ADVERTISEMENT

Epistocracy Should Be The Future Of Our Republic

Veerman_12

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2019
3,054
2,791
113
Epistocracy, has many different conceptions but the core idea is that the vast majority of individuals do not have necessary political knowledge for participating in decision-making process.

In this theory, citizens should pass a competence test in which they answer questions about government structure of their country, basic principles and theories in political science, economy, and sociology.

If they manage to answer more than half of the questions, they will possess political rights, let us say, for the next five years. If they fail, they will have a second or a third or more chances until the next election.

Another method will be to distribute various number of votes to individuals based on their knowledge. For instance, if somebody correctly answers 80 questions out of 100, that person will have 0.8 vote instead of 1.0.

In this regard, whether we give full 1.0 vote for a person who passes a test or we proportionately distribute votes in accordance with the correct answers, in a perfect epistocratic system, every adult citizen will be knowledgeable and they all will possess political rights.

I personally like this concept as it rewards political literacy and will lead to better overall results in the quality of candidates we have as well as (hopefully) better government function.
 
I make it even simpler...you have to pay income tax or you can't vote.

Nah, I do believe it is the right of adult citizens to vote, I just don't think 3R or kaskaskiakid's uninformed vote should count as much as say Neuron Monster's.
 
I disagree once you are a ward of the State and your mere existence is dependent upon the sweat and labor of others you are now no more than a child who must rely on others to provide for your safety,well being and survival. Therefore you have lost the right to have a say, age should not be the determining factor in voting. Actually having skin in the game should be. A citizen who brings no worth to society should have no say in the decisions of society.

If I don't buy stock in a company do I get a say on the governance of who makes up the Board or CEO...Nope so why should a freeloader get a vote to determine elected officials that basically bribe them with benefits paid for by those who actually contribute to society.
 
I disagree once you are a ward of the State and your mere existence is dependent upon the sweat and labor of others you are now no more than a child who must rely on others to provide for your safety,well being and survival. Therefore you have lost the right to have a say, age should not be the determining factor in voting. Actually having skin in the game should be. A citizen who brings no worth to society should have no say in the decisions of society.

That's a slippery slope toward voter suppression.

If I know a certain segment of society will vote against me (and I have power to begin with) why then wouldn't I go out of my way to make as many of that group as possible "wards of the state"?

Give everyone a test, you don't necessarily have to even give them the results. Whatever percentage of the test they get correct is the percentage of one vote that they get.

If they get zero, well then give them an opportunity to re-test at some point and try for a better score, or give them .01% for signing their name right. For those of us who actually pay attention and aren't completely politically illiterate will provide .75% to 1.0% of a vote.

Can you imagine what election cycles and debates would look like if these candidates weren't pandering to the lowest common denominator in our country? I all but guarantee Biden and Trump wouldn't even be in the conversation.
 
No. I want weighted voting which will lead to better outcomes.
So better outcomes means old people that don't make enough to pay taxes should not get to vote? That's purely absurd. I'm back to just reading these so called conservative ideas.
 
Last edited:
So better outcomes means old people ta don't make enough ti pay rates should get to vote? That's purely absurd. I 'm back to just reading these so called conservative ideas.

Dude...read the thread.

I. NEVER. SAID. ANY. OF. THAT.

Give everyone a test, you don't necessarily have to even give them the results. Whatever percentage of the test they get correct is the percentage of one vote that they get.

If they get zero, well then give them an opportunity to re-test at some point and try for a better score, or give them .01% for signing their name right. For those of us who actually pay attention and aren't completely politically illiterate will provide .75% to 1.0% of a vote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Distancefix
While I agree we need a better educated electorate, you just can't have the government know how you are voting. If your vote is to be given weighted value, they have to know which ballot is yours.
I'm ok with one person one vote as long as that person is a citizen in good standing and only gets one vote.

There are 250 MILLION eligible voters. There is bound to be some overlap. You get kids with the same test scores in a class of 20. These results would have a bell curve just like any other test.

Make it a basic 10 or 20 question scantron test that comes with your ballot. They both get graded at the same time and your percentage of the vote is assessed at the same time as your submitted vote. They may know essentially where you came from, but it would be hard if not impossible to pinpoint WHO did extremely well vs who did poorly.

It is possible you could pinpoint which regions have better overall results and then have pandering to those regions, but that's the only "downside" I see.
 
Better outcomes for who ? You spew elitist crap !

Better outcomes for the entire country.

God forbid we have people who actually understand the issues having a bigger impact on who is elected than the 18 year old who thinks Herbert Hoover was the inventor of the vaccuum...
 
Better outcomes for the entire country.

God forbid we have people who actually understand the issues having a bigger impact on who is elected than the 18 year old who thinks Herbert Hoover was the inventor of the vaccuum...
It is elitist crap... you want an authoritarian government.
 
How would this lead to authoritarian government? What's your reasoning?
Democracy for some... the chosen few... It would be merely a scheme to maintain power over the masses. BTW: What would you do if your own children "failed the test ?" Would you ban them from your family. Would you force them to live in the shed in your back yard ?
 
Democracy for some... the chosen few... It would be merely a scheme to maintain power over the masses. BTW: What would you do if your own children "failed the test ?" Would you ban them from your family. Would you force them to live in the shed in your back yard ?

No, it would still be democracy for all.

What are the barriers that prohibit anyone in this country from having a basic understanding of how government works? I'm not advocating an Ivy League level political test. Just something that tests a baseline knowledge (let's say a 12th grade public school level) of "social studies".

In this scenario no one "fails" the test they just demonstrate their knowledge base and are awarded that percentage of a vote. It rewards basic civic engagement.

How is that worse than having someone with zero understanding of the issues or candidates going to the ballot box and blindly filling in the bubbles?

Also, how does that result in authoritarian government? That was your conjecture. I'm interested in how epistocracy leads to authoritarianism?
 
No, it would still be democracy for all.

What are the barriers that prohibit anyone in this country from having a basic understanding of how government works? I'm not advocating an Ivy League level political test. Just something that tests a baseline knowledge (let's say a 12th grade public school level) of "social studies".

In this scenario no one "fails" the test they just demonstrate their knowledge base and are awarded that percentage of a vote. It rewards basic civic engagement.

How is that worse than having someone with zero understanding of the issues or candidates going to the ballot box and blindly filling in the bubbles?

Also, how does that result in authoritarian government? That was your conjecture. I'm interested in how epistocracy leads to authoritarianism?
You purport freedom for all and then offer a plan for voter suppression. Your forked tongue is very obvious...
 
Good point, Meat!!

Any barrier that prevents any otherwise legal voting from exercising their right to vote is unAmerican. Stupidest idea I ever heard, but consider the source. They're getting desperate because they see the anti trump voters are fleeing the cult.
 
Last edited:
You purport freedom for all and then offer a plan for voter suppression. Your forked tongue is very obvious...

No one is being barred from voting. I know democrats are in favor of lowering the voting age to 16, in an epistocratic system I'd be fine with expanding the voting age because it would still require a baseline knowledge of the issues in order to have an impact.

You call it "voter suppression", it's really not, everyone still gets to vote. It just rewards those who took the time to research the basic functions of government.

I'll ask again for clarification, why should the 18 year old who thinks the Electoral College is a place he could go to get a degree have an equal voice in electing officials who impact the entire direction of the country.

That system is how we wound up with Joe Biden and Donald Trump as our only real options for president.

That system is how we wind up with career politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell.

I don't understand how you can be against at least attempting to improve our representation via rewarding informed voters.

I'm also still very interested, how does rewarding the informed among the electorate in any way lead to authoritarian government?
 
I’m not sure how many members of Congress would be allowed to vote.

Lol I want to be clear, in this system they'd still be allowed to vote. Their vote would only count for the percentage of the answers they got right. Get a 90% on the test, you get .90% of a vote. Get a .45% you get .45% of a vote, etc.

I understand you were joking, I just want to clarify for others who delight in taking things out of context.
 
Lol I want to be clear, in this system they'd still be allowed to vote. Their vote would only count for the percentage of the answers they got right. Get a 90% on the test, you get .90% of a vote.

I understand you were joking, I just want to clarify for others who delight in taking things out of context.
What about equal rights don't you understand..? There was a time when slaves were counted as 3/5's of one vote. We have come a long way since then; I really don't care to go to go back that direction.
Judging from the looks of Trump's rallies, he would lose far more votes than his opponent under your proposal.
 
What about equal rights don't you understand..? There was a time when slaves were counted as 3/5's of one vote. We have come a long way since then; I really don't care to go to go back that direction.
Judging from the looks of Trump's rallies, he would lose far more votes than his opponent under your proposal.
One word for you Homey...............Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
 
What about equal rights don't you understand..? There was a time when slaves were counted as 3/5's of one vote. We have come a long way since then; I really don't care to go to go back that direction.
Judging from the looks of Trump's rallies, he would lose far more votes than his opponent under your proposal.

That equates to Authoritarian government how exactly?

Everyone would still be equal, everyone would still get to vote. It's up to the individual if they don't take the time to have a basic understanding of government function.

No one's rights would be violated. If you only have a 30% understanding of government function or political literacy, why should you get an "equal" say with someone who has a 75% or greater understanding of the outcomes of their vote?

You don't have equal understanding, but you want equal say. That seems wrong.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT