2 deleted 3 characters in body
source | link

Let's assume for a moment that there is a way to test for "intelligence" and that the test is genuine. Let's also assume that it can be taken quickly and with ease. And that the test it's selfitself can apply a scale to the individual vote. Stupid people get 1 vote, average people get 5 votes, and smart get 10 votes. LetsLet's also assume there is a perfect, and well agreed upon definition of stupid, average, and smart.

Pause to clarify, stupid, smart, and average in the context of this answer are for shorthand only.

You still have a lot of problems to overcome.

  1. There are way more stupid people then there are smart people. It's just that simple. The vote weight would have to be adjusted to a point to make the stupid peoples vote count less.
  2. Average people, by definition are going to out weighoutweigh smart and stupid people. The average category is, average. Most people will belong here. So again smart votes are going to have to be weighted even higher.
  3. Smart people don't care. One of the side effects of being a smart peopleperson is that, by and large they tend to want to focus on their smartness. That is to say, as a smart person, I want to increase my smartness, I. I don't want to spend 2 years learning how someone else's stuff functions , just so I can make a super smart vote.
  4. Average people, and stupid people can wield weapons, and make them, and use them. And they will. When they feel that they don't have a voice in government, they will do what all people do in that case.
  5. Smart, stupid, and average, "None of us are as dumb as all of us." Meaning that as a society, or group, or gathering, or whatever, the more people you have the dumber the resulting ideas will be. Don't think for a moment you could lock 100 smart people in a room and not have some horridly stupid ideas about how to get out of the room. No matter the grouping, when people start to collaborate we do some really stupid things.

Mostly though, you have a really big concern.

The government is supposed to be representative of it'sits people. If the people are a bunch of idiots then the government should reflect that. It's not supposed to be a government of the smartest and brightest people. It's supposed to be a government of the people. That's how stability is maintained. It doesn't matter that a law, technically, is harmful or dumb, if enough people want that law, then they will have it; by pen or by sword.

Let's assume for a moment that there is a way to test for "intelligence" and that the test is genuine. Let's also assume that it can be taken quickly and with ease. And that the test it's self can apply a scale to the individual vote. Stupid people get 1 vote, average people get 5 votes, and smart get 10 votes. Lets also assume there is a perfect, and well agreed upon definition of stupid, average, and smart.

Pause to clarify, stupid, smart, and average in the context of this answer are for shorthand only.

You still have a lot of problems to overcome.

  1. There are way more stupid people then there are smart people. It's just that simple. The vote weight would have to be adjusted to a point to make the stupid peoples vote count less.
  2. Average people, by definition are going to out weigh smart and stupid people. The average category is, average. Most people will belong here. So again smart votes are going to have to be weighted even higher.
  3. Smart people don't care. One of the side effects of being a smart people is that, by and large they tend to want to focus on their smartness. That is to say, as a smart person, I want to increase my smartness, I don't want to spend 2 years learning how someone else's stuff functions , just so I can make a super smart vote.
  4. Average people, and stupid people can wield weapons, and make them, and use them. And they will. When they feel that they don't have a voice in government, they will do what all people do in that case.
  5. Smart, stupid, and average, "None of us are as dumb as all of us." Meaning that as a society, or group, or gathering, or whatever, the more people you have the dumber the resulting ideas will be. Don't think for a moment you could lock 100 smart people in a room and not have some horridly stupid ideas about how to get out of the room. No matter the grouping, when people start to collaborate we do some really stupid things.

Mostly though, you have a really big concern.

The government is supposed to be representative of it's people. If the people are a bunch of idiots then the government should reflect that. It's not supposed to be a government of the smartest and brightest people. It's supposed to be a government of the people. That's how stability is maintained. It doesn't matter that a law, technically, is harmful or dumb, if enough people want that law, then they will have it; by pen or by sword.

Let's assume for a moment that there is a way to test for "intelligence" and that the test is genuine. Let's also assume that it can be taken quickly and with ease. And that the test itself can apply a scale to the individual vote. Stupid people get 1 vote, average people get 5 votes, and smart get 10 votes. Let's also assume there is a perfect, and well agreed upon definition of stupid, average, and smart.

Pause to clarify, stupid, smart, and average in the context of this answer are for shorthand only.

You still have a lot of problems to overcome.

  1. There are way more stupid people then there are smart people. It's just that simple. The vote weight would have to be adjusted to a point to make the stupid peoples vote count less.
  2. Average people, by definition are going to outweigh smart and stupid people. The average category is, average. Most people will belong here. So again smart votes are going to have to be weighted even higher.
  3. Smart people don't care. One of the side effects of being a smart person is that, by and large they tend to want to focus on their smartness. That is to say, as a smart person, I want to increase my smartness. I don't want to spend 2 years learning how someone else's stuff functions , just so I can make a super smart vote.
  4. Average people, and stupid people can wield weapons, and make them, and use them. And they will. When they feel that they don't have a voice in government, they will do what all people do in that case.
  5. Smart, stupid, and average, "None of us are as dumb as all of us." Meaning that as a society, or group, or gathering, or whatever, the more people you have the dumber the resulting ideas will be. Don't think for a moment you could lock 100 smart people in a room and not have some horridly stupid ideas about how to get out of the room. No matter the grouping, when people start to collaborate we do some really stupid things.

Mostly though, you have a really big concern.

The government is supposed to be representative of its people. If the people are a bunch of idiots then the government should reflect that. It's not supposed to be a government of the smartest and brightest people. It's supposed to be a government of the people. That's how stability is maintained. It doesn't matter that a law, technically, is harmful or dumb, if enough people want that law, then they will have it; by pen or by sword.

1
source | link

Let's assume for a moment that there is a way to test for "intelligence" and that the test is genuine. Let's also assume that it can be taken quickly and with ease. And that the test it's self can apply a scale to the individual vote. Stupid people get 1 vote, average people get 5 votes, and smart get 10 votes. Lets also assume there is a perfect, and well agreed upon definition of stupid, average, and smart.

Pause to clarify, stupid, smart, and average in the context of this answer are for shorthand only.

You still have a lot of problems to overcome.

  1. There are way more stupid people then there are smart people. It's just that simple. The vote weight would have to be adjusted to a point to make the stupid peoples vote count less.
  2. Average people, by definition are going to out weigh smart and stupid people. The average category is, average. Most people will belong here. So again smart votes are going to have to be weighted even higher.
  3. Smart people don't care. One of the side effects of being a smart people is that, by and large they tend to want to focus on their smartness. That is to say, as a smart person, I want to increase my smartness, I don't want to spend 2 years learning how someone else's stuff functions , just so I can make a super smart vote.
  4. Average people, and stupid people can wield weapons, and make them, and use them. And they will. When they feel that they don't have a voice in government, they will do what all people do in that case.
  5. Smart, stupid, and average, "None of us are as dumb as all of us." Meaning that as a society, or group, or gathering, or whatever, the more people you have the dumber the resulting ideas will be. Don't think for a moment you could lock 100 smart people in a room and not have some horridly stupid ideas about how to get out of the room. No matter the grouping, when people start to collaborate we do some really stupid things.

Mostly though, you have a really big concern.

The government is supposed to be representative of it's people. If the people are a bunch of idiots then the government should reflect that. It's not supposed to be a government of the smartest and brightest people. It's supposed to be a government of the people. That's how stability is maintained. It doesn't matter that a law, technically, is harmful or dumb, if enough people want that law, then they will have it; by pen or by sword.