Friday, November 12, 2004

IQ tests and voters

Alright, I am not saying that either of these are valid. Both of these links were sent to me, and very interesting. Interpret them yourself.

here is some guy who tried to debunk the above, but said he couldn't (and admitted it).

But I don't want/need these stats to back up this argument that I laid out in a previous post. Its simple logic. Half of Americans are below average intelligence. We should not be the decision makers. The decision makers should be one or just a few peope who are EXTREMELY wise, selfless, and moral. It should be a Ben Franklin, a Mark Twain, a Martin Luther King...(Ross Perot??).


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is it right to base a person's right to vote or even other given liberties based on the results of a standardized IQ test or other academic measures? Given some people are capable of learning more/less than others due to genetics or personal fault (drugs, etc...), we live in America and that's the way things work.... period. It's a logical idea to have only the above average brains voting but it's not even plausible or possible to do so. I mean look at the U.S. today we have plenty of demographic divisions (for good or bad) and racism, sexism, north countyism, etc... Do we need to create another one due to what an IQ test reveals about a person? Voting is not hard. You have agendas you vote on. Whichever agenda/party/platform is more favorable to you personally that's how you vote. Voting is not brain surgery. Some people vote certain ways for the wrong reasons (like ignorance, family pressure, stereotypes), but they are just as capable of making the RIGHT DECISION FOR THEMSELF if they actually think about it. So someone w/ a lower IQ is just as capable as someone w/ a high IQ to figure out what will benefit them personally w/ the outcome of an election. Obviously a retard would not, but you get it. So instead of showing your IQ card at voter registration, there should be an effort to let people know the issues at hand unbiased. Laziness is the main problem w/ elections. People don't do their homework, myself included, before they rail a chad at the voting booth. I don't think you should be allowed to vote if you are uneducated about the voting matter at hand. For instance i was a jackoff come election time and voted to fire all of the judges from office in st. louis. Aside from the fact i thought that was funny to do i felt dumb as a citizen for not knowing any morsel of information whether or not to retain or get rid of these whigs. Got to get back to work....



Fri Nov 12, 01:52:00 PM EST  
Blogger Greg said...

Maybe democracy is a good idea. After all it has withstood the test of time. I am of course being sarcastic. It has only been around 225 years. Companies have lasted longer.

Our form of democracy is quite similiar to communism. We use the word democracy because it appears to be democracy...just like Russia appeared to be communision. America in fact is ruled as a Kleptocracy and kakistocracy. We just pick the thieves.

In the history of the world, Aristocracy, Theocracy, and whatever the word is for rule by military.

Whether people do their homework or not, the simple fact remains. More than half of any democracy has average or below average intelligence, morals, and judgment. I'm included in that. I should not be a decision maker. Hell I don't even have access to all of the information necessary to make the right decision.

America is also a short term thinking country. People vote based on what is best for them. That is wrong. People should vote based on what is best for the country. I voted for Kerry because he did not start an unmeritted war. Bush by far will do more for me. But I feel he is bad for the country in the long run.

The decision makers should be the wisest, most selfless, and most moral citizens. Mark Twain, Ben Franklin, etc. People that do what is right for the sake of what is right. And thsoe people are smart enough to solve problems. I don't want to see my leader. I want my leader in a room solving problems.

Sun Nov 14, 05:52:00 PM EST  
Blogger tony said...

The war is so we can be safe in the long run. we are getting rid of people who are bad. You may not agree. Fact is though Saddam took billions from his people, more like 20 billion to give you a better idea. What did he support? Terrorists, look at his sons. It's a shame they are gone, man they weren't doin anything wrong.(sarcastic) Only the smartest should have the power? oh that wont cause even more problems. SOCIALISM DOES NOT WORK! the sweedish are the most "social" country in the world, what are they doing? leaving, gettin the hell out of there. oh and go to canada where their unemployment is near 10%, but thats no indication of good government or economy is it (sarcastic).

Mon Nov 15, 07:11:00 PM EST  
Blogger tony said...

i forgot to metnion that stats thing. that was a hoax. those numbers were faked. they did the same thing in 2000 and people blew it up like everthing else and spread it like it was true. i know you said off thebat that they may no be correct, but people are going to look at them and see nothing else that argues it so of course they are going to belive it.

Mon Nov 15, 07:17:00 PM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ben Franklin a moral leader? Ha! That's simply just another american myth, or legend. similar to G. Washington chopping down the cherry tree. Wise? yes. Moral and selfless? not exactly, don't get me wrong he had his moments, however, being an American representative(ambassador) over in France was not one of them. Then again I am being way too picky I guess and am only focusing on a few elements(though they were extremely key ones for the development of this country, arguably). In summation, B. Franklin-not a bad man but just as selfish as anyone else. I realize that this was a huge digression from your actual topic.


Fri Nov 26, 03:33:00 PM EST  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Website Counter
island drafting and technical institute