Should everyone have the right to vote unconditionally?
To some people, this question sounds deeply anti-democratic. Whoever would ask it might be accused of being a fascist, a totalitarian who does not recognize one of the most fundamental human rights -the right to take decisions concerning your economic situation and life. Since politics affect every aspect of one's life, one should have the right to affect politics no matter what, and only a fascist would deny that one should do so. Hence the accusation. But accusations do not give satisfying answers to questions -they are rather a way to avoid answering by calling upon ethics. So the question remains: should really everyone have the right to vote unconditionally?
One may claim that whoever is a tax payer should have the right to choose the ones who would use his money and the way it would be spent. And i definitely agree on this part. But since when is being tax-payer enough to decide for the future of the children of the other tax-payers? Let me elaborate.
In the country in which i currently live, Greece, people have repeatedly shown that being a tax-payer (and even though there are numerous tax-dodgers, the way our money is used by the Greek state justifies tax-dodging) does not mean that you have the education and capability of logically thinking that gives you the right to affect the life of the other tax-payers. Most people, especially in less-developed countries, tend to take political decisions according to how the feel instead of what is reasonable to vote.
In such a rampant democracy it is an inevitable consequence that the governments to be elected are the ones that promise what people would like to hear, even though it would be a lie. Whoever knows about Greek politics, knows that the ex prime minister (who will likely be re-elected today), Alexis Tsipras, seized power by promising unrealistic reforms that would take place without us exiting the eurozone. Though one would be right to vote for a leftist government, since the euro-cannibals and bankers lend hundreds of billions to our state knowing that it would be unable to give them back in case of a crises (an inevitable phase of capitalism), one would be an idiot for thinking that a grexit could be avoided in case of a disagreement with the Europeans. And many Greeks were once again proved to be idiots.
The same thing happens in almost all countries of the world: people vote according to how they feel and not how things actually are. And most of all, people vote without comprehending fundamental principles of economy and political theory. They are anti-communists or anti-fascists, without really knowing what these ideologies actually are. They prefer socialism over liberalism or vice versa, without being aware of the good and the bad aspects of both of these systems. They vote for an economical system without knowing what inflation is, for instance, or how the banks work.
Given the above, here comes the question: should everyone have the right to vote unconditionally? Should everyone have the ability to affect the lives of millions without having the knowledge and reasoning to vote for any party?
It may sound idiotic, and even unrealistic but... shouldn't there be some kind of testing the ones who want to become voters? Testing on fundamentals of economics and law, of the modern history of their state (what kind of voter are you if you don't know how and why the politics of your country are as they are?), of political philosophy (what is each ideology about and how each political system works) and even some proof that one is scientifically literate or capable to reason? Well, there should be some form of testing knowledge and capabilities.
Not everyone is eligible to vote, for not everyone comprehends politics (which require some knowledge of history and what each system is about), economics (which require knowing some fundamentals of economy), logic (knowing when is a claim valid and when is an argument fair to use) and basic science (knowing when is a research or survey trustworthy and to change your theory when the data proves you wrong).
Is it really fair to be a voter just because you pay your taxes? I doubt it. And denying that not everyone is eligible to vote is denying the reality.
To some people, this question sounds deeply anti-democratic. Whoever would ask it might be accused of being a fascist, a totalitarian who does not recognize one of the most fundamental human rights -the right to take decisions concerning your economic situation and life. Since politics affect every aspect of one's life, one should have the right to affect politics no matter what, and only a fascist would deny that one should do so. Hence the accusation. But accusations do not give satisfying answers to questions -they are rather a way to avoid answering by calling upon ethics. So the question remains: should really everyone have the right to vote unconditionally?
One may claim that whoever is a tax payer should have the right to choose the ones who would use his money and the way it would be spent. And i definitely agree on this part. But since when is being tax-payer enough to decide for the future of the children of the other tax-payers? Let me elaborate.
In the country in which i currently live, Greece, people have repeatedly shown that being a tax-payer (and even though there are numerous tax-dodgers, the way our money is used by the Greek state justifies tax-dodging) does not mean that you have the education and capability of logically thinking that gives you the right to affect the life of the other tax-payers. Most people, especially in less-developed countries, tend to take political decisions according to how the feel instead of what is reasonable to vote.
In such a rampant democracy it is an inevitable consequence that the governments to be elected are the ones that promise what people would like to hear, even though it would be a lie. Whoever knows about Greek politics, knows that the ex prime minister (who will likely be re-elected today), Alexis Tsipras, seized power by promising unrealistic reforms that would take place without us exiting the eurozone. Though one would be right to vote for a leftist government, since the euro-cannibals and bankers lend hundreds of billions to our state knowing that it would be unable to give them back in case of a crises (an inevitable phase of capitalism), one would be an idiot for thinking that a grexit could be avoided in case of a disagreement with the Europeans. And many Greeks were once again proved to be idiots.
The same thing happens in almost all countries of the world: people vote according to how they feel and not how things actually are. And most of all, people vote without comprehending fundamental principles of economy and political theory. They are anti-communists or anti-fascists, without really knowing what these ideologies actually are. They prefer socialism over liberalism or vice versa, without being aware of the good and the bad aspects of both of these systems. They vote for an economical system without knowing what inflation is, for instance, or how the banks work.
Given the above, here comes the question: should everyone have the right to vote unconditionally? Should everyone have the ability to affect the lives of millions without having the knowledge and reasoning to vote for any party?
It may sound idiotic, and even unrealistic but... shouldn't there be some kind of testing the ones who want to become voters? Testing on fundamentals of economics and law, of the modern history of their state (what kind of voter are you if you don't know how and why the politics of your country are as they are?), of political philosophy (what is each ideology about and how each political system works) and even some proof that one is scientifically literate or capable to reason? Well, there should be some form of testing knowledge and capabilities.
Not everyone is eligible to vote, for not everyone comprehends politics (which require some knowledge of history and what each system is about), economics (which require knowing some fundamentals of economy), logic (knowing when is a claim valid and when is an argument fair to use) and basic science (knowing when is a research or survey trustworthy and to change your theory when the data proves you wrong).
Is it really fair to be a voter just because you pay your taxes? I doubt it. And denying that not everyone is eligible to vote is denying the reality.
You are so damn right, George
ΑπάντησηΔιαγραφή