Only above average IQ people should vote????

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Only above average IQ people should vote????

What is everyones thought on that? Please keep an open mind here.

I read on the Raelian page (www.rael.org) they think that only people of above average intelligence should elect the government.

Just curious what other think about it.




posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:20 AM
link   
well if that happened all the republicans would be run out of government in the US
so i'm for it!



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
well if that happened all the republicans would be run out of government in the US
so i'm for it!


Nor would the Democrats ever see the office.

Wed actually see new party system. A combination of positive conservativism and controled liberalism. Centrism.

Its not a bad idea really.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:29 AM
link   
What's considered the 'cut-off', an IQ of 100, 50, 150? Besides, the IQ test is flawed. Further, look at all the [insert political party here] that came out and voted in '04.

Screw Jim Crow!



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Well, poonchang, I guess that would all have to be worked out if this was a reality. I think the "Average" IQ is 100...so I would think that would be the starting point.

Good point about the IQ test...whose IQ test would it be...the dems or the repubs?

Makes you wonder who would be in office today.

And what about other countries whose vote we are trying to have influence over....how would we measure the IQ?

Would you need a IQ/ID?


[edit on 1/20/2005 by Cherish]



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:39 AM
link   
I agree with this as i have a slightly above iq haha
Democracy is based apon the majoirty vote, yet if the majority of people are ignorant then what does that say for democracy?
People with a iq of above lets say 125 should be aloud to vote, also i dont think people who are pious should be aloud to vote, because there vote is soley going to be based along their beliefs.
If both of these were in place in america, as stated above the republicans wouldnt of been voted in, most likely it would of been the liberal party. Thats my above average iq assumption.

Yes the iq test is flawed, but we do not have a test that exams peoples level of inteligence any closer than the iq test.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:40 AM
link   
If only above average IQ people are allowed to vote, then maybe people should only be allowed to vote for above average IQ politicians.

So thats Bush out for starters.
Unfortunately we'd still be stuck with Blair so maybe that idea is flawed too.




posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:44 AM
link   
Hey, pisky....i love it!

Only above average IQ people can run for office and only the above average can vote for them.

That would leave a certain "C' average yale cheerleader out of running for office, I am thinking!



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:48 AM
link   
Do u really think that someone to get into the american whitehouse can have a below average iq? Bush may seem like a dimwit....but i can promise he isnt.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 02:52 AM
link   
I wish that I could agree with you on bush not being a dimwit...but I can't!



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 03:19 AM
link   
As much as the idea appeals to be on "gut" level, I don't think such a thing would be fair. First of all, I don't think an IQ test is a accurate measure of intelligence. Most psycholgists don't. Then you'd have the problem of people rigging the test, cheating, the tests being skewed towards one culutre or region, et cetera, et cetera....

And drfunk, I think alot of supposedly "smart" people would still make dumb voting decisions. Smart people can be fooled and manipulated as easily as the less intellligent... look at Nazi Germany.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cherish
I read on the Raelian page (www.rael.org) they think that only people of above average intelligence should elect the government.

I wasn't able to find this. Do you have a link?

Doing a google, I saw some references to this policy suggestion on other sites.

From what I've been reading, it seems like Raëlism is just Eugenics spiced up with space aliens.

Speaking of Raël, am I the only person who picks up a sort of Charles Manson vibe from this guy?



Edit: Yes, that's a swastika inside that magen david. Talk about your irony.


[edit on 1/20/2005 by Majic]



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Utter lunacy. Society is more than hierarchal enough as it is. It is riddled with ample inequality already without implementing this idiotic idea that democracy should only be open for people deemed to be of 'above average' intelligence.

Lets hypothetically suggest that this nightmarish scenario is implemented, and 30% of the population of our hypothetical nation are stripped of their voting rights - and effetively therefore stripped of their citizenship and place in a democratic society. What then? What does that make them? Automatons? Slaves? what?

Do you expect these people to contribute to society any further? work? pay taxes? happily carry on with their lives? after you've expelled them from society based on their IQ??!

What do you do with these dissenters then? Put them in prison? worse?

Its ironic that people can be conceited enough to advocate a system where democracy exists only for a chosen 'intelligent' proportion, without being able to consider the concequences of sych a system, or the basic rights of a fellow human. Dont be so partronising towards these people either; someone of below average intelligenge is quite able to put a cross next to the political party that best represents their views and beliefs, and furthermore have just as much right as anyone to have those views, and to have them represented in a democracy.

If people are prepared to judge someone and devalue their worth - let alone question their place in society - based on an attribute that is determined pre-birth and in early childhood, then its a sad state of affairs indeed I'm affraid. I cant say much more without mentioning Prince Harry's party wear...



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic

Speaking of Raël, am I the only person who picks up a sort of Charles Manson vibe from this guy?







Possibly, but I'm also getting a Barry Gibb from the Bee Gees vibe.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 04:23 AM
link   
That is a good idea. That would mean that there'd be less stupid people to cast ballots to offset my ballot!

Now, if we'd couple the intelligence test with the requirement that you have a stake in the country, the Democratic party would all but implode, more than it is now.


Hold on. Scratch that idea. If only my peers (intelligent people) were allowed to vote, they would do the only logical thing: Elect me king for life. Thanls, but no thanks; I have better things to do with my time.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 04:37 AM
link   
Doing great in IQ tests doesn't make humans necessarily emphatic, caring for others, I bet many Ayatollah Khomeiny was a pretty intelligent scholared person.

Having above intelligent people vote could lead to a more sensible or to a tecnofacist soceity as well.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cherish
Only above average IQ people should vote????

In that case only geniuses should run for office.. of course that would put the puppet masters out of business though.
There are several different types of intelligence.. the most standard tests require a certain amount of education to reach the highest scores.. which would pretty much stop everyone that can't afford one from voting. The ones 'smart enough' to vote.. even if they were Eintein [who probably had dispraxia/aspergers anyway] wouldn't have much of a clue about how the rest of the world works outside the class they were born into.. so they wouldn't have a clue what is best for everyone. But at least they could think they do and that to them would be the most important thing.

Just elitist bollox.. the only people who truly think the standard tests are infallible are Mensa.. [highest number gets to sit in the big chair] and obviously the Raeliens. Interesting connection between the two.


[edit on 20-1-2005 by riley]



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 07:13 AM
link   
Ooooohhhh yeah thats going to work, is there going to be a legitimate paper trail? When you end up having a bunch of math savants and science freaks running your foreign relations and intel operations u can kiss your ass goodbye.

lets not forget the diversion of all gov funds to RnD, the elitist class system, and the new dictatorship powers youve just given the Board of Education/Testing.

Iq doesnt mean anything, let someone earn their rank/job the old fashioned way, by getting there.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Countermeasures
Doing great in IQ tests doesn't make humans necessarily emphatic, caring for others...



Good point, and very pertinent too considering what the advocates of this idea are assuming and implying, that is that: -
a) Someone with an IQ score above average is automatically granted the wisdom to be able to make better and more informed political desicions.
b) People with a below average IQ score do not make a worthwhile contribution to society or their community, and therefore do not deserve to take part in a democratic process.
c) People with below average IQ are, without exception, incapable of making a rational or informed decision.
d) The views and beliefs of people with below average IQ are worthless.

These assumptions are completely erroneous, and do not stand up to a minutes critical thinking, or logical reasoning. Consider the definition of democracy, and these assumptions become downright, well, undemocratic, horrible in fact.



Onto another point...

There are a few people suggesting how high the 'bar' should be (100, 125), but how much thought has been put into these figures? And for those who propagate such ideas, how did you arrive at such a figure? Through scientific study? ...
Or by making an irrational or unconsidered guess?
My point here being that your argument is based on the assumption that people of lower IQ are incapable of making a considered and logical decision, when you, in your proclaimed intelligence, have made a decision - although hypothetical - that if implemented would affect millions of people....and how have you picked your nominal IQ figure? Yes, in exactly the way you assume a person of lower IQ would decide upon their vote!



The idea that only people with above average IQ should vote is at best patronising to those with below average IQ, and at worst a fascist nightmare.



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 07:32 AM
link   
The trouble with IQ is it states who is clever, but not at what.

I can honestly boast an IQ of 140+, member of N.H.IQ.S and Mensa both Uk and International, but you will find that most children aged 13-16 read and write better than I do. The only reason my IQ is high is due to pattern recognition and 3D interpretation.

My IQ doesn't actually make me smarter than anyone else, just have a knack with patterns.

I am sure no one would want me in office cause of my IQ when it would take me a week to read an requests they sent in.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join