Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Forum - Perennial Ideas and Debates that cross societal/time boundaries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 17th, 2012, 09:23 PM   #81

dagul's Avatar
Rabbit of Wormhole
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt
Posts: 9,624

A person who is of legal age and with the ability of discernment must have the right to vote.
dagul is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 17th, 2012, 09:48 PM   #82

Belgarion's Avatar
Cynical Optimist
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: Australia
Posts: 3,173

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wenge View Post
I paid no income taxes in The United States this year but I am a proud citizen of my country. Still, everything that happens in The States affects me and my livelihood. Should I have been prevented from voting because I do not reside in the country of my birth and citizenship?
I would argue yes, if you have moved overseas permanently. If you are an expat who will return to your home country in a few years then it's a different story.
Belgarion is offline  
Old November 17th, 2012, 10:39 PM   #83

Wenge's Avatar
American
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: The True Capital of China
Posts: 8,116

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgarion View Post
I would argue yes, if you have moved overseas permanently. If you are an expat who will return to your home country in a few years then it's a different story.
That I would agree with.
Wenge is online now  
Old November 18th, 2012, 01:41 AM   #84
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Denmark
Posts: 1,582

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
1. It would be hard to deny that at least the most severe crimes are evidence of significant anti-social tendencies, which would clearly disqualify anyone for taking any relevant decision on the fate of any such society.
Not to mention that the loss of political privileges could be perfectly considered as part of the fair punishment deserved by at least some major crimes.
Which party you vote for has nothing to do with the crimes you've committed. I bet no party would gain any control of government of the supporters of the government, if they support major crimes.


Quote:
2.- It's naturally the quid of the OP.
I'm entirely against your solution, because it couldn't be any more inherently aristocratic and anti-democratic, namely the very idea that some restricted individuals would be able to determine by themselves and just themselves who could and who couldn't vote .
I'd rather like the content than the box and framework.

While democracy as a framework certainly can ensure a good and decent content, it can also abolish it all. Surely, so can aristocracy, but it isn't the matter of the type of rule, what matters is the content, i.e. high quality of life for as many citizens as possible.

Quote:
As already mentioned more than once, I'm entirely in favor of the obvious other alternative to control any shortcoming from any purportedly unskilled electorate...
(In fact IMHO the only democratic option, not any true "alternative" scenario)
...namely to provide the required skills to all such purportedly unskilled electorate.
Providing education to the masses is another alternative... unfortunately even if we can succeed in that, not everybody are interested in politics, or current politics for that matter. Not everybody can remember their history lessons either.
philosopher is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 02:03 AM   #85

Chancellor's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: The far North
Posts: 882

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColonelFear View Post
I think people ought to take a political aptitude test prior to attaining the right to vote. That way, we'd at least try to stop uninformed individuals from making an injudicious, gratuitous decision just for the hell of it.
If it could be arranged and safely so, yes.
Chancellor is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 03:35 PM   #86

gregorian's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,083

I reserve my right to vote of a candidate for ironic or deliberately chaotic reasons.
In a country where the two main parties are frozen into their positions by the fear of polls, a few lunatics in the government would help break the ice.

And living in an electorate where one party ALWAYS wins.... my area has voted the same way since the first suburban houses were built here... minor parties, stupid parties getting votes just makes the results more interesting.

Some humourless official asking me if my vote has been seriously thought about would be given a serious lie in return, and then I would go vote for the Australian Sex Party anyway.
gregorian is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 03:48 PM   #87

Earl_of_Rochester's Avatar
Scoundrel
€ Member of the Year €
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Perambulating in St James' Park
Posts: 11,057

The right to vote should definitely be limited, I know some particularly thick people who shouldn't be trusted with such responsibility, at least not in equal measure as others anyway. There should be a politics exam taken before franchise is given, imho, just to ensure the voter actually understands the demographic process and what each party stands for.
Earl_of_Rochester is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 03:17 AM   #88

The Ghost of Crazy Horse's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Jan 2011
From: Berlin, MD.
Posts: 385

All I ask is that you have a high school diploma. The bigger issue is the education system in the US. We need to reintroduce civics in school and stronger history classes. We also need to lift the cap on the House and use the constitutional required amount of representatives. Repeal the 17th amendment as well. Lastly, abolish super PAC's and the electoral college. We do those things and we will see, educated and informed citizenry and a greater voter turn out, more political parties, more fair representation, less corruption and a more responsive, functional government. Until then, things will just get worse each election cycle.
The Ghost of Crazy Horse is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 03:49 AM   #89

infestør's Avatar
Surprise pølse!
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Ẍ
Posts: 3,831
Blog Entries: 3

how about assessing people according to their knowledge on the issues related to country administration (politics)? (assuming the exams will be done in an un-corrupted environment )

Quote:
Originally Posted by infestør View Post
i would advocate a point system rather than a restriction. you take a test and according to your score you are assigned votes. if you don't take the test you have 1 vote by default. if you do 20% then 2, 30% then 3 and so on.
the test should asses people's knowledge of economics, politics, (maybe) their foreign languages etc. i mean questions like:

-what is d'hondt method?
-what is inflation?
-what is budget deficit?
-why is secularism beneficial?
-if 1 lira is 44.42 japanese yen, does that mean that our economy is stronger?
-differences between federation and confederation?
-what is a unitary state?
-for crying out loud, what is a republic?
etc.

the one that does know and the one that does not know are not equal. (someone said this a long time ago)
infestør is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 05:55 AM   #90
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Denmark
Posts: 1,582

Quote:
Originally Posted by infestør View Post
i would advocate a point system rather than a restriction. you take a test and according to your score you are assigned votes. if you don't take the test you have 1 vote by default. if you do 20% then 2, 30% then 3 and so on.
the test should asses people's knowledge of economics, politics, (maybe) their foreign languages etc. i mean questions like:

-why is secularism beneficial?
If you ask questions like this one, I bet you'd get in trouble.

I could aswell ask the opposite question: Why is a theocracy good?

Secularism or not, it is a matter of opinion. (Please note, I'm not in favor of Theocracy like Iran).
philosopher is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology

Tags
limited, vote


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why was the right to vote limited for so long? philosopher European History 13 April 8th, 2011 02:24 AM
Freedom of limited information corrocamino Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 0 August 16th, 2010 06:36 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.