“Literacy tests did not begin as a racist tool. Connecticut adopted the first literacy requirement for voting in 1855 as part of its new state constitution, with the stated goal of preventing voter fraud and ensuring voters could understand ballot questions. Massachusetts, Maine, and several other Northern states followed with similar requirements in the decades that followed.”
A test will inherently disenfranchise a group, that’s the point though; disenfranchise the least intelligent and easiest to manipulate across the population. Like I said, I’d rather we just educated people better and they weren’t so easily manipulated but how do you deal with existing adults who will never be able to meaningfully detect bias and propaganda? I don’t think there’s a correct answer.
Did you include that quote / link as an example of states that have run successful voting test programs?
That’s really great that they “[allegedly] did not begin as a racial tool.” How did it go for those states?
If you think there wasn’t a shitload of racism and voter suppression in the North, then I guess maybe you shouldn’t be able to vote. Or am I misunderstanding your argument?
As I said repeatedly, in not envisioning a copy of the extremely flawed system that was used previously. I was simply sharing my thoughts that a test would probably be a better alternative to the reeducation camps the poster I was originally responding to suggested, I’m not campaigning or even seriously suggesting we implement a test.
And apparently you are misunderstanding my argument in that I said a specific set of very easy questions a fifth grader could answer.
I would’ve been happy to continue this discussion, but your attitude is argumentative and off-putting so I’ll spend my time elsewhere.
Really? Which ones?
I couldn’t find any with my internet sleuthing skills. Just a bunch of stuff about voter suppression.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=have+there+ever+been+studies+about+voting+tests&ia=web
I believe that any test, even if done in good faith initially, will inevitably lead to voter suppression against some minority group.
“Literacy tests did not begin as a racist tool. Connecticut adopted the first literacy requirement for voting in 1855 as part of its new state constitution, with the stated goal of preventing voter fraud and ensuring voters could understand ballot questions. Massachusetts, Maine, and several other Northern states followed with similar requirements in the decades that followed.”
https://www.cuip.org/what-were-literacy-tests-for-voting/
A test will inherently disenfranchise a group, that’s the point though; disenfranchise the least intelligent and easiest to manipulate across the population. Like I said, I’d rather we just educated people better and they weren’t so easily manipulated but how do you deal with existing adults who will never be able to meaningfully detect bias and propaganda? I don’t think there’s a correct answer.
Did you include that quote / link as an example of states that have run successful voting test programs?
That’s really great that they “[allegedly] did not begin as a racial tool.” How did it go for those states?
If you think there wasn’t a shitload of racism and voter suppression in the North, then I guess maybe you shouldn’t be able to vote. Or am I misunderstanding your argument?
As I said repeatedly, in not envisioning a copy of the extremely flawed system that was used previously. I was simply sharing my thoughts that a test would probably be a better alternative to the reeducation camps the poster I was originally responding to suggested, I’m not campaigning or even seriously suggesting we implement a test.
And apparently you are misunderstanding my argument in that I said a specific set of very easy questions a fifth grader could answer.
I would’ve been happy to continue this discussion, but your attitude is argumentative and off-putting so I’ll spend my time elsewhere.
Hope you have a lovely day anyways though!