anyways i agree, the human being is the problem. However if those willing to learn and then do the test to be able to vote that would root out those who were unwilling but who would normally vote. sort of like evolution, taking them out of the gene pool, or in this case out of the voting pool.
How would you implement that, practically speaking? Will the test be the same for people of all the ages/social groups? How will you prevent cheating? When, where and how will it be taken?
I saw that vid before. It looks pretty serious. But is that real? :confused: Its just unbelievable. You sure its not acted by those people?
So seriously, is that vid for real?!?
I hope it's not.
Again, what does this video have to do with democracy?
Democracy is a governmental system. Uneducated people are not generated by democracy.
Yea, I agree. ''This is where the american educational system fails'' would have been a better title.
i was saying that it fails because the people voting fail at voting... ie they are not informed and so instead of doing something positive they ultimately are able to vote for someone who is not good.
I can go into a huge debate concerning all things wrong with that statement...
People don't "fail" at voting. They vote the way they see fit. They don't see it the same way you do. Problem is right here.
Democracy does not fail. It can't. It's a term. It's like nature. Or the solar eclipse. They do not fail. They just are. They function exactly as expected.
Bashing a system is a tempter tantrum, which is what you're throwing right now:
"OMG people are stupid democracy is stupid let's do... uh... dunno, I just wanted to say it's stupid."
Yes, some people have opinions that do not seem to benefit them much. What do you propose? :confused: Or did you just make this thread to complain about human nature?
And how influential is voting, really? How much does a voter have control over who he gets to vote for? Very little. We could go into a debate on that, too.
And the next thing, these people may actually vote for the "right" candidate. They have no say. They are Id, and they are slaves of the media, absolutely. So it's not them who are voting, it's the people who set up their television channels.
this is starting to get really annoying (this is at those who didnt read the thread)
People don't "fail" at voting. They vote the way they see fit. They don't see it the same way you do. Problem is right here.
ima stop you right there... take a seat please (you say: "what why") take a seat please... Do you know who i am? Im chris hansen from dateline NBC on to catch a predator.
anyways its not a matter of seeing the way i do its the matter of them not being able to answer some simple questions correctly. if they could then they can have any opinion they want.. they could vote for riding pink dildos to work everyday to be mandatory... i frankly dont care (though i would be mad...) reiterating my point, its them not knowing some simple facts
*and i am most CERTAINLY not throwing a temper tantrum. I was actually laughing when i made this thread...
So it's not them who are voting, it's the people who set up their television channels.
wrong, i could go on a huge rant but no i wont. simply no that is incorrect.
im all up for a mature discussion as long as you are logical with your responses. I have made my point clear and given reasons in which to back up my claims. however certain elements keep on being nitpicked when i quite clearly made them clear later...
and as i said this is starting to get really annoying
ESPECIALLY since iv already for example answered this bloody point
Democracy does not fail. It can't. It's a term. It's like nature.
sorry for becoming angry but its true.
ok to make it absolutely crystal clear i shall re post what i posted before:
So i suppose democracy in the sense of whoever gets more votes doesn't fail, just the great mass of uneducated humans makes it suffer/not work as well, it degrades the overall goal of democracy which is the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. however when the populace is unable to know whats best for itself it ultimately fails in the goal it set for itself.
Erm, electoral college anyone? The problem with that is you're pretty much making an express lane to corruption via wealth. The only thing that needs to go is the media. Fucking manipulative bastards. Nothing about the election should be televised. It subverts the need to research and leaves everyone feeling like a political savant, when really, they're just a tool.
I think that politicians should be forced to live the life of a monk, totally dedicated to serving his people. He may not have any worldly possessions, he must live within the confides of a monastery (government building). and he must be fed meager rations. This is the best chance we have at creating a utopia not driven by greed but hope and love.
Media is only one part of the problem. The smaller one.
Good education is something every country should aim for but (for "some" reason) always gets worse. Maybe the situation in the US is a little worse because the Media there are even more manipulative than in the rest of the world (not saying its not everywhere, just how much) and exactly because of the lack of education and judgement (to understand when you're being fooled) people look naive or even stupid.
Education is what we should be asking for, not the removal of the Media.
Quote from "Equinox" »
People don't "fail" at voting. They vote the way they see fit. They don't see it the same way you do. Problem is right here.
thats actually a very good point. Its in lack of judgement thats the problem. Democracy was founded in a city. Every citizen was educated and took part in the decision making process. And thats where a good education comes in handy. Because most of the people taking part in this discussion at least are educated to some level.
Democracy does not fail. It can't. It's a term. It's like nature. Or the solar eclipse. They do not fail. They just are. They function exactly as expected.
If by this you mean that the fact that people can be so manipulated and misled to vote for someone thats not good for the job is one of the downsides of Democracy then i'll agree with you on this one too.
So i suppose democracy in the sense of whoever gets more votes doesn't fail, just the great mass of uneducated humans makes it suffer/not work as well, it degrades the overall goal of democracy which is the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. however when the populace is unable to know whats best for itself it ultimately fails in the goal it set for itself.
Well, this is debatable...
Democracy was made up long ago with some idea in mind, and today, that idea no longer applies. Instead of looking at what democracy "should have been" we need to look at what it has become. And in democracy, I do not at all see a system where the needs of many outweigh the needs of the few. I see a seat of manipulators who are balancing between psychological satisfaction of the Id population (the "stupid" people) and the silencing of the Superego population (the middle class).
that didnt negate what i said that is simply your view.
anyways i wont post in here anymore as repeatedly coming back is surely taking months off of my life. and as i have already made my point which is undeniable i shall never venture in here again.
You'll always have idiots. Always. That doesn't mean 'everyone' is an idiot. And that certainly doesn't mean that Democracy is going to fail because of a few idiots.
This thread is epic fail. Not only for it's insinuation, but also for using a completely bias video.
You'll always have idiots. Always. That doesn't mean 'everyone' is an idiot. And that certainly doesn't mean that Democracy is going to fail because of a few idiots.
This thread is epic fail. Not only for it's insinuation, but also for using a completely bias video.
m8 u honestly didnt read or either didnt comprehend this thread (yes i had to post again) iv explained all of what you just said which has in your opinion, debunked what i said...
I don't think it's right. Tests for voting (like this) have been used numerous times in at least American history. Just off the top of my head, they were used to prevent people with lower education from voting (people like blacks and such, who couldn't receive as good of an education as whites because of all manner of issues- this is no longer a problem), IE, people who were forced to do factory jobs and such that didn't require an education. Hard working people. People who knew what it was like to suffer and work. The very people who made our financial spine. People who actually know how the world works- pain and suffering. And they weren't allowed to vote.
Given, they didn't know how the system worked. But no one has to know how it works to vote. We just vote with our morals and choices, and, for the most part, the larger group wins. Whether or not I know how legislation is created, reviewed, reviewed again, rejected, reviewed, and passed in to law does not affect how I think about something I would vote with or against- a policy along the lines of illegal immigration, abortion, gay rights, etc.
Also given, knowledge in any form is good, so, it should be more openly available(more non-biased or non-limited sources) within schools. I believe better education in schools about political processes would be the best solution, but seeing as no one likes learning anything anymore, that doesn't even matter. Until the recession hits rock-bottom for a couple of years and people start to value education more, there isn't much anyone can do.
Also, take in to account whoever filmed that probably edited people out to achieve his or her desired goal. That's the same way media works- they edit out what doesn't help their argument. I'm fairly certain not that many people are as dumb about it. It does depend on location, though. Different groups of people concern themselves with politics to differing degrees.
Just off the top of my head, they were used to prevent people with lower education from voting (people like blacks and such, who couldn't receive as good of an education as whites because of all manner of issues- this is no longer a problem), IE, people who were forced to do factory jobs and such that didn't require an education. Hard working people. People who knew what it was like to suffer and work. The very people who made our financial spine. People who actually know how the world works- pain and suffering. And they weren't allowed to vote.
Don't overdratimise, please. Those people exist everywhere and they're the majority, which is why they are where they are. And they are the last person who knows how anything works.
Just because a person works hard (meh) doesn't mean they know anything about the next president. Most probably, they don't. A person without an education is still a person without an education. We should allow them to get an education before we allow them to vote.
If the world is pain and suffering, there is no point in living. For the Id population, pain and joy are mixed together as outbursts depending on the immediate situation. Those "hard working" people may often be happier than the "smart" people, because they're not responsible for anything they do nor do they see anything beyond "today".
Nobody has pointed out a single flaw in my system, so I will assume it owns democracy. I'm just saying that the answer to greed is selflessness. Selflessness is what we need in our leaders. Monks are the ultimate in that respect. We cant afford to have people in the government that are only looking out for themselves because then who's looking out for us? The problem with our voting system is that our votes mean next to nothing. That's why I feel that voting should be localized, cities and towns should be more independent. Their political makeup should reflect the peoples interests. Unified, not by law, but a common goal. People with different beliefs can work together to create a utopia where we can live by our own rules. The monks would be devoted to carrying out the consensus of their people. Cities would gain reputations that would either attract or repel people so that they can choose the kind of world they want to live in by just moving.
Im not into politics and such at all. But based on what are so many people against communism actually. Isnt it pretty much "utopic" and thus simply and only seen as impossible?
The goal of communism was not achieved. But my point was that people were made to go and try to install it. Although, communism did accomplish a few things, but it was also very broken.
I think communism was most successful in making good observations about the problems of capitalism. It failed however in its solution to those problems. Most political philosophers like Marx though were always good at pointing out the problems of a system. But their solutions to those problems were far too idealistic.
I hope it's not.
Yea, I agree. ''This is where the american educational system fails'' would have been a better title.
People don't "fail" at voting. They vote the way they see fit. They don't see it the same way you do. Problem is right here.
Democracy does not fail. It can't. It's a term. It's like nature. Or the solar eclipse. They do not fail. They just are. They function exactly as expected.
Bashing a system is a tempter tantrum, which is what you're throwing right now:
"OMG people are stupid democracy is stupid let's do... uh... dunno, I just wanted to say it's stupid."
Yes, some people have opinions that do not seem to benefit them much. What do you propose? :confused: Or did you just make this thread to complain about human nature?
And how influential is voting, really? How much does a voter have control over who he gets to vote for? Very little. We could go into a debate on that, too.
And the next thing, these people may actually vote for the "right" candidate. They have no say. They are Id, and they are slaves of the media, absolutely. So it's not them who are voting, it's the people who set up their television channels.
And... ugh... whatever.
ima stop you right there... take a seat please (you say: "what why") take a seat please... Do you know who i am? Im chris hansen from dateline NBC on to catch a predator.
anyways its not a matter of seeing the way i do its the matter of them not being able to answer some simple questions correctly. if they could then they can have any opinion they want.. they could vote for riding pink dildos to work everyday to be mandatory... i frankly dont care (though i would be mad...) reiterating my point, its them not knowing some simple facts
*and i am most CERTAINLY not throwing a temper tantrum. I was actually laughing when i made this thread...
wrong, i could go on a huge rant but no i wont. simply no that is incorrect.
and as i said this is starting to get really annoying
ESPECIALLY since iv already for example answered this bloody point sorry for becoming angry but its true.
ok to make it absolutely crystal clear i shall re post what i posted before:
So i suppose democracy in the sense of whoever gets more votes doesn't fail, just the great mass of uneducated humans makes it suffer/not work as well, it degrades the overall goal of democracy which is the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. however when the populace is unable to know whats best for itself it ultimately fails in the goal it set for itself.
Media is only one part of the problem. The smaller one.
Good education is something every country should aim for but (for "some" reason) always gets worse. Maybe the situation in the US is a little worse because the Media there are even more manipulative than in the rest of the world (not saying its not everywhere, just how much) and exactly because of the lack of education and judgement (to understand when you're being fooled) people look naive or even stupid.
Education is what we should be asking for, not the removal of the Media.
thats actually a very good point. Its in lack of judgement thats the problem. Democracy was founded in a city. Every citizen was educated and took part in the decision making process. And thats where a good education comes in handy. Because most of the people taking part in this discussion at least are educated to some level.
If by this you mean that the fact that people can be so manipulated and misled to vote for someone thats not good for the job is one of the downsides of Democracy then i'll agree with you on this one too.
Democracy was made up long ago with some idea in mind, and today, that idea no longer applies. Instead of looking at what democracy "should have been" we need to look at what it has become. And in democracy, I do not at all see a system where the needs of many outweigh the needs of the few. I see a seat of manipulators who are balancing between psychological satisfaction of the Id population (the "stupid" people) and the silencing of the Superego population (the middle class).
anyways i wont post in here anymore as repeatedly coming back is surely taking months off of my life. and as i have already made my point which is undeniable i shall never venture in here again.
This thread is epic fail. Not only for it's insinuation, but also for using a completely bias video.
CyberPunk RP Nexus
m8 u honestly didnt read or either didnt comprehend this thread (yes i had to post again) iv explained all of what you just said which has in your opinion, debunked what i said...
which it most certainly has not.
I don't think it's right. Tests for voting (like this) have been used numerous times in at least American history. Just off the top of my head, they were used to prevent people with lower education from voting (people like blacks and such, who couldn't receive as good of an education as whites because of all manner of issues- this is no longer a problem), IE, people who were forced to do factory jobs and such that didn't require an education. Hard working people. People who knew what it was like to suffer and work. The very people who made our financial spine. People who actually know how the world works- pain and suffering. And they weren't allowed to vote.
Given, they didn't know how the system worked. But no one has to know how it works to vote. We just vote with our morals and choices, and, for the most part, the larger group wins. Whether or not I know how legislation is created, reviewed, reviewed again, rejected, reviewed, and passed in to law does not affect how I think about something I would vote with or against- a policy along the lines of illegal immigration, abortion, gay rights, etc.
Also given, knowledge in any form is good, so, it should be more openly available(more non-biased or non-limited sources) within schools. I believe better education in schools about political processes would be the best solution, but seeing as no one likes learning anything anymore, that doesn't even matter. Until the recession hits rock-bottom for a couple of years and people start to value education more, there isn't much anyone can do.
Also, take in to account whoever filmed that probably edited people out to achieve his or her desired goal. That's the same way media works- they edit out what doesn't help their argument. I'm fairly certain not that many people are as dumb about it. It does depend on location, though. Different groups of people concern themselves with politics to differing degrees.
That's just my opinion.
Just because a person works hard (meh) doesn't mean they know anything about the next president. Most probably, they don't. A person without an education is still a person without an education. We should allow them to get an education before we allow them to vote.
If the world is pain and suffering, there is no point in living. For the Id population, pain and joy are mixed together as outbursts depending on the immediate situation. Those "hard working" people may often be happier than the "smart" people, because they're not responsible for anything they do nor do they see anything beyond "today".
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs