To think you should have to demonstrate a basic understanding of the facts before being allowed to vote

[Bearbehind]

Ok, I appreciate this is purely hypothetical is it could never be enforced but, it does astound me when a proportion of the electorate, albeit hopefully small, are so clueless they come out with comments like I've seen this morning which included:-

-Looking forward to doing some online shopping for items from the USA as they'd be cheaper now the pound has dropped

-Being surprised that the markets have fallen following the vote to leave and not realising their vote would have that effect

-Thinking this decision might pave the way for Norway to hold a referendum to leave the EU too

It's bad enough we all have to filter through the outright lies, like the money saved on the EU which would go straight to the NHS, and the scarcity of facts but people making decisions when their basic understanding is so poor is downright scary.

Please do fee free to enlighten me OP on the following

Basic understanding of the EU
Why you are more informed

I've been asking for ages

Bear you have said over and over a basic understanding so people are asking you what do you consider that to be

It's not a tough question

Answer it

AIBU to think you should have to demonstrate a basic understanding of the facts before being allowed to vote

It's a conversation though, so it's moved on from the initial title and posts, that happens in all threads on here.

I don't understand how me questioning the value of someone putting a cross in a box and either doing it to answer a question other than what's on the ballot, or the flip of a coin toss as an example given on here, is a way of demonstrating 'democracy in action'. Is that democratic, to think you're answering one question, wake up in the morning and realise it's another? How is that democracy?

After sleeping on it. I'm still wondering if there can be an extent that someone can said to hold responsibility for their own vote, and questioning how much responsibility is in the hands of the government and the media to distribute information?

What's wrong with questioning democracy itself? Is democracy a great pillar of civilised societies? Is there a better system? Why is merely asking those questions something to be shut down?

Now that I have asked do you wonder whether I deserved my vote? I am certainly wondering whether I was put in a fair position by being asked to vote on this.

Whiskey2014 I do not genuinely give one small shiny shit whether someone voted in because they think Angela Merkel has a nice smile or out because the tomatoes from outside the EU are redder.

I would defend absolutely their right to vote either way for whatever was important to them.

and that is the key difference on this thread.

some of us have the ability to see how absolutely vital democracy is with all its issues and some ....well as has been said above its like a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

What a delight. Definitely should be a test OP. Based on some of the fools on this thread.

kittens I stated my reasons for voting and you said they were uninformed.

Not that they were more or less informed that the next person- my reasons were 'uninformed' but you refuse to back that up.

It was incredibly difficult to get any factual, non biased information about this vote and I've never suggested I was more informed than anyone else- in fact, the opposite is true. I know I only scratched the surface but I do know what the EU is and what Brexit meant and I didn't just vote for what my nan told me to.

Bear you have said over and over a basic understanding so people are asking you what do you consider that to be

I quite like an answer I saw about p.5, something like "an understanding that the vote being cast is on whether to remain in the EU or to leave".

What's democratic about people thinking they're answering something else?

No you didn't state them you just said what question should be asked

I said you seemed uninformed based on that question.

And if you have said then please say again

You have said in this thread that it is not ok to place rules and regulations around if people can or cannot vote. but, there are loads of rules and regulations around voting - so the existence of rules can't be an excluding factor unless you say we don't have democracy now? There are rules about what we can vote on, who can vote, when we can vote, whether our vote will count in a certain way or another. So is it that rules we're used to are ok, but others are an affront?

whiskey2014 so you bring in a test. then the next new govt has a massive majority and sneaks in under the radar (like the changes to holidays in term time) that they are going to extend this basic test. so for arguments sake lets include something on basic numeracy because after all its all about the money isn't it.

then they decide to include a test on some of The Facts.

why are you so completely incapable of seeing the slippery slope.

But hey here's an idea for your test? lets not let anyone vote who answers yes to the following question:

"do you think we should ban from voting anyone who votes in because they like angela merkels hair or out because the tomatoes outside Europe are redder"

Now based on your responses you would be answering yes to this. so would that be fair? No? well you see that's the problem with asking questions because sometimes you are set up to fail or the question isn't one that you like.

kiitens you are being deliberately obtuse now and this discussion is going round endlessly.

I don't believe someone who doesn't know what the EU is or what Brexit is, or doesn't understand that their vote will count should be allowed to influence the outcome of an event like this.

Clearly there are plenty of people who are happy with the toss of a coin voters as its democratic - we are never going to reconcile that difference of opinion on here.

*whats wrong with questioning democracy itself

Holy Fuck*

Why so shocked, we question democracy all the time. Every time we discuss whether we should have fptp or pr we examine democracy don't we, for example?

Every time people protest against a decision made by politicians or ask for a referendum, we're saying that the democracy we have is only fit for purpose with addendums aren't we?

The boundaries of what we accept as workable democracy get moved, how does that happen if the boundary isn't questioned first?

decaff there is only one rule around voting in this country that is important and that is that everyone gets a vote and everyones vote counts equally.

the rest is just process.

and before you ask, yes, I do believe that everyone should have a vote - prisioners, illegal immigrants everyone.

bearbehind I feel really genuinely sorry for you that you cannot comprehend the massive value to the human race of democracy and how many people over the centuries have given and will give their lives to protect it. Its the old adage - I disagree with your point of view but will defend with my life your right to express it. Clearly you would want someone to take a test before deciding whether or not to do this.

Yeah honestly I have seen and heard this from people who have themselves never bothered to

Yeah honestly I have seen and heard this from people who have themselves never bothered to

I think there's a massive problem throughout the west with the perception that all opinions are equal regardless of how they're arrived at. It's not just an issue for voting, it's a massive cultural shift and I don't know how it can be rectified. So you have a vote like this where low information voters make a catastrophic decision based on prejudices unrelated to the issue at hand. Possibly asking them to take a vote is not the answer. But just blithely accepting that this is all fine because someone did it based on their opinion and because it's an opinion someone holds its objectively as valid as any other reason because you can loosely describe that as a form of democracy is a pretty poor reflection of how society is developing.

My instinct is to say that you are completely right, BUT the point of having a government is that we (should) have people who ARE qualified to make decisions like this. Very few of us are qualified to vote in a referendum like the one we just had, and it should never have happened in the first place.

The (possibly apocryphal) conversation I have heard of was "What way are you voting in the referendum?" "Oh, I always vote Labour."

Sorry, that's take a test rather than take a vote.

No need to feel sorry for me mummymeister, save your sympathy for those people over the centuries who have given and will give their lives to protect others right to vote- I'm damn sure they didn't/ don't do it so that those votes can be decided on the toss of a coin.

Yeah honestly I have seen and heard this from people who have themselves never bothered to

I think there's a massive problem throughout the west with the perception that all opinions are equal regardless of how they're arrived at.

Wow. Just wow. I think there's a massive problem alright. A problem with people thinking some should have more rights than others - in other words, those that agree with me.

It all boils right back down to the arrogant assumption that "if they had read the facts, they MUST come to the same decision as me, so therefore if they voted differently than me, they either don't know the facts or are too stupid to understand them."

You can dress it up all you like, but basically that's what a lot of people on here are saying.