teaching

Honestly, I prefer if people come to go seeking the knowledge themselves from multiple avenues

Or at the very least start off with things like mathematics, biology, physics, economics etc first BEFORE moving onto things like philosophy, sociology and history

Preferably they study this STEM stuff with actual bodies or samples, like a male dog constantly being given estrogen and the effects of having its dick and balls cut off
 
Last edited:

Yinko

Well-known member
Honestly, I prefer if people come to go seeking the knowledge themselves from multiple avenues

Or at the very least start off with things like mathematics, biology, physics, economics etc first before moving onto things like philosophy, sociology and history
That's more difficult now. No gatekeepers of information means that anyone can say what they like, this has already led to a reactionary move towards censorship. Both of which are horrible and make the viewer less informed. Not to mention, the mass availability of countless sources of information about every topic and of limited credibility has made the average person too intellectually lazy to look stuff up.

Then you hear these people saying that they want to erase the 'bad' parts of history, get rid of 'white science', if you are educating yourself with those books then it would be worse than useless. Autodidactalism is commendable, but I'm not sure for how much longer it will be a real option.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top