Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Do you think that we, the UK, ought to govern our own country? Watch

    Offline

    20
    (Original post by AlmightyJesus)
    that is extremely relative - they're less likely, but to some extent *everybody* is governed by "spin" in some shape or form. spin, basically, is simply putting an emotional rhetorical slant on a fact. all people are governed, to some degree, by emotions. how will you account for stopping intelligent yet emotional people from voting emotionally? is this necessarily a matter of intelligence? I know (anecdotally, obviously) some clearly intelligent people, perhaps more intelligent than me, whom make the worst kinds of choices in some cases simply because their emotions couldn't be controlled. and controlling your emotions isn't always a matter of intelligence, seeing as emotions may practically prevent you from even being able to begin thinking rationally, as opposed to merely cloud rationality.
    Intelligence is strongly correlated to the ability to make rational decisions. Of course, many intelligent people make irrational decisions, but we are talking about statistical evidence, not anecdotal

    *I* did, though. ethics governs voting. how can you vote without some kind of system of principles?
    I don't think intelligent people will have a vastly different set of ethics to other people.

    after struggling to find a definition for that term, all I can deduce is that it is to stop people voting themselves money - what about, simply, a constitution that prohibits that? I mean, if you can't stop people from revolting via armed uprising for a regime that gives them this, at least you can establish some kind of buffer like a constitution that prevents it in that this would make a revolution (something a lot of people cannot bring themselves to stage) the only way to secure the outcome of a "selfish plebian democracy~"
    Sapiocracy I'd imagine is a democracy where votes are simply weighted by intelligence. I have no clue what you are talking about, sorry
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    If you are asking how I'm voting in the EU referendum, then yes I am voting out.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    No, given how the majority adults in the UK can't even control their own diets

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...-obesity-study
    That's the beauty of first world living. Gluttony is a liberty you can indulge in if you're able to. Not that this is in any way related to restoring sovereignty to the UK.
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by Cpt. Josh)
    That's the beauty of first world living. Gluttony is a liberty you can indulge in if you're able to. Not that this is in any way related to restoring sovereignty to the UK.
    Not just the first world

    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    Very Important Poster
    The Mr men and Little Misses would do a better job as well as be more respected.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Not just the first world

    Interesting, looks like an equatorial relation on the whole- makes sense, really.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    This question would be more relevant if people actually believed the out campaign stood a chance. Unfortunately, the politics of fear will triumph again. When you have key political figures tell the masses that their jobs, pay, pensions and security will collapse if we leave what would a betting man or woman do? That's what it comes down to even though it is not true
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by Cpt. Josh)
    Interesting, looks like an equatorial relation on the whole- makes sense, really.
    Anglophonic countries are the most obese of all - US, UK, Australia

    Obesity is rapidly increasing in China, Africa, and Australasia (excluding Australia), not increasing so much in the first world.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Intelligence is strongly correlated to the ability to make rational decisions. Of course, many intelligent people make irrational decisions, but we are talking about statistical evidence, not anecdotal
    so you're merely saying that this kind of democracy would be better?
    also, what about the fact that some have relatively average IQ-based intelligence but, say, had a political PHD~? would qualifications be made on those particular bases?

    I don't think intelligent people will have a vastly different set of ethics to other people.
    but some political issues will inevitably boil down to ethics and not intelligence...

    Sapiocracy I'd imagine is a democracy where votes are simply weighted by intelligence. I have no clue what you are talking about, sorry
    (oh okay, I understand that term now then...)
    ...you don't understand the concept of constitutionalism?
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by AlmightyJesus)
    so you're merely saying that this kind of democracy would be better?
    Yes... better, not perfect

    also, what about the fact that some have relatively average IQ-based intelligence but, say, had a political PHD~? would qualifications be made on those particular bases?
    Perhaps there can be improvements to my Sapiocracy, based on knowledge, but we are not arguing whether or not systems exist which are better than my suggestion, but whether my suggestion is better than our current democracy

    but some political issues will inevitably boil down to ethics and not intelligence...
    ...So what?

    Also, I disagree. An intelligent person will likely be more realistic about how to implement their ethical ideas; you don't vote for parties solely because of their ethical values, but also how competent they are
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Yes... better, not perfect

    Perhaps there can be improvements to my Sapiocracy, based on knowledge, but we are not arguing whether or not systems exist which are better than my suggestion, but whether my suggestion is better than our current democracy
    to be honest, the idea of voting rights based on knowledge isn't inherently flawed - I mean, in order to be allowed to drive a car in this nation is based on your ability to not crash or do unintelligent/dangerous things on the road, so I don't inherently think that the concept of stupidity is such a qualification to be able to vote. also, the fact that you have to be 18 to vote is kind of based on the higher intelligence of adults over children, obviously. however, it is such an idea which would require the most insane amount of scrutiny, because the right to vote is such a hugely more important right than the right to drive a car, for instance. I, therefore, can't endorse it on those grounds. it's like the death penalty - you don't want innocent people to be put to death as a mere prospect, and that will inevitably happen sooner or later under this system where there will be an error which causes a person responsible enough to vote to be denied their right to vote.

    ...So what?
    what do you mean "so what?" I just explained what. you can't have "more intelligently emotional" (etc) as a concept, right? emotions are emotions, surely? if you vote based on emotions, and you just so happen to be more intelligent than another person *generally speaking*, then that is still stupidity in isolation here. right? that wouldn't reduce their IQ or political knowledge

    Also, I disagree. An intelligent person will likely be more realistic about how to implement their ethical ideas; you don't vote for parties solely because of their ethical values, but also how competent they are
    so you're saying that a rational and high-IQ individual would have uncertain ethics but certain ways of calculating the means of implementing these ethics? what about communism? what kind of rational calculations will make communism work? surely communism is based on both ethics and means/policies? what about fascism, also? is totlaitarianism something that is permissible? what if you had a stupid person who voted for something that many clever people thought was prudent as an option, yet simply got denied their right to vote based on their general lack of political expertise? if we're talking about good outcomes and not good procedures (necessarily) then that would be a factor, surely? what if most "stupid" people agreed with what the "clever" people happened to want? isn't that kind of what already happens in this country? you could get an absolute dunce that votes labour and a prodigy of their age who also votes for labour - the result is probably the valued aspect of your system, right? what if you had a system where the reasoning of clever and stupid people was exactly the same? again, how could you deny the stupid their right to vote when their reasons behind their respective ballot is equivalent to those of an intelligent person? surely the only grounds to bar someone from voting would be certain things like 1) errors or misconceptions of policies of parties/candidates, and 2) personality politics? surely that would have to be the test and not intelligence? I'm not sure myself, which is why I think your opinion would be fairly interesting
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Frank Underwood)
    Allowing the UK to govern our own country is transferring the power from some politicians in Brussels to some politicians in the UK. Either way, we still have no ability to govern ourselves apart from trusting some individuals who 'represent' us.
    also, this didn't answer the question - to suggest that MPs are not swayed by public opinion (e.g. the EU) to any extent is just plainly false. if that were the case, then we'd be living in a pure political kleptocracy
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlmightyJesus)
    also, this didn't answer the question - to suggest that MPs are not swayed by public opinion (e.g. the EU) to any extent is just plainly false. if that were the case, then we'd be living in a pure kleptocracy
    lol dont care
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlmightyJesus)
    I'm looking you in the eye and you know what I'm talking about.
    Definitely
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Reading between the lines. The funny thing is if you're going to trust a Jew with anything it's going to be looking after the country's money supply so this thing about Jews running the banks, it's not a bad thing in my opinion.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by #_ZINAN)
    The UK needs strong and intelligent politicians like the prime minister of Hungary who doesn't give a flying crap about feelings and offensiveness.


    Unlike the pig knob gobbling pussies like David cameron and the clown faced joke that is Boris johnson.
    Well said!

    The weak should never be allowed to govern. Instead of bending their knees to outlanders who know nothing about life in Britain, our leaders should be supporting the wishes of the British people! It's about time we dethroned Cameron, kicked Corbyn out of politics and made Farage the prime minister!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    Well said!

    The weak should never be allowed to govern. Instead of bending their knees to outlanders who know nothing about life in Britain, our leaders should be supporting the wishes of the British people! It's about time we dethroned Cameron, kicked Corbyn out of politics and made Farage the prime minister!
    Make Farage prime minister? hahahhahaahahaha good one
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Frank Underwood)
    Make Farage prime minister? hahahhahaahahaha good one
    I'm not joking though. Farage is far more suited to lead the country than those Tory and Labour pushovers.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Frank Underwood)
    lol dont care
    you cared enough to reply

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peroxidation)
    I'm not joking though. Farage is far more suited to lead the country than those Tory and Labour pushovers.
    April fools, i guess
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.