Amerika

[Cantousent]

Sure have a SAT and cognitive behaviour test, and any other psychometric test deemed necessary, but it is unconscionable for a person who has never served in the military to send people out to their deaths.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I profoundly disagree.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I second. Apart from the fact that Commissar and I would be full citizens, I have to say that the civilian government must be the highest authority. Of course, Starship Troopers required that the government must be civilian comprised of folks who had served. Intriguing, but I don't like it.

 

For good or ill, I'm for democracy. Meritocracy is great and all, but I'll take my lumps and stick with the republic.

[User Name]

Man this is totally not what i had in mind when I started the topic.

[213374U]

Of course, Starship Troopers required that the government must be civilian comprised of folks who had served.

That's the quid of the question. It'd be interesting to try, at any rate.

[Cantousent]

Well, Name, your name is a lot easier to read now. I didn't realize a member could change names.

 

Okay, well, thread evolution and all. It's virtually impossible to avoid some shift in the conversation, and this one seems related at least, unlike most of the spam I see creep into thread. Still, if you'd like to get us back on task, steer the conversation and I'll try to keep your original topic in mind.

[metadigital]

Man this is totally not what i had in mind when I started the topic. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What did you have in mind?

[SteveThaiBinh]

I take it your point is that the test is arbitrary and open to abuse?

That's part of it, yes. However, I also mean that this idea is a step backward. The test is of course not about granting rights to those who pass, it's about denying rights to those who fail on the grounds that they will ultimately get a better deal from a more effective, high-IQ government. It's a patrician solution which I think history shows has failed. Democracies treat their people better than dictatorships because the people have power, and the politicians have some reason to fear their exercising that power. I suspect your system will ultimately turn into an abusive nightmare, with those who failed the test reduced to slavery.

 

I'd like to see a survey of politicians that showed a correlation between IQ and effective government. I'd like to see an indicator for effective government, if it comes to that. The very concept of what good governance means is contested; that is why we need democracy to resolve it.

[Archmonarch]

Well, Name, your name is a lot easier to read now.  I didn't realize a member could change names.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

They can not. Different account, same avatar.

[213374U]

Democracies treat their people better than dictatorships because the people have power, and the politicians have some reason to fear their exercising that power.

Which is the biggest flaw of democracy as well, with politicians never doing anything that will remove them from power, even if it needs to be done, for fear of losing that power.

[Archmonarch]

Which is the biggest flaw of democracy as well, with politicians never doing anything that will remove them from power, even if it needs to be done, for fear of losing that power.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Another large flaw is that the use of the veto power is determined solely by the president's own conscience, indeterminate of popular opinion or necessity, i.e., there is no effective check or balance for the president. Impeachment has more to do with criminal behavior than fallacious judgement.

[Walsingham]

Who defines the test? Service is fine, but if your object is to risk life and limb I can tell you all service duties aren't created equal. Moreover, I hate to say it but the military doesn't turn you into clean-jawed right-thinking honest folk. You crazy fascists! Military training and military service expose you to certain experiences. That's all. How you turn out is another business entirely.

 

However, I do agree that some kind of rite of passage into the electorate is a good idea. If only so people valued their right to vote more.

 

Personally I'd rather keep military stuff in the hands of keen professionals, and the hordes of stinkabouts that constitute the general public in some other national endeavour. Community construction, care, and education projects spring to mind. You can keep it tough, gritty, and actually teach people useful skills. Not just how to kill. Which in our well-run state should be a rare necesssity.

[Cantousent]

You can keep it tough, gritty, and actually teach people useful skills. Not just how to kill. Which in our well-run state should be a rare necesssity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Indeed!

[SteveThaiBinh]

Which is the biggest flaw of democracy as well, with politicians never doing anything that will remove them from power, even if it needs to be done, for fear of losing that power.

Perhaps so. Democracy is good at avoiding the big mistakes (famine, slavery, genocide), but not always so good at getting the 'little' things like education and the economy right. I'll still take it over any alternative, though.

 

However, I do agree that some kind of rite of passage into the electorate is a good idea. If only so people valued their right to vote more.

Agreed. Ceremonies are a good thing (I lived in Asia too long). We need better citizenship education all round.

 

Do we have any Australians or Belgians here? How do we feel about compulsory voting, and fines/jail sentences for people who don't?

[213374U]

Who defines the test? Service is fine, but if your object is to risk life and limb I can tell you all service duties aren't created equal. Moreover, I hate to say it but the military doesn't turn you into clean-jawed right-thinking honest folk. You crazy fascists!    Military training and military service expose you to certain experiences. That's all. How you turn out is another business entirely.

 

However, I do agree that some kind of rite of passage into the electorate is a good idea. If only so people valued their right to vote more.

 

Personally I'd rather keep military stuff in the hands of keen professionals, and the hordes of stinkabouts that constitute the general public in some other national endeavour. Community construction, care, and education projects spring to mind. You can keep it tough, gritty, and actually teach people useful skills. Not just how to kill. Which in our well-run state should be a rare necesssity.

Yeah, I'm quite the fascist. I'm surprised it took folks so long to notice it. But I no longer mind being called that.

 

At any rate, the idea of a compulsory service in exchange for full political privileges is to throw off people that don't really want them that bad. And if they don't, they shouldn't have them, as it obviously shows a worrying lack of civic responsibility. Allowing such people to vote or even enter politics is irresponsible at best, and an invitation for disaster at worst.

 

I agree that not all service duties are equally exerting or risky, but the point is not to ensure that every citizen is a steel-skinned killing machine, but to give a sense of sacrifice for the community and to make people realize that the right to have a voice in the affairs of everyone else is neither free nor guaranteed.

 

I guess that community service would work, too, as the philosophy is the same. But that takes away the equalizing element of serving in the military, and it also neglects the point raised by meta, that nobody should send others to death without even knowing what the army is.

Being thrown out of a voluntary military service in case that the candidate doesn't show enough effort or motivation would apparently be much easier than being kicked out of a social organism, as obviously, the discipline isn't enforced in the same way.

 

But that's just fascist ol' me.

[Volourn]

There should be nothing required to vote in an election other than being a citizen. Period. This idea that you have to 'prove' yourself in order to vote is just plain silly. No one chooses what country they ar eborn from, and those who take up citizenry in a new country usually have to go through some process/test to be grnated citizenry in their new adopted country.

 

Voting is NOT a privelege. It is a right. Anyone who tries to take away that right is spitting on the concept of freedom. I have, or at leats should have the UNDENIABLE right to vote who will 'lead' me, and make important decisions about my life. Period.

 

If you try to take away that right you ar enothing more than a wannabe dicator who doesn't believe in TRUE freedom.

[213374U]

Voting is NOT a privelege. It is a right.

I already admitted I'm a fascist.

 

But voting is not a right. Getting stuff in exchange for nothing is stupid. And with something as important as the right to vote, it's not only stupid, it's dangerous.

 

But hey, you are Volourn. That makes you automatically wrong in anything you post.

[Walsingham]

I _was_ being deliberately over the top in calling you a fascist. I was a little concerned that people might be drifting towards the 'warrior' society ideal. The Zulu used to have a law that said you could not marry or have intercourse until you had 'washed your spear in blood' for the nation. Made the young regiments rather keen to get into battle. Also made them start wars all over the place.

 

Basically I'm saying yes to discipline, yes to learning a little about real hardship, and even yes to risking life and limb. But I'm also suggesting that work service is more constructive (natch) and more conducive to maturity and humility. Military service can be downright immature and also quite cool, if you like getting covered in mud and running around like a pig. Cleaning up after old folks, or tending to cerebral palsy kids, or repainting blocks of flats is tough physically and emotionally, no bullets required. I need hardly point out that work service would be money otherwise spent on having pricvate contractors do the work, probably with no greater enthusiasm.

[213374U]

I _was_ being deliberately over the top in calling you a fascist.

Hey, no problem. I'm not allergic to a bit of truth every now and then.

 

 

I was a little concerned that people might be drifting towards the 'warrior' society ideal. The Zulu used to have a law that said you could not marry or have intercourse until you had 'washed your spear in blood' for the nation. Made the young regiments rather keen to get into battle. Also made them start wars all over the place.

With the difference that this has absolutely nothing to do with denying physiological needs and it would affect the individual's personal rights and life in absolutely no way.

 

 

Basically I'm saying yes to discipline, yes to learning a little about real hardship, and even yes to risking life and limb. But I'm also suggesting that work service is more constructive (natch) and more conducive to maturity and humility. Military service can be downright immature and also quite cool, if you like getting covered in mud and running around like a pig. Cleaning up after old folks, or tending to cerebral palsy kids, or repainting blocks of flats is tough physically and emotionally, no bullets required. I need hardly point out that work service would be money otherwise spent on having pricvate contractors do the work, probably with no greater enthusiasm.

Fair enough, but that still doesn't address the three issues I brought up in my previous post.

[Volourn]

"I already admitted I'm a fascist."

 

Ok. And?

 

 

"But voting is not a right. Getting stuff in exchange for nothing is stupid. And with something as important as the right to vote, it's not only stupid, it's dangerous."

 

1. Voting is a right.

 

2. What do you get stuff for free? Voting is not something that is done for free. You do it for a price. Any laws made through voting (be it through politicians elected or through refenrdums) effects everybody. That's why everybody has the right to vote 'cause laws passed effect you whether you vote or not.

 

3. Taxes. You are the type of person who says 'dumb people can't vote' (ie. dumb people = people you disagree with making it more likely your side will win any vote) yet you would gladly force these 'dumb people' who you say can't vote to pay taxes to cover governemnt expenses. You seem to forget that's one of the major reasons why the US threw Britain and the Queen in the trash. Taxation without representation only leads to trouble. And, no, if I can't vote or at least don't ahve the option to vote the person elected is not my represenative nor should I pay for any bills.

 

 

"But hey, you are Volourn. That makes you automatically wrong in anything you post."

 

Really? This is true? So, if I were to say that NumbersU is correct that would be automatically wrong? R00fles!

 

 

Your logic is very poor, and its the thing that revolutions are made of.

 

 

 

Voting is a right. It's a right as its one of the few ways outside of violence that one can keep their freedom, and have a say on how they will be governed. If someone CHOOSES not to vote that's one thing; but forcefully disallowing someone from voting is something dicators who don't care about the people would do. It also makes new groups called 'second class citizens' where one group will get all the benefits of society while the other side gets trashed and thrown in the gutter, and get leftovers f they're lucky.

 

Even the best of dmeocratic/free countries have major problems when it comes to true freedom. Yoru type of proposal makes it much, much, much worse.

[Walsingham]

Tired. Going to sleep. Apologies for missing extant points. If you want me to get them tomorrow please bullet them for my poor brain.

[213374U]

1. Voting is a right.

It is. It shouldn't be.

 

 

2. What do you get stuff for free? Voting is not something that is done for free. You do it for a price. Any laws made through voting (be it through politicians elected or through refenrdums) effects everybody. That's why everybody has the right to vote 'cause laws passed effect you whether you vote or not.

You don't do anything to earn the right to vote. Therefore, you are getting stuff for free. Laws, however, are necessary for society not to crumble, but you can go live under a rock if you wish. It's not a matter of "I trade you the right to vote in exchange for you submitting to my rules".

 

 

3. Taxes. You are the type of person who says 'dumb people can't vote' (ie. dumb people = people you disagree with making it more likely your side will win any vote) yet you would gladly force these 'dumb people' who you say can't vote to pay taxes to cover governemnt expenses. You seem to forget that's one of the major reasons why the US threw Britain and the Queen in the trash. Taxation without representation only leads to trouble. And, no, if I can't vote or at least don't ahve the option to vote the person elected is not my represenative nor should I pay for any bills.

Where did I mention dumb people? In fact I'm against a system that prevents "dumb" people from voting. You just pulled that out of your ass, as usual, to make me look like something I'm not, that is, a hypocrite.

And voting has nothing to do with taxes, as people that couldn't vote would still have rights to use public roads or benefit from firemen and police services. Try to make some sense with real (not invented) points next time, please.

 

 

Really? This is true? So, if I were to say that NumbersU is correct that would be automatically wrong? R00fles!

No, that's the exception that proves the rule.

 

 

Your logic is very poor, and its the thing that revolutions are made of.

Volourn actually questioning other people's logic? That's HILARIOUS. Too bad this isn't a comedy thread.

 

 

If someone CHOOSES not to vote that's one thing; but forcefully disallowing someone from voting is something dicators who don't care about the people would do. It also makes new groups called 'second class citizens' where one group will get all the benefits of society while the other side gets trashed and thrown in the gutter, and get leftovers f they're lucky.

No one is disallowing anyone from voting. Only requiring them to prove they are willing to give something in exchange for that privilege and ensuring that people have a civic sense and the capacity to put aside their own pursuits for some time to help the community they live in. Obviously this last point is alien to you.

 

 

Even the best of dmeocratic/free countries have major problems when it comes to true freedom. Yoru type of proposal makes it much, much, much worse.

You obviously fail to understand the concept of freedom.

[Volourn]

"You obviously fail to understand the concept of freedom. Luckily for everyone, you are insignificant."

 

Next unjustified personal attack like this will be reported. thank you for your co-operation in making this a freidnly,a nd safe environemnt.

 

As for the rest of your post, voting is a right. You shouldn't have to 'prove' yourself to have a right. Lobbing up between those who heave earned' the right or not is a way to divide a voting populace even furtehr which helps no one. All you'd get is revolution after revolution.

 

The right to vote is one of the only ways to show one's disapproval of how they ar ebeing governed. It's ncie that you think you feel the right to taxe people who you wouldn't be allowed to vote meaning if a politician comes up fo election, and wants to tax a certain amount more (or less); someone can't at least have a say of whetehr or not they feel they should be taxed that much.

 

Everyone should ahve a right to have a say on how much they are taxed. Currently, the only real way to have that say is through voting for various candidates. And, taxes is just one issue.

 

Voting is a right. This is undisputable. No voting allowed on this issue. LOL

[metadigital]

Who defines the test? Service is fine, but if your object is to risk life and limb I can tell you all service duties aren't created equal. Moreover, I hate to say it but the military doesn't turn you into clean-jawed right-thinking honest folk. You crazy fascists!    Military training and military service expose you to certain experiences. That's all. How you turn out is another business entirely.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Never said the contrary. If you read my post, I was not advocating the teaching of killing to every citizen as part of a good education, I was focusing on the mandatory and compulsory skills learnt in working with others, not chosen by you, in a command structure. A society. Sure some people won't get it. But at least 98% of people will (excluding those sociopaths that cannot) gain empathy for their fellow citizens.

 

Who knows, maybe the next great civilizational progression will come out of such an engine.

However, I do agree that some kind of rite of passage into the electorate is a good idea. If only so people valued their right to vote more.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Perfect. The problem is that now, everyone who won the freedom of "the free world" is dead, so noone values it as much as those who have gone before.

 

"Remeber, they gave their todays, for your tomorrows."

Personally I'd rather keep military stuff in the hands of keen professionals, and the hordes of stinkabouts that constitute the general public in some other national endeavour. Community construction, care, and education projects spring to mind. You can keep it tough, gritty, and actually teach people useful skills. Not just how to kill. Which in our well-run state should be a rare necesssity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hurricane Katrina demonstrates the real use of a military force in a democracy: a rigorous command structure and a inexhaustible work force to attack large-scale problems. Not killing. Armies are not just for war.

[213374U]

ELDAR EDIT: Behave, Mr. numbers.

 

 

As for the rest of your post, voting is a right. You shouldn't have to 'prove' yourself to have a right. Lobbing up between those who heave earned' the right or not is a way to divide a voting populace even furtehr which helps no one. All you'd get is revolution after revolution.

It is not a right. It is a political privilege. Until you understand this fundamental difference, you won't be able to make any solid points in this debate.

 

 

The right to vote is one of the only ways to show one's disapproval of how they ar ebeing governed. It's ncie that you think you feel the right to taxe people who you wouldn't be allowed to vote meaning if a politician comes up fo election, and wants to tax a certain amount more (or less); someone can't at least have a say of whetehr or not they feel they should be taxed that much.

Sure. All they have to do is earn the privilege. It's there for everyone to grab.

 

 

Everyone should ahve a right to have a say on how much they are taxed. Currently, the only real way to have that say is through voting for various candidates. And, taxes is just one issue.

As I said, you can always go live under a rock, if you don't wish to be part of society. Otherwise, you must contribute to maintain the basic services that you benefit from, regardless of whether or not you can vote. You seem to have the strange notion that rising taxes is a whimsical decision based on the next car model the Senator wants to buy. It's not. It's based on the needs of society as a whole. That includes you.

 

 

Voting is a right. This is undisputable. No voting allowed on this issue. LOL

Um, yeah. Voting is a right. I already stated so in the previous post. [reading comprehension: failed]

 

What it should be however, is a different matter.

[Volourn]

"But you are insignificant, even if mommy tells you otherwise. Deal with it. Feel free to report me now."

 

Your wish is my command.

 

None of this changes that voting is a right. A right that many have died for so we cna enjoy it. That right will always be there as long as freedom loving peoplemake sure everyone enjoys it even if you feel that some people aren't worthy just because they disagree with you or don't fit in some 'voters' mode. everyone in our freedomc ountries have to do with the plusses of citizenship and the negatives. One of the positives is the undeniable right to vote; one of the negatives is obeying laws that you don't really agree with it.

 

That's a part of life. Let's deal with it.

[Cantousent]

Remember the debate. Don't start flaming. This is a kinder, gentler forum. ...Or something like that.