-4

Conclusion: I wrote this question, and clarified it many times, so it seems that this platform is not for me, at least in my current question; thanks for attempts everyone, I appreciate your efforts.

If democracy is about people and most of the people are significantly less smart than smartest 10% of the people, does it mean that less smart people mostly choose a way of humanity?

P.S. I understand that people choose the government, and the government then takes control, but isn't this choice the main one?

Edits:

  • What does “choose a way of humanity” mean?

People choose government. Government choose the way of the country. All countries together represent humanity.

  • What does "smart" mean, in the context of your question? Higher IQ? Better educated? More politically aware?

I meant intelligence of the people. Yes, you can think of it as IQ.

Quote: "these tests were administered largely to voters of color and were scored by biased judges. The tests were intentionally confusing and difficult and one wrong answer meant a failing grade." – my question doesn't contain anything about race discrimination and double standards. I wrote about the intelligence of people, without division by race or anything else other than intelligence.

  • The point is that history has demonstrated that once you have a requirement like that, it is abused by those with a vested interest to exclude a segment of the electorate.

I reckon, one can abuse anything as long as the one get away with it. So if you see that something is abused you can just report it to the authorities and the public.

  • You can change your question to: most of the people are significantly smarter than least smart 10% of the people, does it mean that smarter people mostly choose a way of humanity?

You compared people with the least smart 10% of people. It doesn't change distribution of people intelligence that is represented by the bell curve. So in your 90% will be people much less smarter than the average. I on the contrary talk about the people which are much smarter than the average.

12
  • 3
    What does “choose a way of humanity” mean?
    – Wes Sayeed
    Jan 9 at 9:38
  • 2
    What does "smart" mean, in the context of your question? Higher IQ? Better educated? More politically aware? Jan 9 at 10:36
  • @Anton - In 'way of humanity" do you mean humanity in the sense of being humane and benevolent as in the third definition here: wordnik.com/words/humanity Jan 10 at 11:33
  • I edited a question yesterday where explained meaning of “choose a way of humanity” and "smart". Have you read the edits?
    – Anton
    Jan 10 at 17:59
  • 2
    The point is that history has demonstrated that once you have a requirement like that, it is abused by those with a vested interest to exclude a segment of the electorate. Jan 11 at 9:58
1

No. Less smart people have the same amount of influence over the choice of a government as more smart people.

You can change your question to:

most of the people are significantly smarter than least smart 10% of the people, does it mean that smarter people mostly choose a way of humanity?

There is no electoral advantage given to either smarter or less smart people.

5
  • 2
    But does this answer the question? I for one am not entirely clear what is meant by "way of humanity". And for that matter the word "smart" might be up for debate too!
    – WS2
    Jan 9 at 9:21
  • Given that the question itself is very poorly phrased, I don't think it's even possible to answer it correctly. But given that any portion of the populace who are in the majority automatically have a democratic advantage, through simple numbers. While they may not be aligned to a single clear aim, they do more have more say in any election. As such, the "less smart" (by whichever metric we're measuring "smart") 90% of the population has more impact on the democratic process than the "more smart" 10%. Jan 9 at 10:40
  • Its poorly phrased, but I suppose the speaker is a non-native speaker of English. I think think the OP is going down the line of "If less smart people have more power then we get less smart decisions made by government.... so we should make more smart people (like me) have more votes than the less smart people." But this is based on a fallacy, and I hope this answer exposes this fallacy.
    – James K
    Jan 9 at 14:17
  • @ws2 I think it does answer the question. I assume "the way of humanity" is a non-idiomatic way of saying "the political direction taken by a government". I hope the answer is structured in the way that it is equally valid however you define "smart". And if "smart" is undefinable, then the answer is still "No" (trivially).
    – James K
    Jan 9 at 14:22
  • "You can change your question to:..." -- you compared people with the least smart 10% of people. It doesn't change distribution of people intelligence that is represented by the bell curve. So in your 90% will be people much less smarter than the average. I on the contrary talk about the people which are much smarter than the average.
    – Anton
    Jan 10 at 20:15
-2

Yes, they do. In a democracy we all have an equal stake in the leadership of our country, regardless of our IQs.

But politics isn't about choosing the smartest individual as a leader, it is about choosing the one that you are confident will apply policies that aling with your own interest, and with the interest of the society.

The smartest person could very well be really good at helping himself and his cronies, while destroying everybody else. See e.g. leaders such as Putin, Erdogan, Lukashenko, Kim Jong-un, etc. They are all obviously smart enough to make entire countries work for them personally, and have become very powerful and wealthy as a result, while at the same time, the life of their citiness continually deteriorates.

If the smart people are really smart, they should be able to convince everybody about the course of humanity that is more beneficial for society.

6
  • I would appreciate some feedback if this answer is wrong, or it if it doesn't answer the question, so I can delete it if that is the case.
    – user000001
    Jan 9 at 10:25
  • You're making a lot of assumptions. In particular, you're assuming smart=self-serving, less smart=humanitarian.
    – user141592
    Jan 9 at 10:35
  • @user141592: Thanks for that. My intention was the opposite: to highlight that smart=humanitarian is not necessarily true in all cases, but one should be looking at things other than the IQ of the candidate, like their intention. I'll make an edit to clarify this
    – user000001
    Jan 9 at 10:38
  • 2
    Then in your second paragraph, you should use "could" instead of "would". It might also help to cite examples of a "smartest" person acting in selfish self-interest at the expense of the masses. You also have a typo in your first paragraph, "alling" instead of "align". Jan 9 at 10:43
  • In democratic countries, everyone has one vote. But until two years ago I would have said that intelligent people will find it easier to influence people and make others vote the way they vote themselves.
    – gnasher729
    Jan 9 at 14:47

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .