This debate is going very well, but I feel the need to stir the pot a bit.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aKula
So would you be in favour of requiring a certain IQ to vote? How about that you must own land?
It just seems like a wrong path to go down for a modern democracy. I mean democracy is meant to be about what the people want, even if it may be unwise at times (which is also subjective, so it is difficult to judge).
|
The United States is not "a modern democracy". We are a constitutional republic, and for good reason. Publius argued that having elected representatives serving multi-year terms would help to insulate the decision-makers in government from the passions of the electorate. In so many ways, the United States was designed for the ground up to prevent the majority from having its way.
This can lead one to two very different conclusions, I think:
1. Checks and balances, seperation of powers, federalism, non-elected judiciary, long Senate terms, etc. already safeguard us against idiocy in the population, so literacy tests are unnecessary.
2. Our government is founded on the principle that, although the rulers should serve at the consent of the governed, the governed should not get their way when they are not representing their own best interests. Therefore, disenfranchising the least educated voters would be in keeping with the spirit of the United States.
In any case, let's stop using the "democracy" rhetoric, as the United States is not a democracy. I wouldn't have it any other way.