Elitism and You.
- Thread starter Mr.Pandah
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Finally, someone who agrees with me. (I'm in a rather conservative neighborhood, not many people like me as a political person)Earthbound said:
Edit: Incidently, the idea has been tried in the States before, but the system was abused to keep people from voting for reasons other than knowledge (race). Thus, the idea has acquired a stigma.
Oh yeah? We'll I'm the liberal twat, and I'm better than you, you corporate flunkey.... freedumb!!!!jim_doki said:
just kidding.
anyway, i'm elitist when it comes to science. I'm allowed to be, because I got a phD, and you didn't. And I like to call people on it when they spew pseudo- and preconceptual-science.
Mray3460 said:
I was going to say, the south did that. There's just no way you could make a test that would be completely fair. This also slants the power to the wealthy who have the leisure time to be educated. The problem is that right now the media anti-informs people by focusing everyone's attention elsewhere. It's also a problem that our system forces you to side with whichever of the 2 sides shares the most of your beliefs. You can't be for libertarian economics and gay marriage/abortion because you can only vote for one party's candidate.
I think it was Churchhill who said "Democracy doesn't work, it just works 5 times better than anything else we've tried"
I'm too good for elitism. Petty little pseudo-intellectuals with something to prove.
Pah! Let them wave about their flacid little members of half-understood learning while I placidly stroke my engorged staff of superiority. I shall never need eat the biscuit.
What? It's true.
Pah! Let them wave about their flacid little members of half-understood learning while I placidly stroke my engorged staff of superiority. I shall never need eat the biscuit.
What? It's true.
Such a test is a great idea in theory, but the people who would set such a test would probably be partisan appointments. So the test would consist of one question, possibly along the lines of, "George Walker Bush: Great President or the Greatest President?".
Also, everybody knows that the left wing are lazy and apathetic, so a test would be disadvantageous to the communist side of politics.
Also, everybody knows that the left wing are lazy and apathetic, so a test would be disadvantageous to the communist side of politics.
It this kind of elitism that annoys me and it seems to be fairly pervasive on the internet. This belief that the individual is superior because they have a different viewpoint or have read an article about the subject etc. It seems that whilst people are keen to condemn others they wilud never admit their own flaws. By the number of people around here who claim to be so superior to the rest of society the escapist is some kind of magnet for world's greatest mindsAardvark said:
I think it's pervasive everywhere. Most people no matter how IQ defficient or actually slow they are, believe that most people besides themselves are morons. It's probably just a side effect of our heliocentric subjective existence but you would think that so many people have heard this sentiment from others that the statement should be considered pointless and ironic.Ken Korda said:
i dont think i am elitist, however i think i am above the elitist because i dont take every chance to be a smart ass and act superior to everyone (which i know i am doing now, i hardly ever do this). i just dont find it makes you feel good or anything it just pisses the people you are being elitist to off, so to all you elitist's take it easy
the greatest flaw of the average man is the consideration that he is better than everyone else, especially when only exercising it through bureaucratic measures; e.g. smart asses who correct spelling and grammar errors as if it was the end of the world if someone misspelled the term YOU'RE. people like that like to create a reason for themselves, and usually the outcome is just as bad as their own mind is.
the real elite is actually keeping quiet and working for more meaningful causes than a world society to end all spelling errors. if you think you're an elitist, you've got to prove it.
i might add that while IQ certainly has its say in this, there are different forms of intelligence.
the real elite is actually keeping quiet and working for more meaningful causes than a world society to end all spelling errors. if you think you're an elitist, you've got to prove it.
i might add that while IQ certainly has its say in this, there are different forms of intelligence.
Last I reviewed the dictionary; "elitist" quite basically meant someone who believed himself superior to his peers (not necessarily, mind you, someone who actually was superior).
My point being - some believe. I know.
Thusly I can straddle myself high above you petty elitists, and throw peanuts at you from my lofty perch. Ha!
My point being - some believe. I know.
Thusly I can straddle myself high above you petty elitists, and throw peanuts at you from my lofty perch. Ha!
I'm not an elitist and I'd hardly call myself arrogant.
I wouldn't try and argue that I'm smarter, better or more right than average, it just so happens that the vast majority of people are stupider, more wrong and worse than average (by a long way). That is to say that there are a LOT of people who are a lot stupider than me, but the group of fewer people who are smarter than me tend to be a LOT smarter than me, and thus bring up the average of the collective intelligence. I tend to disregard to opinions of people I see as being too stupid to compose their own.
I wouldn't try and argue that I'm smarter, better or more right than average, it just so happens that the vast majority of people are stupider, more wrong and worse than average (by a long way). That is to say that there are a LOT of people who are a lot stupider than me, but the group of fewer people who are smarter than me tend to be a LOT smarter than me, and thus bring up the average of the collective intelligence. I tend to disregard to opinions of people I see as being too stupid to compose their own.
The thing is, we already have a test to decide if people get to vote: citizinship tests. We already use it to decide if an imigrant has enough knowledge to be considered a viable constituant, I say that we just apply it to natural born citizens as well.kingofnothing said:
As for the wealthy-poor argument, there's a simple solution: Put the information e-v-e-r-y-where; on posters in malls, libraries, street courners, soup kitchens, construction sites, and all other matter of places so that a person has to make an -effort- to stay ignorant. The same goes for candidate policies. Have posters and flyers that have the candidate's policies and stances on issues (laid out by them well before the election) side by side on the same sheet of paper, and have the entire thing laid out in plain english (and/or spanish).
Additionally, get websites that have the same information, and give voters the ability to choose from third party and independant candidates as well.
Furthermore, have the information posted just outside the polls and testing facilities, so that all but the most dedicated ignorants could possible be able to fail the test.
Finally, Kingofnothing, I agree with your quote, democracy is the best system of government in the world, but, the only reason why that is so is that we haven't come up with anything better.