![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
same_skyM is doing the political meme, the one that I referred to recently. (Hi! ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
big_bubba! We were pretty much exactly in the same spot on the grid. Ha!) M is an extremely hateful person, and this I know because he continually works it into the conversation that I am hateful, and only a hateful person would call someone hateful. (Yes, I know, it's a vicious cycle, isn't it?) I am reminded of his hatefulness in this case because he is shredding the integrity of the questions. There has been some reference to the author being a Quake-playing moron who uses phrases such as "death match". But anyway, I was going somewhere else with this. He stopped at a question that he didn't make fun of, just read aloud because it was interesting.
Should only people who are literate be allowed to vote? (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)
Here's the thing. I know what people are thinking when they read this question. The premise is that the illiterate people don't keep up with the issues, they won't know enough about politics to make an informed decision. M asked me what I had choosen, and I told him "strongly disagree", and he looked at me a little sideways and asked why. (This isn't a reflection of M's choice, whatever it ended up being--we have many conversations that begin with one of us asking for the other to explain reasoning on issues we agree on, and our marriage is certainly strong enough to disagree on things, so don't read too much into this.) Denying someone the vote because of their illiteracy boils down to economic discrimination. It reminds me of the laws that were put into place to deny former slaves the right to vote. But what about the issues, you say. And I say.. so what? What does it matter if they know absolutely nothing about the issues? Who cares if they don't know anything about the candidates? The idea of voting is to get a representative sample of the population. Some of the population can't read, but they still deserve a voice because they are still living in this country.
You may be wondering why I'm telling you all of this. It relates to absolutely nothing, it's not relevant to any discussion ongoing, it's not relevant to current politics, really. The reason I'm blogging about it is because when I was done with my rather concise explanation (seriously, you know how I ramble, and this time I did not) M looked at me in that way you look at someone you know better than you know yourself but who has managed to vaguely surprise you and said, "That's a very valid point if you truly believe in the principles of democracy."
I call myself a Democrat, the quiz called me a Socialist--I believe that I am, in all truth, an Idealist.
And where being an idealist bites you in the ass is when a majority of the minority--and I'm not talking race and class here, I'm talking numbers and electoral colleges--of Americans went to the polls last year and cast their vote for a man who stands against the majority of the minority's ideals--the issues, if you will. They arrived to vote for someone who gave a "tax break" (also known as a "loan", people) and plunged the country into the greatest debt in history--from, incidentally, a surplus. Women arrived to vote for someone who would make it a felony to be a woman if he thought he could get away with it. Christians arrived to vote for someone who stands before us as a nation and lies* through his ever-loving teeth about issues of life and death. (Weapons of mass destruction, anyone? Oh, wait, nevermind, it was never about those, right?) Parents with teenagers arrived to vote for someone who's sending America's young adults off to die. Look, I applaud your right to cast your vote to the right if that's what you believe in. Really, I do. What bothers me is how many people do it in spite of their own convictions, in spite of the man showing a strong history of acting against their interests.
*How I long for the days when the biggest lying problem we had with the president was that he denied getting a hummer. Which, to be honest, I would deny getting a hummer, too.
big_bubba! We were pretty much exactly in the same spot on the grid. Ha!) M is an extremely hateful person, and this I know because he continually works it into the conversation that I am hateful, and only a hateful person would call someone hateful. (Yes, I know, it's a vicious cycle, isn't it?) I am reminded of his hatefulness in this case because he is shredding the integrity of the questions. There has been some reference to the author being a Quake-playing moron who uses phrases such as "death match". But anyway, I was going somewhere else with this. He stopped at a question that he didn't make fun of, just read aloud because it was interesting. Should only people who are literate be allowed to vote? (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)
Here's the thing. I know what people are thinking when they read this question. The premise is that the illiterate people don't keep up with the issues, they won't know enough about politics to make an informed decision. M asked me what I had choosen, and I told him "strongly disagree", and he looked at me a little sideways and asked why. (This isn't a reflection of M's choice, whatever it ended up being--we have many conversations that begin with one of us asking for the other to explain reasoning on issues we agree on, and our marriage is certainly strong enough to disagree on things, so don't read too much into this.) Denying someone the vote because of their illiteracy boils down to economic discrimination. It reminds me of the laws that were put into place to deny former slaves the right to vote. But what about the issues, you say. And I say.. so what? What does it matter if they know absolutely nothing about the issues? Who cares if they don't know anything about the candidates? The idea of voting is to get a representative sample of the population. Some of the population can't read, but they still deserve a voice because they are still living in this country.
You may be wondering why I'm telling you all of this. It relates to absolutely nothing, it's not relevant to any discussion ongoing, it's not relevant to current politics, really. The reason I'm blogging about it is because when I was done with my rather concise explanation (seriously, you know how I ramble, and this time I did not) M looked at me in that way you look at someone you know better than you know yourself but who has managed to vaguely surprise you and said, "That's a very valid point if you truly believe in the principles of democracy."
I call myself a Democrat, the quiz called me a Socialist--I believe that I am, in all truth, an Idealist.
And where being an idealist bites you in the ass is when a majority of the minority--and I'm not talking race and class here, I'm talking numbers and electoral colleges--of Americans went to the polls last year and cast their vote for a man who stands against the majority of the minority's ideals--the issues, if you will. They arrived to vote for someone who gave a "tax break" (also known as a "loan", people) and plunged the country into the greatest debt in history--from, incidentally, a surplus. Women arrived to vote for someone who would make it a felony to be a woman if he thought he could get away with it. Christians arrived to vote for someone who stands before us as a nation and lies* through his ever-loving teeth about issues of life and death. (Weapons of mass destruction, anyone? Oh, wait, nevermind, it was never about those, right?) Parents with teenagers arrived to vote for someone who's sending America's young adults off to die. Look, I applaud your right to cast your vote to the right if that's what you believe in. Really, I do. What bothers me is how many people do it in spite of their own convictions, in spite of the man showing a strong history of acting against their interests.
*How I long for the days when the biggest lying problem we had with the president was that he denied getting a hummer. Which, to be honest, I would deny getting a hummer, too.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-09-22 01:15 am (UTC)Anyway, great post and I agree 100% (surprise, surprise).
Over at FFF there is a political discussion going on and there's one girl there who just frustrates me beyond belief b/c there is no way I can possibly understand her viewpoint. Partly because she's not a good writer so doesn't explain it well, but partly because I AM an idealist (I guess) and can't imagine people not wanting to help others help themselves.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-22 02:02 am (UTC)I had the same reaction when I first read the question.. literate people theoretically SHOULD be better voters. Of course, I can't imagine that half of all Americans are illiterate so clearly that's a flawed reaction anyway. ;)
no subject
Date: 2005-09-22 02:06 am (UTC)Long post to agree with you.. everyone gets a vote, but not everyone gets to legislate.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-22 06:27 am (UTC)