Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
approximately 19 million Americans—6 percent of the population—still lack access to fixed broadband service at threshold speeds. In rural areas, nearly one-fourth of the population —14.5 million people—lack access to this service.
How many people in Africa, where you live lack broadband access?
Originally posted by dadudemon
This is a lie and it has been noted why your statement is a lie. You're the elitist who looks down on the poor and minorities by thinking they are too dumb to understand the current political landscape.
Your attempt to flip your elitism on me has been noted.
I do realize that you actually do understand that not all people have the same access and why your voting-plan is silly.
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
approximately 19 million Americans—6 percent of the population—still lack access to fixed broadband service at threshold speeds. In rural areas, nearly one-fourth of the population —14.5 million people—lack access to this service.
Yep.
His plan would be punishing people and potentially not allowing them to vote over something they might not have any control over.
Originally posted by BrolyBlack
How many people in Africa, where you live lack broadband access?
In 2020, Nigeria had 99.05 million internet users. This figure is projected to grow to 131.7 million internet users in 2023. The internet penetration amounted to 46.6 percent of the population in 2020 and is set to reach 65.2 percent in 2025. -snip
In Nigeria, about half don't have access.
Originally posted by Robtard
Your elitism has been noted.DDM, not everyone has the same access to this information regardless of it being 2020. You'd be punishing people for something they may not be able to control.
I think I may understand what DDM is saying, and IMO, it's the epitome of the Freudian manifest in the macroscopic scale of Evolutionary Ethics. Quite simply, older cultures, most certainly including Black cultures, favor the ideals of discipline via corporal punishment, whereas newer cultures, most notably Western, favor giving children more compassion and liberty. Obviously, the kids in Western cultures seem to be growing up smarter and embracing ideals of education and enlightenment, whereas the cultures of corporal discipline produce seemingly embittered children focused on the obsolete ideal of strength. Then, while the more compassionate members of Western society sympathize with the tribal people, the less sympathetic educated Western people exploit them with the arguably correct justification that the tribal people are taking pride in their ignorance and deserve their exploitation, causing the sympathetic Westerners to wrongfully assume that the tribal embitterment comes SOLELY from the exploitation.
Like I said, the Freudian manifest. Note this has nothing to do with racism and moreso to do with the chronology of humanity's social evolution. Put it like this, the U.S. may have enslaved people, but every other country has as well. What is important is that unlike all of those other countries, the U.S. only took a single century to abolish it, whereas other civilizations enslaved people for millennia. Perhaps humanity's childhood nightmare of a Doomsday apocalypse is just that, a nightmare, and perhaps the true transition into the future will be one of peaceful enlightenment, if everyone learns to do what Big Boss Jesus died for and actually PHUCKING FORGIVE EVERYONE.
But maybe DDM is just an elitist who secretly burns homeless men alive. I guess we'll have to see...
Nah, he's not saying any of that.
I say let all Americans vote regardless of their education level in given area nor lack there of. Jesus would agree here.
We do need to get ride of the corrupt Electoral College system though. Should be one American = one equal vote. The candidate with the most votes wins.
Originally posted by Robtard
Your attempt to flip your elitism on me has been noted.I do realize that you actually do understand that not all people have the same access and why your voting-plan is silly.
I'm not Surtur. Don't waste my time with your circular bullshit as the rebuttal to what you're saying has already been posted:
Originally posted by dadudemon
Robtard, that's elitism. There are homeless people on the street who grew up on the streets who are far more politically savvy that most voters.Also, due to living in the information age and this is no longer the 1700s, obtaining civic knowledge and understanding the political positions of candidates is as easy as access to the internet. I highly suggest you stop thinking all poor people are dumb and uneducated - that overlaps with racist thinking, as well.
If you feel there is a lack to access to the internet in any one area, that's up to the mayors to resolve. If you feel those measures are not enough, a regulation at the national level is your solution.
Stop being an elitist, classiest, and implicit racist by thinking the poor are too dumb to educate themselves on concurrent political issues.
Your stance is a classic libtard stance: "[insert minority, here] are too poor and uneducated to know how to do [insert perfectly reasonable activity, here]."
Originally posted by Robtard
Nah, he's not saying any of that.I say let all Americans vote regardless of their education level in given area nor lack there of. Jesus would agree here.
We do need to get ride of the corrupt Electoral College system though. Should be one American = one equal vote. The candidate with the most votes wins.
I think that's what he's saying. Maybe you're misinterpreting him that same way you misinterpreted McClane's victory over Bauer 😎
I definitely agree about the election process, and I think we will see some major legislative progress in regards to bureaucratic efficiency going forward. The Neo-Roaring Twenties are about to be phucking epic!
Originally posted by Lestov16
I think I may understand what DDM is saying, and IMO, it's the epitome of the Freudian manifest in the macroscopic scale of Evolutionary Ethics. Quite simply, older cultures, most certainly including Black cultures, favor the ideals of discipline via corporal punishment, whereas newer cultures, most notably Western, favor giving children more compassion and liberty.
This has nothing to do with public access to the library and requiring your citizens to be voters who are educated on the things they are voting for.
You also run the risk of thinking people are just too dumb to know what they are voting for no matter what you do. That's simply not true.
I think many on the left praise the education institutions and their own enlightenment about how woke they are and how this and that science supports their political beliefs. So if you're so afraid of requiring people know the details of who they are voting for and how the system works, and you trust your education and science, then why are you afraid of disenfranchising voters who you feel don't have access to the internet? Aren't you enlightened and know how to vote for them in a way that helps them, based on your political stances and science?
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Yup, that sounds like DDM.
I'm taking your advice on the "new KMC model" and not falling for the diversionary attack antics and nonsense meant to shit-up the conversation. Just stick to the facts and repeat the facts despite the nonsense being put forth and be polite.
Originally posted by Robtard
DDM,You're still punishing people for something they may have no control over.
Since I fundamentally disagree - because I do not believe humans not automatons incapable of thinking and learning - we will never agree that non-mentally-disabled people have control over educating themselves on the civic system and the current candidates.
Even people who are mentally disabled or otherwise incapable of reading have options to educate themselves enough to be prepared to pass the 2 exams I mentioned. Memorization concept retention are things most mentally disabled (but not the severely mentally disabled) are still capable of doing.
This is how far you look down on humans, in general.
Originally posted by Robtard
You're the only one who brought up "race", I noted how your stance could affect "poverty" and poverty isn't one-race-specific.You're plan is elitism, it's not good.
Here is a learning opportunity for you, then: poverty disproportionately affects black and Hispanic people in the US compared to white and Asian peoples. Your specific first reply about people who do not have the same opportunities of access has a direct implicit meaning regarding the Hispanic and black citizens in the US. Whether you choose to acknowledge the fact that you just called potential black and Hispanic voters "too dumb and incapable of educating themselves on contemporary politics and American Civics" is irrelevant to the fact that your statement is racist.
So which is it:
A. Black and Hispanic people will always be too dumb to know how American Civics and what the positions are of contemporary candidates on the ballot.
B. Black and Hispanic people possess the same mental capabilities as other race demographics and are more than capable of educating themselves to a minimum level of proficiency in American Civics and the positions of candidates on the ballot.
Do you even talk to black and Hispanic people outside of your small social circle? Are you really that sheltered that you think they are too dumb and ignorant to know how American Civics work?
Edit -
FYI, you're hyper-focused on the 32 million Americans who cannot read:
But that does not include people eligible to vote.
The ability to register to vote is already the same barrier of entry of what I'm talking about. You have to fill out voter registration forms. If you cannot, you must go through an assistant.
Originally posted by dadudemon
This has nothing to do with public access to the library and requiring your citizens to be voters who are educated on the things they are voting for.You also run the risk of thinking people are just too dumb to know what they are voting for no matter what you do. That's simply not true.
I think many on the left praise the education institutions and their own enlightenment about how woke they are and how this and that science supports their political beliefs. So if you're so afraid of requiring people know the details of who they are voting for and how the system works, and you trust your education and science, then why are you afraid of disenfranchising voters who you feel don't have access to the internet? Aren't you enlightened and know how to vote for them in a way that helps them, based on your political stances and science?
So basically, you're criticizing the education system for its whole "White Men are Evil, Melanated Polysexuals are the future" phase that it's going through. I understand, as nobody wants a bunch of traumatized Desmond Napoles and violent Bonita Tindles running around, but that doesn't mean the education system should be abolished and white people should flee to private schools. Maybe instead, there needs to be some solidarity on a political level, maybe two candidates, one of whom is a minority woman SJW, the other a lecherous privileged white man, who have the geopolitical connections and concern for welfare to make practical and positive changes to the system. Their names rhyme with Clyden and Barris......
Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Whirly should focus on getting those people Broadband. Maybe he could sell his armored truck and give the money to the local warlords to install wifi
Right. Getting public access to the internet allows the people to look up the voting records of their representatives as well as their official political positions. 🙂
Seems pretty important.