Support NeoGAF

[Josh5890]

I'd rather see mandatory voting, with a small fine for non compliance and tax break reward.

many demographic groups did not turn up to vote, I see that as a big problem in North America overall.

So punish people who don't have the means of making it to the polls (usually poor people)?

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

Quite a modest proposal.

Swift is rolling in his gravy.

 

[Flo_Evans]

Republicans (primarily white males) and voter suppression? Heard of it?

Edit: sry didn't see the link

I thought of that too, but I haven't really seen any op-eds saying we should completely ban women from voting. Its usually "voter fraud".

 

[benicillin]

Looks like we found the topic for the next Colin's Last Stand video.

 

[radios shipping overview]

The author seems to be the type who would argue in good faith that identity politics are the reason Trump won.

 

[Squalor]

I thought of that too, but I haven't really seen any op-eds saying we should completely ban women from voting. Its usually "voter fraud".

Why would they write articles about it when they just pass laws because white people, mostly men, are in charge?

 

[Flo_Evans]

Uh yeah. Hell, I've been told that I shouldn't be able to vote because I'm the child of non-white immigrants.

Welcome to America.

I'm in favor of giving those people citizenship tests before allowing them to vote.

 

[Leopold]

I don't think this is satire at all.

 

[Calamari41]

If I were an alt-right extremist, I would publish this article word for word as a false flag.

 

[NullPointer]

I don't think this is satire at all.

Whatever it is, its stupid.

 

[Fuchsdh]

Is this a parody piece or satire? I love Poe's law.

When something's written by a philosophy student, it's safe to assume the batshit crazy is in fact entirely sincere. However given that I can't find a good Google trail for Shelley Garland and yet it's her first contribution to HuffPo, it's safe to assume the identity is entirely made up and likely the background details are too for maximum apoplexy potential. So it smells like a troll job, although why they would publish this is beyond me. I guess they really just want angry clicks.

 

[stilgar]

is this one of those "joke is on you , I was just pretending!" type of articles?

You're saying this is dumb? TROLLED YOU

 

[akira28]

uhhh I think everyone gets a white grave marker in Arlington, no matter what their skin color or gender

Spoiler

or is he saying the graves stopped the Nazi's? by like blocking their path or something

skeletons are all white.

 

[Deepwater]

skeletons are all white.

does that mean we're all white people on the inside?

 

[ThreePiMatt]

Does HuffPost not have editors that look at this and say "no part of this is rational or well-thought out, maybe we shouldn't publish it?"

Editorials like this aren't smart, they aren't clever, they don't encourage positive discussion. They make her and her cause look foolish.

 

[benjipwns]

I don't understand why people think it's satire, we have to start somewhere. The only real flaw in her proposal is ending it after 20-30 years instead of extending it to all males, then adding all females and so on.

 

[demosthenes]

A period of twenty years without white men in the world's parliaments and voting booths will allow legislation to be passed which could see the world's wealth far more equitably shared. The violence of white male wealth and income inequality will be a thing of the past.

HAHA.

 

[benjipwns]

Does HuffPost not have editors that look at this and say "no part of this is a rationale or well-thought out, maybe we shouldn't publish it?"

Editorials like this aren't smart, they aren't clever, they don't encourage positive discussion. They make her and her cause look foolish.

This is the same site that did this:

During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the Huffington Post regularly appended an editor's note to the end of stories about candidate Donald Trump, reading: "Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims—1.6 billion members of an entire religion—from entering the U.S."

After Trump was elected on November 8, 2016, the Huffington Post ended this practice.

 

[DeathoftheEndless]

I'm fine with being denied The Sixers and The Browns.

 

[KirbYuuYuu]

What could possibly go wrong? Everything

 

[Fuchsdh]

does that mean we're all white people on the inside?

Glistening with just a hint of bleach.

Also, searching for the author just shows up the usual suspects of stuff. Given the number of mentions to SarkonOfAkkad, I can't wait for the terrible video to come of this. Lots of "she's ugly and fat" and (((Name))) stuff too, so I guess the true author got what they wanted.

This is the same site that did this:

Lol. Why not stick to your guns, then, HuffPo.

 

[XenoRaven]

What if, in a surprise twist, white men lose the right to vote, yet all the remaining voters just vote in the incumbents anyway?

 

[ZOONAMI]

I'm in favor of giving those people citizenship tests before allowing them to vote.

Wut

 

[Intheflorsh]

Sometimes I wish people would ask themselves "am I actually helping" before putting stuff like this out there.

 

[Fuchsdh]

Wut

I believe they're saying that they should give citizenship tests to the people who want to kick out immigrants or restrict access to polling places. You know, see how good an American they are when they're busy trying to exclude everyone else.

I would be morbidly curious to see what the result of implementing that nationwide would be. Wonder how many people would actually be left to legally vote and if the Dems or Republicans would come out ahead.

 

[Squalor]

I'm in favor of giving those people citizenship tests before allowing them to vote.

And what exactly is a "citizenship test"?

I believe they're saying that they should give citizenship tests to the people who want to kick out immigrants or restrict access to polling places. You know, see how good an American they are when they're busy trying to exclude everyone else.

I would be morbidly curious to see what the result of implementing that nationwide would be. Wonder how many people would actually be left to legally vote and if the Dems or Republicans would come out ahead.

Hm, maybe. The poster should have been more clear with pronouns.

And, just based upon education statistics of people who identify as Democrats and Republicans, I'm giving the nod to Democrats.

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Oh well isn't this writer edgy.

 

[Eidan]

Hm.

 

[akira28]

does that mean we're all white people on the inside?

that's exactly what it means. but we also all originate from Africa. birthplace of the first white skeleton.

Hm.

seems to be a lot of cross interaction between racism and white people. ( yeah that red color pretty much stands for racism. )


if only man was wise enough to judge a person by the color of their bones, not the color of their skin...

 

[DragonGirl]

I was going to say this sounds like a Modest Proposal but at least some people have already figured that out.

 

[wandering]

Hm.

WA is mail-in only, should be the standard IMO.

Washington stays winning

 

[Alex]

So punish people who don't have the means of making it to the polls (usually poor people)?

WA is mail-in only, should be the standard IMO.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

As a white dude from America, I don't understand how so many other white men from America vote the way they do, purely from an economic perspective. I think that is because I was raised Catholic prior to becoming a defacto atheist later in life. I think white evangelicals in particular and WASP protestants in general are so engulfed in the hegemony of John Locke, Hobbs, Adam Smith, and others within that philosophical realm that they cannot see outside of their ideological box, as stepping out of their shoes for even a moment would enlighten them in realizing that they themselves are being exploited by systems of pure capitalism, that they are voting against their own economic interests in reinforcing them, and that they in fact are more than likely not the temporarily embarrassed millionaires that they think they are.

 

[radios shipping overview]

I don't understand why people think it's satire, we have to start somewhere. The only real flaw in her proposal is ending it after 20-30 years instead of extending it to all males, then adding all females and so on.

Tankie thread?

 

[Squalor]

WA is mail-in only, should be the standard IMO.

Nah, Election Day should just be a national holiday.

 

[PARANO1A]

So punish people who don't have the means of making it to the polls (usually poor people)?

Australia has mandatory cutting and no one is punished. Polling places are everywhere eg every school, held on the weekend and employers have to give staff paid time to vote if they're writing in the weekend. It's awesome.

 

[benjipwns]

And what exactly is a "citizenship test"?

Hm, maybe. The poster should have been more clear with pronouns.

And, just based upon education statistics of people who identify as Democrats and Republicans, I'm giving the nod to Democrats.

I believe they're saying that they should give citizenship tests to the people who want to kick out immigrants or restrict access to polling places. You know, see how good an American they are when they're busy trying to exclude everyone else.

I would be morbidly curious to see what the result of implementing that nationwide would be. Wonder how many people would actually be left to legally vote and if the Dems or Republicans would come out ahead.

I feel like there's dubiously sourced stories about how high school students score like 30% on it every couple of years.

For the record I got 20/20 and will be sending the results page to my bosses: https://my.uscis.gov/en/prep/test/civics/view

edit: oooh it gives you new questions every time

 

[Funyarinpa]

I don't know if this is satire, but I'm just glad that I don't really see anyone seriously defending it. I hope it is satire.

Even ignoring that this would just cause a HUGE amount of political and social instability, denying a particular race and/or gender the democratic right to vote is racist and sexist as hell, and fucking disgusting.

There isn't much more intellectual merit to this at face value compared to "let's kill all white men so that they don't siphon the economy!"

 

[Flo_Evans]

And what exactly is a "citizenship test"?

Hm, maybe. The poster should have been more clear with pronouns.

And, just based upon education statistics of people who identify as Democrats and Republicans, I'm giving the nod to Democrats.

If you are an immigrant you need to pass a basic test to become a citizen https://my.uscis.gov/prep/test/civics

I'd suggest if you are questioning another citizens right to vote you should have to submit to the test.

edit: I took the test for fun:

shit got real.

 

[HellforLeather]

If I read an article like this 5 years ago I would have guessed it was satire....not anymore.

 

[MrToughPants]

I self identify as black so this wouldn't affect me.

 

[Garrett Hawke]

It would work though

 

[Garrett Hawke]

Looks like we found the topic for the next Colin's Last Stand video.

this got me good

 

[Team Filler]

If I read an article like this 5 years ago I would have guessed it was satire....not anymore.

This is where I stand. I'm ridiculously upset that I can't say for a certainty that this is satire.

 

[Deepwater]

I don't know if this is satire, but I'm just glad that I don't really see anyone seriously defending it. I hope it is satire.

Even ignoring that this would just cause a HUGE amount of political and social instability, denying a particular race and/or gender the democratic right to vote is racist and sexist as hell, and fucking disgusting.

There isn't much more intellectual merit to this at face value compared to "let's kill all white men so that they don't siphon the economy!"

great that something like this doesn't happen in the U S of A today. absolutely wonderful.

 

[Squalor]

If you are an immigrant you need to pass a basic test to become a citizen https://my.uscis.gov/prep/test/civics

I'd suggest if you are questioning another citizens right to vote you should have to submit to the test.

I'm aware of that.

Your pronoun use was poor, so it made your meaning convoluted.

great that something like this doesn't happen in the U S of A today. absolutely wonderful.

Praise Godmerica.

 

[MsKrisp]

Came to the comments for salt.

I now have hypertension.

You guys are so predictable.

lol

What position is she satirizing? Is there anyone seriously advocating we don't allow black women the right to vote?

....

jesus http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-women-be-allowed-to-vote

:/

 

[HellforLeather]

It would work though

Lets think of all the other ways we could improve the world by taking rights away from people based on sex and race...

 

[jviggy43]

I'm 100% down with this even if it means I lose my vote. It will never happen but I am not opposed to trying out. Plenty of research has been done that has shown ingroup majority voting is largely opposed to outgroup minority groups gaining ground unless they themselves are also seeing tangible gains; additionally, they are also likely to approve of measures that would ensure their own betterment at the cost of outgroup inequity

In Experiment 1, the effect of a
manipulation of affirmative action procedures on policy support was mediated by how Whites expected
the policy to affect fellow Whites, but not by the expected effect on minorities.

Lowery, Brian S., et al. "Concern for the in-group and opposition to affirmative action." Journal of personality and social psychology 90.6 (2006): 961.

I don't know if this is satire, but I'm just glad that I don't really see anyone seriously defending it. I hope it is satire.

Even ignoring that this would just cause a HUGE amount of political and social instability, denying a particular race and/or gender the democratic right to vote is racist and sexist as hell, and fucking disgusting.

There isn't much more intellectual merit to this at face value compared to "let's kill all white men so that they don't siphon the economy!"

It has less to do with the actual race and gender aspect as it does the majority population seeking to maintain their own social positioning. When people say "white men" theyre more or less referring to their dominance in a society rather than associating these problems as an inherent trait feature of their race or gender.

 

[benjipwns]

Even ignoring that this would just cause a HUGE amount of political and social instability, denying a particular race and/or gender the democratic right to vote is racist and sexist as hell, and fucking disgusting.

Herbert Marcuse addressed your concerns over fifty years ago: http://www.marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetolerance.htm

Withdrawal of tolerance from regressive movements before they can become active; intolerance even toward thought, opinion, and word, and finally, intolerance in the opposite direction, that is, toward the self-styled conservatives, to the political Right--these anti-democratic notions respond to the actual development of the democratic society which has destroyed the basis for universal tolerance. The conditions under which tolerance can again become a liberating and humanizing force have still to be created. When tolerance mainly serves the protection and preservation of a repressive society, when it serves to neutralize opposition and to render men immune against other and better forms of life, then tolerance has been perverted. And when this perversion starts in the mind of the individual, in his consciousness, his needs, when heteronomous interests occupy him before he can experience his servitude, then the efforts to counteract his dehumanization must begin at the place of entrance, there where the false consciousness takes form (or rather: is systematically formed)--it must begin with stopping the words and images which feed this consciousness. To be sure, this is censorship, even precensorship, but openly directed against the more or less hidden censorship that permeates the free media. Where the false consciousness has become prevalent in national and popular behavior, it translates itself almost immediately into practice: the safe distance between ideology and reality, repressive thought and repressive action, between the word of destruction and the deed of destruction is dangerously shortened. Thus, the break through the false consciousness may provide the Archimedean point for a larger emancipation--at an infinitesimally small spot, to be sure, but it is on the enlargement of such small spots that the chance of change depends.

The forces of emancipation cannot be identified with any social class which, by virtue of its material condition, is free from false consciousness. Today, they are hopelessly dispersed throughout the society, and the fighting minorities and isolated groups are often in opposition to their own leadership. In the society at large, the mental space for denial and reflection must first be recreated. Repulsed by the concreteness of the administered society, the effort of emancipation becomes 'abstract'; it is reduced to facilitating the recognition of what is going on, to freeing language from the tyranny of the Orwellian syntax and logic, to developing the concepts that comprehend reality. More than ever, the proposition holds true that progress in freedom demands progress in the consciousness of freedom. Where the mind has been made into a subject-object of politics and policies, intellectual autonomy, the realm of 'pure' thought has become a matter of political education (or rather: counter-education).

This means that previously neutral, value-free, formal aspects of learning and teaching now become, on their own grounds and in their own right, political: learning to know the facts, the whole truth, and to comprehend it is radical criticism throughout, intellectual subversion. In a world in which the human faculties and needs are arrested or perverted, autonomous thinking leads into a 'perverted world': contradiction and counter-image of the established world of repression. And this contradiction is not simply stipulated, is not simply the product of confused thinking or fantasy, but is the logical development of the given, the existing world. To the degree to which this development is actually impeded by the sheer weight of a repressive society and the necessity of making a living in. it, repression invades the academic enterprise itself, even prior to all restrictions on academic freedom.

These same conditions render the critique of such tolerance abstract and academic, and the proposition that the balance between tolerance toward the Right and toward the Left would have to be radically redressed in order to restore the liberating function of tolerance becomes only an unrealistic speculation. Indeed, such a redressing seems to be tantamount to the establishment of a "right of resistance" to the point of subversion. There is not, there cannot be any such right for any group or individual against a constitutional government sustained by a majority of the population. But I believe that there is a "natural right" of resistance for oppressed and overpowered minorities to use extralegal means if the legal ones have proved to be inadequate. Law and order are always and everywhere the law and order which protect the established hierarchy; it is nonsensical to invoke the absolute authority of this law and this order against those who suffer from it and struggle against it--not for personal advantages and revenge, but for their share of humanity.

UNDER the conditions prevailing in this country, tolerance does not, and cannot, fulfill the civilizing function attributed to it by the liberal protagonists of democracy, namely, protection of dissent. The progressive historical force of tolerance lies in its extension to those modes and forms of dissent which are not committed to the status quo of society, and not confined to the institutional framework of the established society. Consequently, the idea of tolerance implies the necessity, for the dissenting group or individuals, to become illegitimate if and when the established legitimacy prevents and counteracts the development of dissent. This would be the case not only in a totalitarian society, under a dictatorship, in one-party states, but also in a democracy (representative, parliamentary, or 'direct') where the majority does not result from the development of independent thought and opinion but rather from the monopolistic or oligopolistic administration of public opinion, without terror and (normally) without censorship. In such cases, the majority is self-perpetuating while perpetuating the vested interests which made it a majority. In its very structure this majority is 'closed', petrified; it repels a priori any change other than changes within the system. But this means that the majority is no longer justified in claiming the democratic title of the best guardian of the common interest. And such a majority is all but the opposite of Rousseau's 'general will': it is composed, not of individuals who, in their political functions, have made effective 'abstraction' from their private interests, but, on the contrary, of individuals who have effectively identified their private. interests with their political functions. And the representatives of this majority, in ascertaining and executing its will, ascertain and execute the will of the vested interests, which have formed the majority. The ideology of democracy hides its lack of substance.