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

gypsy79 · 14-11-2014 12:46PM

Grayson wrote: »

Are there studies on that?

I know the average black IQ is lower, but that is because of the environment. White people in the same environment experience the same effects.

Rather than saying black people have a lower IQ it should really be poor people have a lower IQ.

You may be right, it is near impossible to get the definitive parameters for each variable and the cross product

I think the Australian studies are more clear cut and can be explained easier than in the US

StudentDad · 14-11-2014 12:55PM

Sorry OP but restricting the right to vote has to be one of the most regressive notions I've heard in quite a while.

You turn 18, you're allowed vote, simple. Once you go down the road of 'qualified' voting you are on a slippery slope to tyranny.

It's bad enough that sections of the population don't bother voting (for a multitude of reasons). However, that does not abrogate a citizens right to vote. The whole point of it is to ensure equality. One citizen one vote.

SD

DeanAustin · 14-11-2014 01:10PM

They should just ban voting. Democracy doesn't work.

A politician's job should be to do what's right for the country. However, their priority is to get elected which means compromising their beliefs to, where possible, give the electorate what they want.

What's right for the country and public opinion are seldom the same thing.

A shame that so many alternatives to democracy are also deeply flawed.

Leopardhyena · 14-11-2014 01:18PM

gypsy79 wrote: »

We are different races....we are different. These are the facts!

But you cannot say any of this in a world outside anonymous internet boards.

Sad as it may be

Better not mention then that women were found to have lower IQs on average in numerous studies.

I actually vaguely remember reading a theory that their is a trade off between intelligence and penis size.

Peist2007 · 14-11-2014 01:21PM

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.

A literacy test and an IQ test are two different things. The illiterate labourer could have an IQ off the charts. So, you've spectacularly missed the point.

Axel Lamp · 14-11-2014 01:23PM

If you regularly read a tabloid and own a tracksuit for anything other than sporting activities you should only get half a vote.

Peist2007 · 14-11-2014 01:56PM

Axel Lamp wrote: »

If you regularly read a tabloid and own a tracksuit for anything other than sporting activities you should only get half a vote.

What about the lounging on the couch watching tv trackie?

Axel Lamp · 14-11-2014 02:40PM

Peist2007 wrote: »

What about the lounging on the couch watching tv trackie?

I'll allow it based on 100% indoor use

Frank O. Pinion · 14-11-2014 02:42PM

HalloweenJack wrote: »

If you answer questions like "Homosexuality is natural" with "false" because of your religious beliefs, then you wouldn't get to vote because you are clearly not thinking about things logically.

In recent times, Atheists have higher IQs than religious people, so that's another thing that would sort itself out with the OP's proposal.

Valmont · 14-11-2014 02:44PM

IQ has nothing to do with voting - Bobby Fischer had an IQ of over 180 and he was a virulent anti-semite for the latter half of his life. The concept of IQ is akin to the power of the engine - where the driver takes it is another story entirely.

To Elland Back · 14-11-2014 02:47PM

A voter may know a candidate to be honest, hardworking and has done a lot for the community yet people are saying that they should not have a vote unless they pass some form of test

Nonsense

RichardoKhan · 14-11-2014 02:50PM

No IQ test but should be asked are you voting from any of the following positions:

a/ Sure its grand I knew his/her father & they are a good family
b/ They fixed the potholes outside my house
c/ Its a protest vote so im voting for the exact same politics but under a different named party
d/ My father voted for them & my father before that etc etc

If the answer is yes to any of the above then definitely refuse them a vote.

Grayson · 14-11-2014 02:51PM

Valmont wrote: »

IQ has nothing to do with voting - Bobby Fischer had an IQ of over 180 and he was a virulent anti-semite for the latter half of his life. The concept of IQ is akin to the power of the engine - where the driver takes it is another story entirely.

Bobby Fisher was probably clinically insane. (doesn't mean I'm not a fan)

To Elland Back wrote: »

A voter may know a candidate to be honest, hardworking and has done a lot for the community yet people are saying that they should not have a vote unless they pass some form of test

Nonsense

Every single political candidate is honest, hardworking and has done a lot for the community

ShowMeTheCash · 14-11-2014 03:23PM

Sounds like a good idea, while we are at it lets restrict the voting in other ways.

1. Take the vote off Women, sure all they do is have babies putting a strain on the economy.
2. Anyone with a mental illness sure what would they want with a vote?
3. Anyone with a disability sure all they are doing is living off the state.
4. Anyone with a criminal conviction, get the vote of them they don't deserve it.
5. Old people sometimes we need to learn to just let them go instread of having them pull is all down with them.
6. Short people, dunno what it is about short people but they cannot be trusted.

We can expand on this list but I think it shows promise!

DEFTLEFTHAND · 14-11-2014 03:32PM

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Sounds like a good idea, while we are at it lets restrict the voting in other ways.

1. Take the vote off Women, sure all they do is have babies putting a strain on the economy.
2. Anyone with a mental illness sure what would they want with a vote?
3. Anyone with a disability sure all they are doing is living off the state.
4. Anyone with a criminal conviction, get the vote of them they don't deserve it.
5. Old people sometimes we need to learn to just let them go instread of having them pull is all down with them.
6. Short people, dunno what it is about short people but they cannot be trusted.

We can expand on this list but I think it shows promise!

You may as well go with the 19th century system, only male landowners over the age of 30 allowed to vote. :pac:

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 14-11-2014 03:34PM

IQ tests don't mean you're intelligent in the same way that jumping in puddles doesn't mean you can swim.

VinLieger · 14-11-2014 03:50PM

We would be far better just teaching basic critical thinking in schools tbh, the amount of people that continually buy into everything a politician says be it during the last election and FG lies or the current batch of independents and SF who just spew populist crap every chance they get.

Once people can actually think beyond "I agree with what they said" and start thinking "wait how will they actually do what they said" only then will we have a working political system in this country.

GarIT · 14-11-2014 03:58PM

I don't think an IQ test would be the right way about it but I do think a test is needed. Something like you must have passed CSPE in the Junior Cert to register to vote (with an exemption for people who are currently already registered to vote). Alternatively a system like the driver theory test could work too.

If you cannot explain how the government is elected you should not be able to vote on the government.

If you cannot explain what a referendum is you should not be allowed vote in those. It's scary the amount of grown adults that regularly vote that don't even know what a referendum is or how the vote transfer system works.

So many people think that Ireland operates on a system of electing the most popular candidate when we actually elect the least objectionable candidate. I know people that only put down a number 1 because they don't know what the two or three means. None of those people should be allowed to vote.

Ideally we need a test that is somewhat easy but proves you actually know how government works.

biko · 14-11-2014 04:01PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

IQ tests don't mean you're intelligent in the same way that jumping in puddles doesn't mean you can swim.

I understand your sentiment but tbh, that didn't make any sense

Buona Fortuna · 14-11-2014 04:07PM

No. No IQ test.

Us thickees are just as entitled to a say in how the country gets fecked up next

strobe · 14-11-2014 04:27PM

More intelligent people don't necessarily make better choices, for themselves or others, than less intelligent people. So no, of course not, that would be stupid.

Grayson · 14-11-2014 04:42PM

GarIT wrote: »

I don't think an IQ test would be the right way about it but I do think a test is needed. Something like you must have passed CSPE in the Junior Cert to register to vote (with an exemption for people who are currently already registered to vote). Alternatively a system like the driver theory test could work too.

If you cannot explain how the government is elected you should not be able to vote on the government.

If you cannot explain what a referendum is you should not be allowed vote in those. It's scary the amount of grown adults that regularly vote that don't even know what a referendum is or how the vote transfer system works.

So many people think that Ireland operates on a system of electing the most popular candidate when we actually elect the least objectionable candidate. I know people that only put down a number 1 because they don't know what the two or three means. None of those people should be allowed to vote.

Ideally we need a test that is somewhat easy but proves you actually know how government works.

Not a bad idea. Politics and how bills are passed can be a bit complicated but the basics should be known by everyone.

ShowMeTheCash · 14-11-2014 05:00PM

GarIT wrote: »

I don't think an IQ test would be the right way about it but I do think a test is needed. Something like you must have passed CSPE in the Junior Cert to register to vote (with an exemption for people who are currently already registered to vote). Alternatively a system like the driver theory test could work too.

If you cannot explain how the government is elected you should not be able to vote on the government.

If you cannot explain what a referendum is you should not be allowed vote in those. It's scary the amount of grown adults that regularly vote that don't even know what a referendum is or how the vote transfer system works.

So many people think that Ireland operates on a system of electing the most popular candidate when we actually elect the least objectionable candidate. I know people that only put down a number 1 because they don't know what the two or three means. None of those people should be allowed to vote.

Ideally we need a test that is somewhat easy but proves you actually know how government works.

This idea makes me think you would lose your vote!

So let me get this staight, the weathly and the powers that be have managed to put into place an infrastructure that only benefits the wealthy and powerful.
We live in a lie a small notion to make people think they might have a little say in how the country is run.
So if you if you are unable to understand or navigate this broken idea that we call governance you are now excluded and cannot nor should not be allowed to participate.

Sure why stop there let's just go the whole hog and go for a full blown dictatorship!

lazybones32 · 15-11-2014 12:06AM

gypsy79 wrote: »

It may mean that black people are less good at that particular test. They are possibly better at other human "tests"

There has been much testing on aboriginals in Austrailia that shows their brain power is considerably less than white people. This would make sense due to the isolation they suffered until 200 years ago. The Flynn test discussed earlier would be further reasons why it has happened

It is very un PC to talk about this

That was the gist of my original post: IQ tests are only good for testing how a person did on one particular test and are not a true or accurate measurement of intelligence (there is still disagreement on how to correctly and fully define what 'intelligence' actually is)

Why is it politically incorrect? It was the findings of many studies over many years...and please, there is no need to write my user name in such large lettering when apologising to others.

GarIT · 15-11-2014 12:25AM

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

This idea makes me think you would lose your vote!

So let me get this staight, the weathly and the powers that be have managed to put into place an infrastructure that only benefits the wealthy and powerful.
We live in a lie a small notion to make people think they might have a little say in how the country is run.
So if you if you are unable to understand or navigate this broken idea that we call governance you are now excluded and cannot nor should not be allowed to participate.

Sure why stop there let's just go the whole hog and go for a full blown dictatorship!

The model of government in Ireland is pretty standard, it's not difficult to learn either. Having to pass a CSPE like exam wouldn't exclude anyone it would just mean you have to spend a couple of hours reading to make sure you have covered all the essentials before you influence important decisions.

You can't keep everybody happy, that's why we vote and the least objectionable government is accepted (The government the least number of people would object to). 'the wealthy' don't get any more votes than the average person. I assume by 'the wealthy' you mean the same group that pay more than enough tax to cover their own costs to the country and subsidise social welfare payments and the lower tax bands, as well as every other service the average person avails of.

crockholm · 15-11-2014 01:33AM

No.How short our collective memories are.Pretty much the same argument was used for not giving Irish people the right to self-determination-"they're savages,you couldn't trust who the they would vote for".You have to have hope that the majority of voters have a grasp of what they are voting on.

feargale · 15-11-2014 01:50AM

lazybones32 wrote: »

That was the gist of my original post: IQ tests are only good for testing how a person did on one particular test and are not a true or accurate measurement of intelligence (there is still disagreement on how to correctly and fully define what 'intelligence' actually is).

Yes, the electorate might be confined to people who were good at crosswords, in which case it might be a good idea to construct the ballot paper in the form of a crossword puzzle e.g. you could only vote for 4 down if you could get his name. That should ensure that no dumbheads were let loose on the political process.

Adamantium · 15-11-2014 02:01AM

crockholm wrote: »

No.How short our collective memories are.Pretty much the same argument was used for not giving Irish people the right to self-determination-"they're savages,you couldn't trust who the they would vote for".You have to have hope that the majority of voters have a grasp of what they are voting on.

And in a way they were right. :pac:

crockholm · 15-11-2014 02:07AM

Adamantium wrote: »

And in a way they were right. :pac:

And in an even bigger way,they were wrong;);)

15-11-2014 02:21AM

I was in Sierra Leone in the 1990's and there was a call for elections because the incumbent government had never allowed elections and they claimed that the population were not intelligent enough to vote!

three years later there was a civil war!

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

Comments