Have you ever wonder how the world would be like If only fair, critical think and rational people could vote?
Have you ever wonder how the world would be like If only fair, critical think and rational people could vote?
Source
Socrates was a man who wandered the streets of Athens questioning people on different subjects, he believed that reason could be reached through dialogue and questioning (Socratic Irony and Mayeutics) he never wrote anything and what is known about him are the interpretations of his discussions in Plato's dialogues and writings. In the sixth book of the famous Republic, Plato refers to a debate held by Socrates with his brother Adeimantus. This discussion was based on the functions of the ideal state. At one point in the discussion Socrates asks Adeimantus:
Who would you prefer to have control of a ship at sea? A group of men whose maritime knowledge is nil? Or a well-trained, experienced and educated captain?
When Adeimantus evidently chose the Captain. Socrates used a metaphor regarding the state and asked:
Why then would you let anyone take over the state?
Some of Socrates' objections against democratic governments can also be found in many of Plato's other works. He advocated for the Spartan monarchies because they were usually well run. In other Plato's writings, he indicated that it was regrettable that some societies were able to appreciate the value of such governments.
Socrates understood the purpose of democracy from the beginning, he never believed that the majority of the population was capable of electing worthwhile leaders. Socrates believed that the majority of the population was not smart enough to have a democratic government. And he was right, in the history of mankind, it has been more the bad leaders we have chosen than the ones who really made a significant change for progress.
Democracy does NOT work
Democracy does NOT workRationally, the problem of democracy is not the system, it is the same case of feudalism, monarchy and any other form of government, they are systems designed in what Plato defines as the world of ideas, therefore utopias. The problem with democracy is the people. The majority of the population does not know how to use the system because the people themselves are irrational, ignorant and disinterested.
Democracy does not take into account people's personal interests, it simply takes the collective good out of it, ignoring the selfish nature of human beings. When it comes to going to the polls, all people do not seek the collective interest, all people seek according to their needs. If you receive the state pension, you will vote to keep or increase it. If you're a civil servant, you won't vote for budget cuts. If you're a teacher, you'll vote for a better salary. Ideologically all people want the collective good of society, but people only focus on everything that directly affects them, therefore, the more interests a person has the more subjective and irrational issue is.
Source
Democracy also promotes the creation of bureaucratic organizations, political lobbies and encourages the use of populist rhetoric. Populists always attract the majority of the electorate: illiterate, ignorant and uneducated people, who are used to blame any factor for their misfortunes. If the majorities of voters in a country were not so ignorant and did not have such an illogical desire to solve problems as quickly as possible, they would question their candidates more about the implementation of their projects, and they would probably find that there was no concrete or logical basis for the nonsense they put forward. If this were the case, many countries in the world would have a very different president today, and the entire political, economic and social course of the country would be different and better.
What should we do about it?
What should we do about it?It may sound shocking at first, but in reality, people are so used to their partial rights and freedoms that even the simplest limitation would sound totally totalitarian and despot to them. People are free to vote for whatever they want or even not to vote. But not only can erudite, intelligent, knowledgeable and competent people vote, but everyone should since it is a right.
It is essential to start making changes not only in our system but also in the worldview of people. If a plumber or taxi driver needs a license to practice his profession, why should people vote without any idea of what they are doing?
A test is needed, not one that excludes the whole of society from voting, but ensures that voters have an understanding of what they will be doing during elections. The right to vote would belong to everyone, but first people must prove that they are rational, critical thinkers and knowledgeable about their country's political and economic system.
There is a reason to believe that the implementation of a test would cause any problems, on the contrary people, would be more motivated to discern what is right and what is wrong according to their worldview. More and more people are now advocating the idea of implementing a pre-voting test, such as conservative columnist Ann Coulter and current U.S. Congresswoman Tom Tancredo.
Source
Promoting such test will require a revolution in the education sector. But that's already a topic for another post.
Voting in an election carries with it a criterion and a skill, it is not a matter of intuition where an irresponsible and uneducated person can take charge - Socrates
Voting in an election carries with it a criterion and a skill, it is not a matter of intuition where an irresponsible and uneducated person can take charge - Socrates
|
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.” ― Winston S. Churchill 🔰BLACKLIBERTARIO🔰
|
Although I agree with you on certain aspects of what you wrote, who would write such a test. What would their level of understanding need to be? Would we then need a test to test those who wrote that test?
I agree that today, many elections have become nothing more than popularity contests, or contests between people who yell the most, but I am not sure that a test is the answer. Not that I know what the answer is however.
He haves two options, as we have made tests for universities admission we would do the same. A test that requires the only understanding of the situation and that focuses on the critical thinking process of the person and that discriminate how gullible a person is.
The second option might be the use of artificial intelligence, nowadays we can use artificial intelligence for many things, why wouldn't we use some codes so that the computer could judge how gullible a person is and how much understanding of the political situation a person has.
This is all true and valid but it would all come down, eventually, to a few who would decide who could vote. I do agree that there are far too many people who don't understand or care about "WHY" they are voting. They vote because they are angry. They are not voting to make anything better. A test to vote, I feel, would not solve the problem you raise, which is a good point.
I totally understand what you mean, but it has been proven that the voting as a right is no longer working. Therefore we should try something new that has not been implemented. Nowadays we have the power and the capacity to educate the whole population.
So the creation of a test will push people to keep their rights (is not a right but a privilege) So they will start getting information about the topics, that's why I would like to change the education system so that we thaught kids to be as less guilliable as posible.
To be honest, as a venezuelan I have seen what ignorance has done to my country. The same standart is spreading all over the world. Especifically in the developed nations.
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by BlackLibertario from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, someguy123, neoxian, followbtcnews, and netuoso. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows. Please find us at the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
If you would like to delegate to the Minnow Support Project you can do so by clicking on the following links: 50SP, 100SP, 250SP, 500SP, 1000SP, 5000SP.
Be sure to leave at least 50SP undelegated on your account.