Author: Simo
Driving is a right for all. But not everyone can drive, this drive because it involves direct responsibility for life, themselves and others. The attainment of theoretical knowledge and practical skills needed to drive safely is certified by obtaining the license. Simple, clear, crystal clear. Who could deny what I just wrote?
now apply this reasoning to drive, but the voting.
What does it mean to vote? Voting is not just to express a preference. Means deciding vote of life, themselves and others. Having noted this, it is fair to assert that everyone has the right to vote? I would say no. Just because the vote involves more people (an entire state!) It is inappropriate to give everyone the chance to go to the polls because, just like driving, voting is a matter of responsibility towards others and towards themselves. I ask you a very simplified example, but which I hope will give you an idea.
There are two people: A and B . A inform you, knows the history of Italy, knows what it means to talk about fascism, communism, nationalism (etc etc ...), know the salient points of party programs that are subject to election and then click knowingly and a responsible candidate who he thinks will be beneficial to him and his country. B rather not know anything, you do not inform, barely fluent in Italian, has no idea who we both government and opposition do not even know what to offer the most prominent politicians (let alone the minor ones) did not citizenship, and then go to vote for sport and almost unconsciously and irresponsibly chose the candidate better looking or nicer or more who have heard about on TV, believes that for these reasons totally unnecessary to bring benefits to him and his country. Both B that A have equal voting rights, but where the vote of B was different from that of A , should cancel it and vice versa. But between the two that would suffer the greatest setback would always A, B easily because, not having the slightest political consciousness, would ultimately vote not only against the interests of A , but also against their own and those the country just can because it has no idea who to vote for the politician to really get the real benefits! Here are some examples of person
B:
In short, everyone has the right to vote for those who want, but it also has the right to be confident that the elections are held between people really able to express an opinion on politics. The jury in a music competition not put a tobacconist, a lawyer and a fishmonger, but the musicians. Similarly, the elections will give an opinion, not the music, but as to who deserves or not to sit on the couch with a capital P. And so it is right that those who express this view (Voter) has demonstrated its ability to do it, because whoever wins the election will not act only on those who have elected, but by all the voters.
Browsing the World Wide Web I found several forums and blogs that deal with the issue of driver's license to vote, with different and often conflicting. If you are interested, take a trip on the Internet, will treat here the way I develop this idea.
The license vote (let's call it 'pos') should be designed in a manner similar to the driver's license, but deprived of the practical part. Reached the minimum age to vote, it's time to take the POV, without which the vote is not possible. The preparation should be offered by the state, because it is the State that you vote. For a period of study in which we must address the of world history and Italian following an update on the highlights of the programs of all lots in the next election. We then move through the certification examination which, if exceeded, is expressed in the POV POV Once achieved, you have the right to vote. Before each election will require a brief update on parties and programs.
This would ensure that the participation in the elections only to those who really care about the fate of the country and there would be genuine equality, perhaps the true democracy.
seems a perfect system ... But then I remember that in Italy and this makes impossible what was said. It could even worsen the situation. Indeed, who can guarantee that the information system at the base of the POV is not corrupted by the very people we vote? What appears to be a possible means of true democracy could be transformed into the cornerstone for the establishment of a dictatorship. And so we are forced to see at the polls people who think that the current President is Mr. Berlusconi, who is the Prime Minister Ciampi, Berlusconi that if you are against six communities, that if you left you're a jerk, who does not know What is the Constitution, which does not know what ideas are proposed by politicians (not even those who vote at the end) and I could go on forever because the museum's entrance and the Italian political ignorance has no exit. Moreover, it is ignorance that feeds the current policy, the current policy does not exist in a country where the majority of voters educated and informed. There followed a public part of the intervention of the magistrate Nicola Gratteri the program that weather, with the quotation of a sentence, set out therein, relating to what has just said.
Driving is a right for all. But not everyone can drive, this drive because it involves direct responsibility for life, themselves and others. The attainment of theoretical knowledge and practical skills needed to drive safely is certified by obtaining the license. Simple, clear, crystal clear. Who could deny what I just wrote?
now apply this reasoning to drive, but the voting.
What does it mean to vote? Voting is not just to express a preference. Means deciding vote of life, themselves and others. Having noted this, it is fair to assert that everyone has the right to vote? I would say no. Just because the vote involves more people (an entire state!) It is inappropriate to give everyone the chance to go to the polls because, just like driving, voting is a matter of responsibility towards others and towards themselves. I ask you a very simplified example, but which I hope will give you an idea.
There are two people: A and B . A inform you, knows the history of Italy, knows what it means to talk about fascism, communism, nationalism (etc etc ...), know the salient points of party programs that are subject to election and then click knowingly and a responsible candidate who he thinks will be beneficial to him and his country. B rather not know anything, you do not inform, barely fluent in Italian, has no idea who we both government and opposition do not even know what to offer the most prominent politicians (let alone the minor ones) did not citizenship, and then go to vote for sport and almost unconsciously and irresponsibly chose the candidate better looking or nicer or more who have heard about on TV, believes that for these reasons totally unnecessary to bring benefits to him and his country. Both B that A have equal voting rights, but where the vote of B was different from that of A , should cancel it and vice versa. But between the two that would suffer the greatest setback would always A, B easily because, not having the slightest political consciousness, would ultimately vote not only against the interests of A , but also against their own and those the country just can because it has no idea who to vote for the politician to really get the real benefits! Here are some examples of person
B:
In short, everyone has the right to vote for those who want, but it also has the right to be confident that the elections are held between people really able to express an opinion on politics. The jury in a music competition not put a tobacconist, a lawyer and a fishmonger, but the musicians. Similarly, the elections will give an opinion, not the music, but as to who deserves or not to sit on the couch with a capital P. And so it is right that those who express this view (Voter) has demonstrated its ability to do it, because whoever wins the election will not act only on those who have elected, but by all the voters.
Browsing the World Wide Web I found several forums and blogs that deal with the issue of driver's license to vote, with different and often conflicting. If you are interested, take a trip on the Internet, will treat here the way I develop this idea.
The license vote (let's call it 'pos') should be designed in a manner similar to the driver's license, but deprived of the practical part. Reached the minimum age to vote, it's time to take the POV, without which the vote is not possible. The preparation should be offered by the state, because it is the State that you vote. For a period of study in which we must address the of world history and Italian following an update on the highlights of the programs of all lots in the next election. We then move through the certification examination which, if exceeded, is expressed in the POV POV Once achieved, you have the right to vote. Before each election will require a brief update on parties and programs.
This would ensure that the participation in the elections only to those who really care about the fate of the country and there would be genuine equality, perhaps the true democracy.
seems a perfect system ... But then I remember that in Italy and this makes impossible what was said. It could even worsen the situation. Indeed, who can guarantee that the information system at the base of the POV is not corrupted by the very people we vote? What appears to be a possible means of true democracy could be transformed into the cornerstone for the establishment of a dictatorship. And so we are forced to see at the polls people who think that the current President is Mr. Berlusconi, who is the Prime Minister Ciampi, Berlusconi that if you are against six communities, that if you left you're a jerk, who does not know What is the Constitution, which does not know what ideas are proposed by politicians (not even those who vote at the end) and I could go on forever because the museum's entrance and the Italian political ignorance has no exit. Moreover, it is ignorance that feeds the current policy, the current policy does not exist in a country where the majority of voters educated and informed. There followed a public part of the intervention of the magistrate Nicola Gratteri the program that weather, with the quotation of a sentence, set out therein, relating to what has just said.
Whoever is in power, be it right or left, does not want a justice system and a strong school system that works, because having a strong judicial system means you can then also control the manipulator, a school effective means of educated people, children educated, erudite people, and then thinking people who can not accept or get used to certain ways of life or certain situations, under certain conditions.
0 comments:
Post a Comment