nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Should people have to pass an I.Q. test to vote?

silent gav

Pretty self explanatory. Would the country be in a better or worse place if people had to get a certain level in an I.Q. Test before they were eligible to vote?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

osarusan

Only if the politicians have to pass one too.

Lau2976

silent gav wrote: »

Pretty self explanatory. Would the country be in a better or worse place if people had to get a certain level in an I.Q. Test before they were eligible to vote?

I would say the same position really. A lot of people don't read up on policies, etc and just go with the loyalty vote regardless of IQ.

SparkySpitfire

osarusan wrote: »

Only if the politicians have to pass one too.

God knows they need some sort of qualification apart from a H.Dip.

The Backwards Man

I think one question should be asked of all the electorate.

Have you ever posted a comment on the Journal.ie?

If yes, no voting card for you.

Lau2976

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

God knows they need some sort of qualification apart from a H.Dip.

Politics or relevant to their ministers position!

Molester Stallone II

"Do you agree with Sinn Fein's fiscal policies?"
Yes?.......back on the monkey island at Fota with you, no need for an IQ test

Buona Fortuna

silent gav wrote: »

Pretty self explanatory. Would the country be in a better or worse place if people had to get a certain level in an I.Q. Test before they were eligible to vote?

End up a bit like the way people get into the Seanad?:mad:

ClovenHoof

Civil Servants should be banned from voting. A government should not be allowed to vote for itself.

dodderangler

Certainly should for driving cuz there's serious amount of idiots behind the wheel nowadays

hfallada

You will generally find its only the educated middle class that vote in this country. Well its the case in Dublin city, where some of the wealthy suburbs will have massive turnouts, while no one in the inner city votes

Mr. G

No. It would not be a fair democracy then. And corruption would make it that some get higher IQs than others. It's a democracy we have. I say leave it alone tbh.

Kevin McCloud

The Backwards Man wrote: »

I think one question should be asked of all the electorate.

Have you ever posted a comment on the Journal.ie?

If yes, no voting card for you.

Or people who have more than 500 posts per year of registration.

Peregrine

No, that would be pointless.

But the idea of passing a civics test before voting might be worth discussing.

Son Of A Vidic

Molester Stallone II wrote: »

"Do you agree with Sinn Fein's fiscal policies?"
Yes?.......back on the monkey island at Fota with you, no need for an IQ test

One only needs to cast a glance at the incumbent clowns in governement. To realise that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

[Deleted User]

The Backwards Man wrote: »

I think one question should be asked of all the electorate.

Have you ever posted a comment on the Journal.ie?

If yes, no voting card for you.

What if you use The Journal specifically for trolling? Where do we stand?

Sheldons Brain

Perhaps an IQ restriction for Boards.ie would help.

feargale

Maybe it's time for one serious response here. The only country I've ever heard of having something like this was pre-WWI Serbia which had a literacy test. No, there shouldn't be an IQ test for voters. Who sets the test? How can it be objective? Would you carry that to its logical conclusion and give, say, Einstein 100 votes? It's a throwback to the days when the franchise was limited to property owners. And it is a negation of democracy. Why should an illiterate labourer who does an honest day's work have no say in the running of his country while a shady, speculating banker has a vote? The Germans in the 1920s were considered by many to be the best educated people on the planet. How smartly did they vote? Neither knowledge nor intelligence equate to wisdom.
As a university graduate I have a vote in Seanad elections but I would abolish that privilege too. Democracy means one person, one vote, and anything else is a recipe for conflict.

tobsey

ClovenHoof wrote: »

Civil Servants should be banned from voting. A government should not be allowed to vote for itself.

Civil servants are forbidden from engaging in political activity with any party for that exact reason. Given that the government changes at least every 5 years when civil servants work for 40+ sort of goes against what you're saying too.

gypsy79

Your vote should be related to how much tax you pay. Maybe 1 vote per 10k a year with a max of 3. People on social welfare shouldnt be allowed vote, end of

dlouth15

It should be linked to paying your water charge.

gypsy79

dlouth15 wrote: »

It should be linked to paying your water charge.

That certainly would be a way to get a lot of the vermin out of the voting pool alright

UCDVet

The point of giving everyone the opportunity to vote, is that it allows each person to become their own advocate. A society that only allows intelligent people to vote would potentially not act in the best interests of everyone.

Same deal with letting rich people's votes count for more.

The only thing that I would support (at least in theory) is requiring people to answer incredibly basic questions about either the people they are voting for or about the issue they are voting on. Sadly, in practice, that wouldn't work either as half the time you can't get a straight answer saying what a politician actually intends to do (beyond fluff everyone supports) and half the information we have on the issues are wrong or misrepresented.

UCDVet

feargale wrote: »

Maybe it's time for one serious response here. The only country I've ever heard of having something like this was pre-WWI Serbia which had a literacy test. No, there shouldn't be an IQ test for voters. Who sets the test? How can it be objective? Would you carry that to its logical conclusion and give, say, Einstein 100 votes? It's a throwback to the days when the franchise was limited to property owners. And it is a negation of democracy. Why should an illiterate labourer who does an honest day's work have no say in the running of his country while a shady, speculating banker has a vote? The Germans in the 1920s were considered by many to be the best educated people on the planet. How smartly did they vote? Neither knowledge nor intelligence equate to wisdom.
As a university graduate I have a vote in Seanad elections but I would abolish that privilege too. Democracy means one person, one vote, and anything other than democracy is a recipe for conflict.

Not disagreeing - but - it would be very easy for the test to be objective. Every question on the test should have a single correct answer. That's a perfectly objective test.

UCDVet

dlouth15 wrote: »

It should be linked to paying your water charge.

Eh - I'm trying to pay, but Irish Water won't tell me if I'm a customer or not

Matt_Trakker

Absolutely yes.

Ridiculous that some pea-brained shinner Celtic-jersey-wearing scumbag who left school at 14 has the same power to influence politics as those who've completed higher education and actually know about how the world works.

Same goes for politicians.

And politicians who have cabinet roles must have at least a docterate/PhD in that field.

dlouth15

How would you weed out the geeks - shut-ins who have intelligence but don't know how to apply it?

lazybones32

IQ tests are only a measure of how well you did on that exam, not a true measure of human intelligence -which has seven different areas.

We already live in a system where those in power think they are smarter than the little people...

Don Kedick

Well you have to ask serious questions about the I.Q of people that have voted for FF or FG for the last few decades.

bnt

Where would you draw the pass/fail line? 80? 70? How would that work, politically?

A slightly more consistent cutoff could be something like "2 standard deviations below the mean", but then you'd have to explain what that means to people with IQs 2 standard deviations below the mean. :eek:

Gannicus

silent gav wrote: »

Pretty self explanatory. Would the country be in a better or worse place if people had to get a certain level in an I.Q. Test before they were eligible to vote?

I'd prefer if they had to pass one to drive.