Don't let ignorant people vote

CriticalBill wrote: <snip> IMO, people who don't pay attention to political issues, don't know who is representing them, and have no clue where the country is heading, can only vote based on appearance or what other people tell them to vote for. It's like a blind man judging a beauty contest when all he can go by is the voices.

The dumber our population becomes, the more bad choices it will make.

This is the very essence of what we are trying to address. Well put.

AspenValley wrote:

major bean wrote: If you had read this series of books you could hardly say that these old hillbillies were not qualified to vote.

Not so sure these books do actually prove your point. I've not only read them all, they are all still on my bookshelf. But while I'd agree that the "folk wisdom" of some of these people was priceless, their general knowledge of the world outside of Rabun Gap was pretty, shall we say, garbled. I recall an entire section in one of the books talking about the then-in-the-news moon landings. Asked to comment, it was clear these people weren't even sure what was being referred to by a moon landing (some called the moon "the Mars") and several of them doubted you could land on it because in their opinions it wasn't solid like earth. A few even ventured that it was all a made-up story like a movie. At any rate, that particiular passage in the book convinced me that there were still a lot of people in this country who might be "wise" within their own limited worlds, but definitely weren't in the least bit informed about the actual modern world in which the political stage exists. It would be like having 17th century farmers voting on whether a field like genetic engineering should be regulated. You can't expect people to make good voting decisions on issues they are totally ignorant of.

I suspect knowledge of the world has penetrated a little more deeply into places like Appalachia these days, but I'm by no means sure its safe to assume that a working knowledge of the issues we are grappling with in the modern world are by any means universal in this country.

Edited to add: I found an excerpt from the Foxfire books about the moon landings. Judge for yourself if this guy's folk wisdom alone would make him a voter qualified to understand modern issues.

Much better said than anything I posted. Thank you. Perhaps I ought to read these books myself.

What if the "uninformed" voter dismisses your fervored enthusiasm for an issue as doggerel? Would you still insist that they devote their energies to research your pet interest even though the "ignorant" voter has dismissed it as totally irrelevant?

major bean wrote: What if the "uninformed" voter dismisses your fervored enthusiasm for an issue as doggerel? Would you still insist that they devote their energies to research your pet interest even though the "ignorant" voter has dismissed it as totally irrelevant?

If they dismissed the issue as "irrelevent" or "doggerel" in spite of being ignorant on the topic, I'd dismiss them as doubly ignorant, not just for lack of knowledge of the subjet, but being ignorant enough to dismiss as unimportant something they have no knowledge of. Happy now?

But, they may have ample knowledge on the subject and dismiss it because of that knowledge. But the supporters of the issue would insist that their dismissal of this issue is because they simply do not yet have enough knowledge.

Don't you get it? It is arrogance and elitism. It is a path to tyranny.

major bean wrote: But, they may have ample knowledge on the subject and dismiss it because of that knowledge. But the supporters of the issue would insist that their dismissal of this issue is because they simply do not yet have enough knowledge.

Don't you get it? It is arrogance and elitism. It is a path to tyranny.

If they have ample knowledge they are not ignorant. We are discussing people voting on issues of which they are ignorant. You can be well-informed and still have legitimate differences of opinion. That is not what we are discussing here.

The arrogant and elite are the ones who determine who is ignorant and label them as such. That is the problem with "qualifications" for voting, those in power will determine what is the political correct "knowledge". If you do not agree with the criteria, then you are ignorant and uninformed.

Don't you get it?

major bean wrote: The arrogant and elite are the ones who determine who is ignorant and label them as such. That is the problem with "qualifications" for voting, those in power will determine what is the political correct "knowledge". If you do not agree with the criteria, then you are ignorant and uninformed.

Don't you get it?

I gotta agree here, ignorance is in the eye of the beholder. Litmus tests on voters is just not doable. I agree that many if not most voters are poorly informed. The price of democracy.

Indeed. The path of exclusion is slippery and steep.

chickaree wrote: Indeed. The path of exclusion is slippery and steep.

I love that saying! So very true. :thumbsup: