Who Gets To Vote?

Anyone that has interacted with society for any amount of time can recognize that the vast majority of people are complete morons.  If we recognize that, we must also recognize that giving universal suffrage is simply insane.  It may sound good in theory, but history has shown us the horrors of the tyranny of the majority.

So how do we decide who gets to vote?  IQ tests?  Test logic and reasoning skills?  Economic status?  Military service (lol Heinlein)?

Or should we go the Plato way and just have a (hopefully) benevolent dictator who was trained from birth to rule?

>>1
The system we have now is good.  Not an absolute democracy - but a democratic republic.  Not every decision is done by popular vote - we elect representatives who make decisions for us.  It isn't pure democracy.. there's a half assed check or balance on the stupidity of the masses.

>>2
Don't forget the stupidity of the representatives.

Most people who don't vote are stupid, and most people don't vote. So, that works out pretty well.

having money allows for a good education. consiquently, those with more money are that much more likely to be better educated and better equiped and informed to vote. unfortunately, the more money they have, the more likely they're going to vote in favor of laws and such that go to the advantage of organizations that continue said wealth, instead of laws that work toward the public good.

if we base voting rights on IQ scores or economic status we'd be tilting the scale in favor of the choices of the better educated, meaning the wealthy and those with special interests. This means the poor, and not so well educated, are left in the dust as laws are passed that put them at a greater and greater diadvantage.

>>4
considering this administration, i highly doubt that.

those who dont vote, are either convinced the system is rigged, and there's no point, or they vote for a 'wasted' candidate because of the flawed two party system.

if it was true only stupid people naturally dont vote, i think we could have come up with a better leader than we do now, gore or otherwise.

>>5
Knowledge =! Intelligence
School provides you with knowledge, which is no good if you can't think. Which is proof of why we see a sheer amount of dumbfucks with college degrees. You could also consider not caring for the public welfare a flaw in their education, not a sign of higher education. (That is unless the educational system is somewhat corrupted and promotes individualism, but that's another matter, for another time...)

Anyway, we're better off just letting everyone vote, than creating partial voting systems that only let a slice of the population vote. They'd probably vote for the same shitty leaders, anyway.

Having a minimum IQ requirement shouldn't be much of a problem.  It's not like it has to be insanely high, just high enough to keep the really dumb motherfuckers from voting.

well, there's a reason to all things, ever wondered why so many people are stupid?
maybe that's where we need to step in, rather than limiting the amount of people who can vote.

and i agree with #7, sure alot of the people know things, like the intellegent design people, i'm certain they know alot of stuff, that doesn't make them any less retarded, but we can blame religious zealotry on that i suppose.

>>9

More like democratic propaganda.

why not just have a popularity contest? that's all these elections seem to be anyhow. stick a dumbass with cherisma in the oval office, surround him with people who actually know what they're doing (or dont, either way), and watch the world take a trip down the lane to hell in a handbasket.

i for one reccomend a two headed fellow by the name of Zaphod Beeblebrox. He's just this guy, you know?

Without free debate there is no democracy.

>>12
then i guess we're fucked, huh?