pull down to refresh

People should take a test before voting, and if they fail, they can't vote!
111 sats \ 10 comments \ @0xbitcoiner 5 Feb ideasfromtheedge
José Maria Pimentel went on a radio show to talk about his course, Critical Thinking. During the conversation, they discussed politics and the topic of informed voting. The discussion on this topic is based on a study conducted in Portugal, but I believe the results wouldn't differ much elsewhere in the world. The study concludes that most people vote without being informed about the candidates or policies. The people who participated in the study were asked whether voters should take a small test before voting, and if they failed, they wouldn’t have the right to vote. As it seems logical, the participants answered that the idea was absurd.
What do you think,? Do you find this idea completely absurd, or do you think it should be implemented?
Outrageous70.0%
This idea should win a novel20.0%
I'm not sure10.0%
10 votes
write
preview
related posts
73 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 5 Feb
Outrageous. The correct answers will just be regime approved narrative, not truth. Can you imagine the question on bitcoin?
reply
30 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner OP 5 Feb
To make it clear, I also don't agree with the test. In the show, they didn't explain how the test would be conducted, so it's possible that if it were implemented, what you mentioned could happen. As for putting this question in the bitcoin context, I also don't think it would make much sense to limit it to those who understand the technology. Bitcoin is for anyone who wants to use it. But if you ask @DarthCoin, I think he might have a different opinion! 🤠
reply
53 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 5 Feb
The South used these in the 19th century, but the results were only enforced against blacks. It's probably a non-starter in America for that reason, alone.
I think it's a fine idea, as long as the test is super objective: i.e. "How many branches of government", "How many senators per state", "Which amendment says ______".
A similar idea, that I've always favored, is making the ballot itself more like a test. Don't include party affiliation next to candidate names, so people actually have to know who they're voting for.
reply
37 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 5 Feb
A similar idea, that I've always favored, is making the ballot itself more like a test. Don't include party affiliation next to candidate names, so people actually have to know who they're voting for.
Kanye West 2028
reply
31 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 5 Feb
No good, the test invariably becomes a feedback loop.
A ballot for everyone with a pulse (in many states even that is optional) doesn't work either though, that just creates harvesting ballots.
Landowner-male voting as a form of stakeholder voting wouldn't be consistent in modern society either, but there's a case to be made for a modernized equivalent: Head of household voting.
Much like tax reporting where you're a dependent or have dependents, and said household gets one bill or credit, the household decides the responsible party for voting. There's organically a leader in each household, if the family recognizes them so to should the state. This is how minors get counted for well, 2 parents 2 kids = household 4 votes.
The left could never be against votes for minors and multiplying the votes of single mothers, right?
reply
14 sats \ 0 replies \ @denlillaapan 5 Feb
Nobody should vote...?
But yes, given that we are; yeah, test is a good screening out of idiots. Problem? Who watches the watchers, i.e., who determines what is good knowledge and what disqualifies a person from voting?
reply
100 sats \ 2 replies \ @Lux 5 Feb
Imagine thinking you are a critical thinker and still think and/or talk about how to vote.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @0xbitcoiner OP 5 Feb
i haven't voted in over 10 years but i don't shy away from a good discussion! Ahahah
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @Lux 5 Feb
If he was a critical thinker, he would talk about the difference between voting and electing, but it takes some critical thinking :)
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @lrm_btc 5 Feb
I think a better alternative is requiring x years of education. But then, can you trust the education system?
reply