Systems of Suffrage - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

For the discussion of Philosophy. Discuss thought from Socrates to the Enlightenment and beyond!

Moderator: PoFo Agora Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. Religious topics may be debated in this forum, but those of religious belief who specifically wish to avoid threads being derailed by atheist arguments might prefer to use the Spirituality forum.
#14708372
A world run by people who can count, and understand the consequences of economic actions beyond the immediate corporate cycle is not just more efficient, it is more livable and stable.

tend to be more stable and more future-oriented than singles and pump-and-dumpsters.


The majority of pump and dumps come from families or those consistently seeking and failing to build families. However most stable offspring in the developed world do arise from functional family units.

Career Singles/Casuals tend to remain childless, and do little harm by simply existing and contributing economically. Pump and dumpers are not in this category-they tend to opt for the whimsical and poorly considered family model. There needs to be more focus on protecting the family unit, making it harder and more costly to separate but also harder to create to keep standards up.

Hitler did so much untold damage far beyond the immediate. He made eugenics unpopular, and screwed us for generations to come. Sterilization of adults based on some agreed upon IQ measure should be a standard. And of course migration should be strictly controlled to complement this.

Artificial Wombs would do wonders for workforce productivity and net population growth beyond just relying on unfiltered mass immigration and pump and dumpers. 50% of the population (women) could suddenly work longer hours without ill effect.

Technology is the basis of practical civilization. It makes work specialization and urbanization possible. It should therefore provide the solution to every social problem. We criticize the Islamist's for backward social practices, yet ignore the ones we practice. Some of the most powerful tools at our disposal for societal betterment, from genetic engineering, ranging from stem cell research to cloning, to high volume, highly clean energy production such as nuclear, we actively suppress based on nothing but a culture of irrational fear.
User avatar
By Ombrageux
#14708423
I agree Hitler's excesses - especially his more-or-less insane approach to the Slavic question - are part of the reason for the revulsion towards eugenics and racism today. But I would not discount the impact of egalitarian brainwashing since WW2 as well.

In my experience, the politics of childless single women are horrible. All their motherly energy is wasted, or worse, on the gay-AIDS-refugee choir. Their instinct to "take care of the helpless children in our society" ends up promoting bad bad bad unhealthy behavior.

If they are married and have their own kids, they seem to be much more constructive, on the whole.
User avatar
By Albert
#14708434
I was reading about last presidential election. Married women tend to vote more conservative as statistics had shown. Single or divorced voted more for Obama instead of Romney.

Single women (I think women in general) and young lads are the bane of democratic process. With naive notions of the world they make poor decisions. Lads usually grow out of it once they lived a little longer, but women continue to exist in fairytale world.

It would be nice to have women function on good measure as men, but it just is not so. That is how you get women fanatically supporting gayism, yet not thinking how this will impact their own children in future.

Women function less rationally, their world is very instinct based. I do not believe they can ever be fully civilized on same level as most men. This is why our ancestors who knew better never considered women as part of civilized order, aka mankind. They existed and will continue to exist always in realm more akin to children. Higher development should not be expected of them.

Hence why in the past, education was considered to be a waste on women. As with their desposition they will achieve nothing of value with it.

Evidence of this, is that women had a chance to prove themselves in reality, for more then 150 years now. As a lot of fields had been open to them in this time. They have not. We have no women that created any breakthrough or anything of sort. More so they did have created a lot of mess though. As for one it was a woman who conducted research to push through with decriminalization of homosexuality. Or they were always vocal in support of minority rights.

It seems ever since 'liberation' of women, they had wanted to liberate everything else they saw subject to their men. It is what it is.

As men we have to start coming in terms that women will never function as men. And trying to make them be like us is cruel in the end. So we have to return back to traditional and normal outlook on things.
#14708457
As usual, these threads degenerate into sexist and racist diatribes about how women or minorities are too stupid to be allowed to vote.

For me, this is the single best argument for allowing women and minorities to vote. If they did not, only the racist and sexist people would get to vote, and that did not work well last time.
User avatar
By Albert
#14708473
Last time? When was that?

If you are bringing out the boogey man Hitler again. Women were allowed to vote in Germany since 1918.
#14708475
Albert wrote:Last time? When was that?


These threads come up every now and then. I thought you would have noticed.

If you are bringing out the boogey man Hitler again. Women were allowed to vote in Germany since 1918.


Never mentioned Hitler.

There should be a test for prospective voters. It can have a single question: do you agree that voting rights should be restricted to certain segments of the population. Everyone who says yes should not be allowed to vote.
User avatar
By Albert
#14708522
These threads come up every now and then. I thought you would have noticed.

Never mentioned Hitler.

There should be a test for prospective voters. It can have a single question: do you agree that voting rights should be restricted to certain segments of the population. Everyone who says yes should not be allowed to vote.

Pants you were going to reference Hitler, then that backfired now you are back paddling.
User avatar
By noemon
#14708562
P-o-D wrote:Everyone who says yes should not be allowed to vote.


That is non-sense and a loop making you ineligible by your own logic as well.

Eligibility to vote and the manner in which one votes as well as the weight a vote carries have always been prescribed and they still are.
User avatar
By Rugoz
#14708564
noemon wrote:Eligibility to vote and the manner in which one votes as well as the weight a vote carries have always been prescribed and they still are.


I'm sure nobody ever attempted to exclude himself from voting.

I think that says it all.
User avatar
By Albert
#14708566
Rugoz wrote:I'm sure nobody ever attempted to exclude himself from voting.

I think that says it all.
I'm sure a child would love to vote as well.
User avatar
By Rugoz
#14708568
noemon wrote:I don't understand what you 're trying to say exactly.


Just stating the obvious. People have an agenda and try to rig the system in their favor.
User avatar
By Albert
#14708572
Conveniently ignores a statement that disproves him. Continues to pretend he is correct.

You exhibit mentality of a progressive western liberal.
Last edited by Albert on 07 Aug 2016 23:24, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By noemon
#14708573
Rugoz wrote:Just stating the obvious. People have an agenda and try to rig the system in their favor.


Yes, and who are you talking about exactly? And what do you think is the correct way of approaching this?
User avatar
By Rugoz
#14708580
noemon wrote:Yes, and who are you talking about exactly? And what do you think is the correct way of approaching this?


Who? The people posting in this thread obviously.

Me personally I've never advocated limiting voting rights.
#14708589
Pants-of-dog wrote:There should be a test for prospective voters. It can have a single question: do you agree that voting rights should be restricted to certain segments of the population. Everyone who says yes should not be allowed to vote.

That wouldn't be such a bad test. :D

Rugoz wrote:I'm sure nobody ever attempted to exclude himself from voting.

It tends to be self-serving in one way or the other at least.

----------------------------------------------------

As I see it, the problem is mostly about representation and information. Politics should be representative of the population's views and this could be improved with more direct democracy. But any participation requires a well-informed electorate and we have some way to go in dealing responsibly with information.
User avatar
By noemon
#14708595
Rugoz wrote:Who? The people posting in this thread obviously.
Me personally I've never advocated limiting voting rights.


So I take it you have absolutely nothing to contribute in here, I should have figured it right from the start. :coffee:
User avatar
By Rugoz
#14708739
Igor Antunov wrote:What if we could all influence the thoughts of our leaders directly?

The ultimate form of suffrage/democratic mandate.


That's not how it works, Igor. Have you forgotten the Borg queen? ;)

Image

Wishing to see the existence of a massively nucle[…]

I was reading St. Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain t[…]

Source? I think Iran only communicated the end […]

Yeah, I'm in Maine. I have met Jimjam, but haven'[…]