Why do people think democracy is a good thing?
Voting should be a right, not a privilege.
The following people should be banned from voting.
-people with an IQ below a certain threshold
-people who support socialism in any way
-people who support open immigration/open borders
-people who support government intervention in the economy
-people who support central banks
The world would be a much better place if we had voting restrictions.
Other urls found in this thread:
And if we nuked Israel and its falsehood the world would be a better place. Snap back to reality, user.
>Snap back to reality, user.
I am in reality.
Voting restrictions should have been built into the constitution.
Not implementing them is why everything is so fucked up right now
>Anyone who disagrees with my political ideas shouldn't be able to vote
>Voting should be a right, not a privilege.
Nice job faggot, you can't get that right. lmao.
You mean he can't get that privilege.
>people should only be able to vote if they vote the way I like
What would they even vote on at that point? God you're retarded.
A few problems as in IQ tests can be rigged, if a different political power somehow got in they can easily change the rules and so on. What I can accept though is some other form of rules, perhaps if you have to join the military service for two years or not be on welfare as those on welfare become dependent on some politicians and those politicians exploit the fuck out of people on welfare.
Its impossible to stop people from voting based on ideological positions because they could just lie and say they won't vote for those things until they get behind the booth and choose the canidate who wants to enact those things.
I agree about the IQ one. i also think immigrants shouldn't be allowed to vote either until they've been in the country for at least 3 generations.
Yes, precisely.
People used to believe what I believe but it slowly got chipped away thanks to democracy and now we live in the shithole called america today.
wow you're right I put that backwards lmao
>A few problems as in IQ tests can be rigged
no they can't.
>Its impossible to stop people from voting based on ideological positions because they could just lie and say they won't vote for those things until they get behind the booth and choose the canidate who wants to enact those things.
This is why we also need to ban political parties that stand against the things in the OP
>wow you're privilege I put that backwards lmao
where does the ride end
So you don't think voting should exist?
Yes they can.
youtube.com
AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Ahh...
ferywyhshfhdfg
Yeah it should probably also be banned for virgins because who wants beta males running a country when they can't even run their own lives? Stop having faggot opinions and grow up
Voting should exist but only for a select few who have high IQs and have certain ideological positions like anti-socialism and anti-globalism.
>amazing atheist
OH NO NO NO NO NO
IQ(actual IQ tests) cannot be rigged.
IQ is the most reliable and replicable metric in all of science, even greater than biology.
What would you do if someone with different ideas from yours decided you shouldn't vote and you couldn't do anything about it?
The whole point of democracy is that everyone has a voice. If you start censoring some people you'll just make way for the censorship to grow until it becomes a dictatorship.
Banning people who have a low IQ and banning all socialists implies that no one gets to vote
Which, as supporter of a completely technocratic state I find no flaw in
So you don't really mean voting, since the outcome is predetermined.
I don't know about the current IQ tests but they've definitely been "rigged" in the past
For example, a question like what does a dog, a horse, and a cheetah all have in common might expect the answer "they're all mammals" when a less science literate person may answer "they all run fast"
I had a similar problem when I took an IQ test when I was in middle school, on the math section I literally had never seen the notation used in several of the problems
Voting restrictions based on ideologies is dumb
Just restrict it to military and landowners.
That's not very 'murican of you
Democracy is a conduit for mass media to control the government through psychological priming and narrative construction.
People think fascism = no freedom = bad even though participating in government is a chore for them and they pick public office positions based on emotional drama and red tie / blue tie while not feeling nor caring that their decision has any impact on the way the world is run at all.
this isnt Jow Forums, but regardless i agree, absolute monarchy is the way things should be
What you are saying is the media creates context.
>Snap back to reality, user
This OP. Democracy was only ever done right twice, with the 1st and 2nd Reich. Unfortunately Amerifats and Anglos got really worried that Germany would challenge their supremacy in controlling irrelevant tracts of land in Africa so the title of "fig leaf covering the nakedness of absolutism" got inherited by our current democracies where lobbyists are the only people with any real influence.
Every society will eventually collapse anyway. If socialism and open borders aren't allowed to do it, some other thing would do it down the road. If people are dumb enough to think these things make sense, there's a problem on the ground level and I don't think it can be stopped.
IQ tests are really not a good indicator of intelligence, take the nordic countries for example, they force almost every male to take the test at 18 because of conscription. When they were first introduced the results varied dramatically but as the decades passed literally everyone started getting high results, they didn't realize it but by testing people so often the population was being trained to take them and get good grades, after a while the results could no longer be used to predict academic or financial success at all since so many people scored 120+. there has to be another way to test peoples intelligence.
>Snap back to reality
OPE, there goes gravity.
I think it should be you're not allowed to vote if
>Don't own land
>Lower than at least 105 IQ
>Unemployed
etc etc
Imagine being so indoctrinated that you not only believe your overlords care about you but you shitpost about how well they treat you online.
> I am right, the others are wrong
Aw, yes, we certainly Haven't heard that one before.
I don't think anyone should be barred from voting (except non citizens), however I think people like OP should be killed on principle.
I'll never understand why whites allowed non-whites to vote. The majority of my people are retarded niggers and vote for the (((wrong))) people
At that point, why not just abolish democracy and have a one-party state? What's the point of voting if my choices are ethnofacsim and ethnoanarchism?
>everyone who votes should share my political opinions
wow fucking super original perspective op no one has ever had that major political insight before
Why should I allow idiots who don't know how to govern their own lives govern my society? If ten people are voting on how to fix a car and six don't know how to but have just as much of a right to dictate how you'd fix the car, how is that better then just having a good mechanic take charge?
>"Voting should be a right, not a privilege."
>In a post where he argues that voting should be a privilege, not a right.
I'm guess you'd be one of those low IQ people who would be barred from voting, OP
>People used to believe what I believe
lol
Why 105?
Why not an actual standard deviation
>ITT: virgin NEETs who spend 24/7 inside their houses claim they know how their country should be run and anyone who disagrees should be barred from voting
lmfao
Because they own the car and the mechanic should tell them they should pick him to fix the car. If the idiots choose someone else then they'll have a broken car.
This list is dumb. You want an authoritarian government not democracy. In a true democracy, I could vote for socialism and open boarders no matter how retarded that is. Other than that, I agree that folks who have an IQ below 115 should be kept from voting.
You can neither spell nor realize OP admittedly doesn't want a democracy. Low IQ.
>The following people should be banned from voting.
The problem is that if the government doesn't reflect all the people, then it will be inherently unstable.
For example, right now in the USA, old people vote a lot more often than young people. The result is that we have greater political instability because of it. (It doesn't matter if the young people are to blame for this or not -- blaming them doesn't change the fact that it has caused greater instability.) The most stable democracy would be the one in which the maximum number of people voted.
Even banning stupid people from voting -- as good as that might sound -- would increase instability. There's a correlation between being "stupid" and being poor -- meaning that the government would increasingly be elected by the rich (who can afford a good education). That's pretty much the maximum-instability scenario right there -- a government elected mostly by the rich, and unresponsive to the poor. It's a classic case of a well-meaning policy leading to bad results.
>unironically turning 50% of your nation against the other half for a popularity contest between two political parties with nearly identical ideology that only exist to serve the interests of upperclasses
LMAO BUT ATLEAST I HAVE A CHOICE, TIME TO INVADE NATIONS AND TOPPLE THEIR STABLE GOVERNMENTS FOR OUR PERSONAL HAND PICKED "DEMOCRATIC" CANDIDATES WOOT FREEDOM.
>people who support socialism in any way
Then become powerful enough to enforce global child birthrate laws to decrease populations or we're headed towards a cockroach's paradise.
No no no Guiado was cheated out of the presidency
It's not like he choose not to run or anything
Damn, I didn't think I'd see someone this woke on this board. I hope you can move to a less feudal country.
>People with different views shouldn't be allowed to vote
>>>>/Facebook/
Democracy needs an update. This is the era of communication, can't we get rid of the proxies already? Also, some kind of course should be passed before being able to vote instead of being just a minimum age.
Democracy has been known to be horribly flawed for at least 3000 years now. The only way it will even have working well is if you make it easy to remove any and all public officials.
If politicians have to worry about getting voted out of office, they couldn't just continue taking "gifts" from "special interests" lest they want to lose their job.
If we had voting restrictions, even just one based on intelligence, probably only white people would be able to vote.
>-people who support central banks
Who tf isn't for central banks, you have to be retarded to hate them
anyone who receives money from the government shouldn't be allowed to vote
this includes
>welfare recipients
>government employees
>soldiers
>those who own stock in companies given money by the government
The reason being is that these people have no reason to vote for anything other than more money being handed to them and therefore shouldn't be trusted with that power until they can prove to society they can stand on their own without it
Good.
Do you enjoy being poor and having your living standards stagnate and decrease?
they unironically did
>people who support government intervention in the economy
>people who support central banks
all my wats
more like "people who enjoy eating on a daily basis"
t. economics graduate
Why the fuck even vote at all if only people that would vote one specific way are allowed to? You sound aggressively retarded.
>Voting restrictions should have been built into the constitution.
There was. Only landowning men were allowed to vote, which meant that they had an actual investment in the country.
>t. economics graduate
Yes, people like you shouldn't be allowed to vote you keynesian brainlet.
That's the point, people would vote over which party is the least corrupt and all parties would have the same ideology.
>Do you enjoy being poor and having your living standards stagnate and decrease?
Lol, who else would keep inflation at a stable rate and the monetary policy? Also how does the central bank make you poor
>or not be on welfare
this can be manipulated
>be congress
>accept bribes campaign donations
>introduce basic income for all people who earn below $1 million per year
>99.7% of US is now on welfare
>only the super-rich can vote
>plutocracy instated
>you keynesian brainlet.
>implying all government intervention is in the form of keynesian stimulus packages
>implying quantitative easing is keynesian
>Lol, who else would keep inflation at a stable rate and the monetary policy?
Kill yourself.
We would have a nice natural DEFLATION which we had in the late 1800s where living standards constantly grew year after year as production increased.
>Also how does the central bank make you poor
Allows the government to spend unlimited resources and also they give money to corporations creating the boom/bust cycle.
Either way, it's all garbage and a lot of it came originally from keynes and then was modified.
That literally defeats the fucking point of voting in the first place you irredeemable retard.
>alright time to vote, everyone who agrees say aye
>wow another unanimous outcome that's the 1000th one in a row
>man voting sure is crucial in this homogeneous society could you imagine how different things would be if there was no voting?
>We would have a nice natural DEFLATION which we had in the late 1800s where living standards constantly grew year after year as production increased.
We grow year after year now, our economy doubles every 30 years with our current growth rate.
>>alright time to vote, everyone who agrees say aye
>>wow another unanimous outcome that's the 1000th one in a row
You're missing the point.
Political parties can be corrupt.
There are many different political parties that believe the same shit but some of them are corrupt.
People would vote based on which one was the least corrupt and most effective at implementing the country's policies and not on ideology.
>We grow year after year now
No we don't.
Living standards for the working class are stagnating.
>our economy doubles every 30 years
Living standards for the working class were better in the 50s/60s.
One man could own a house, take care of his wife who didn't have to work and a bunch of kids on a single fucking salary.
This isn't possible now.
If we got rid of central banking it could be possible again.
>No we don't.
>Living standards for the working class are stagnating.
Lol obv they're not producing more than they did back in the day due to unions ruining technological innovations so manufacturing
moved
>Living standards for the working class were better in the 50s/60s.
We had a central bank back then too
>One man could own a house, take care of his wife who didn't have to work and a bunch of kids on a single fucking salary.
Housing is super cheap now days too as long as you have capital due to loans real interest rates are often negative
>If we got rid of central banking it could be possible again.
How user? How exactly does monetary policy and controlled inflation make it impossible for the working class to afford a decent lifestyle?
democracy is a spook
>Democracy
>People can only vote for the ideology I like
or
>>>/leftypol/
>Lol obv they're not producing more than they did back in the day due to unions ruining technological innovations so manufacturing
>moved
It's not just unions brainlet, it's government intervention in the economy, massive levels of government spending and central banking.
>We had a central bank back then too
We got off the gold standard for good in 1970 which allowed the central bank to go hardcore mode printing whatever it wanted.
>Housing is super cheap now
No houses are super expensive compared to before.
>How exactly does monetary policy and controlled inflation make it impossible for the working class to afford a decent lifestyle?
Compare the 50s to today.
You dumb commie.
>>People can only vote for the ideology I like
Yes, seriously, this is what I believe and the founders of this country should have set it up this way.
They almost did but didn't think ahead.
>We got off the gold standard for good in 1970 which allowed the central bank to go hardcore mode printing whatever it wanted.
You know that the gold standard was apart of the central banks control of the currency right user? I mean we don't even seem to disagree I also think that the central bank should be more tightly regulated and not be able to print a ton of money but that doesn't mean I want to abolish it just make it go back to the old system
>No houses are super expensive compared to before.
Yes and no, housing was cheaper but not the loans. Again often times loans real interest rates are negative whereas before they were expensive as hell. You can't just look at the housing prices user you have to look how much it costs to borrow money too
>Compare the 50s to today.
Endless entertainment, way better communication, better healthcare etc. Ye i'd say we live a better lifestyle today
>You dumb commie.
Wanting the central bank to control inflation makes me a commie now?
>You know that the gold standard was apart of the central banks control of the currency right user?
No shit but it placed restrictions on what they could do.
>but that doesn't mean I want to abolish it just make it go back to the old system
Why not, it was more stable under free banking.
You're just reading propaganda to support your broken government monopolies.
>housing
pic related
>Endless entertainment, way better communication, better healthcare etc.
kek, these are minor things and have little to do with actual wealth of the working class
>Wanting the central bank to control inflation makes me a commie now?
LOL
The central bank doesn't control inflation, it CREATES inflation.
We need free banking and a natural deflation.
Inflation is so fucking retarded.
The value of savings should increase over time.
Who tf has the right to print money if we abolish central banks user?
>Voting should be a right, not a privilege.
>The following people should be banned from voting.
You played yourself user
>>housing
>pic related
I blame baby boomers, they restricted supply with a retarded building code at the same time they didn't give a fuck about building codes of beauty standards and erected ugly faceless concrete boxes
Nobody does, we go back to the barter system because MUH LIBERTY is worth carrying an actual sack of gold around and being forced to eat the same food day in and day out.
>democracy is bad because people don't agree with me
>you should only be allowed to vote if you agree with me
low iq post
>Allows the government to spend unlimited resources and also they give money to corporations creating the boom/bust cycle.
THIS ISN'T WHAT CENTRAL BANKS DO
monetary policy and fiscal policy are completely different things
please google "what the federal reserve does", I'm sure there are some videos that can explain it to you
I don't know who made you believe that the Fed controls government spending, but they did not have your education or your best interest in mind
you do realize that quantitative easing (what the Federal Reserve does) makes it easier for you to buy a home by lowering the interest rate on your mortgage, right?
Nobody.
All existing money will stay in the economy and none will be created or destroyed.
>THIS ISN'T WHAT CENTRAL BANKS DO
It's exactly what central banks do.
Austrian economics is right.
>please google "what the federal reserve does", I'm sure there are some videos that can explain it to you
Yeah lol I want to listen to some federal reserve propaganda.
>I don't know who made you believe that the Fed controls government spending, but they did not have your education or your best interest in mind
You're brainwashed.
Kill yourself idiot, they are responsible for dramatically raising the price of houses so it takes longer for you to pay it off.
see my graph
Fiat currency was a mistake.
THIS
SF
ERG
ER
G45
Y
RT
Wouldn't all those restrictions just be ripe for abuse? Half of those restrictons aren't even practical and are just based on opinion alone. You can place those restrictions now but it won't stop the next party to either get rid of them or add in new restrictions based on their ideologies. Or it could be abused in a way where the current party in power can just tilt the voting system to the favour of their voters making it harder for other parties to get into power.
Shit's just dumb and will just end up causing more problems then it fixes. The only time when somebody should not be allowed to vote is if they commit treason or serious political fraud.
>ut it won't stop the next party
This is why we also need to ban political parties that advocate for things like this.
>add in new restrictions based on their ideologies.
It would be constitutionally bound.
I know it's just a piece of paper but it's far better than nothing.
>Shit's just dumb and will just end up causing more problems then it fixes.
nah
>The only time when somebody should not be allowed to vote is if they commit treason or serious political fraud.
Enjoy having low iq idiots destroying the economy and taking your shit
If you're that worried about having the wrong people being able to vote then why not just cut the crap and advocate for a technocracy or something? You're just jumping through a lot of hoops for little pay off. All you need to do is just have preferential voting system and some time for more minor parties to form.
>It's exactly what central banks do.
>Austrian economics is right.
Why do you have such strong opinions on central banks when you don't even know the basic functions of the FED?
Sadly the US decided to go full retard and print money to pay for their expensive wars so the gold standard couldn't be upheld anymore
>If you're that worried about having the wrong people being able to vote then why not just cut the crap and advocate for a technocracy or something?
because that's even worse
I don't want AI controlling the government.
>Why do you have such strong opinions on central banks when you don't even know the basic functions of the FED?
I do, I'm just too lazy to post them here.
What's more important is the shit they DON'T say they do.
That's not what a Technocracy is. It's a form of government ruled by technical experts, usually scientists.
>It's a form of government ruled by technical experts, usually scientists.
sounds fucking worse
scientists don't know anything about politics
>I do, I'm just too lazy to post them here.
>What's more important is the shit they DON'T say they do.
You acted like the FED was financing the government user so you clearly don't know what roles the FED has
>That's not what a Technocracy is. It's a form of government ruled by technical experts, usually scientists.
That's a pretty autistic way of ruling since scientists usually don't know anything about management and politics
>You acted like the FED was financing the government
it does though
maybe not directly but it does
>it does though
>maybe not directly but it does
In what way user, did you watch a yt documentary and think you're an expert on central banking now?