For a third world democratic country,is it ok that only educated citizens should votewhen electing a president

Answer 1

That's a tough question because the uneducated, misinformed are so easily brainwashed and manipulated by hate and propaganda.

We tried this in the USA in the early 1900s under Jim Crow... there were literacy tests required before you could vote. I understand the logic behind it but it just isn't morally right.

Instead, what should be done, is the party that is on the losing side of the morons voting should have the incentive to educate the voters for their cause.

Answer 2

Well, like it was said, the uneducated and misinformed can be so easily brainwashed in a turmoil-stricken third-world country, but by the same token the educated and wealthy in third-world countries tend to be the ones doing the most harm (ie. the most powerful militia, most dangerous warlord). I'd suggest that in a perfect world the UN could set up a nice temporary transitional government that doesn't abuse human rights, that'll be able to organise the country and get enough infrastructure and educational services to allow a free, universal, democratic election so that all the people can get what they want.

But that's in a perfect world.

Answer 3

Frankly, I think this should be true. Educated people know how to weigh things and decide on matters apart from money. Coming from a third world country, i've seen officials put into their position because they got the support of the masses. However, they do not have the best intentions in mind. Come to think of it, in a third world country, all we have is corruption.

Answer 4

In simple words this is the best solution for third world countries to get rid of corruption, bad governance and filling the ballot boxes with fake votes. Education makes a lot of difference.

Answer 5

Not really. Then the folks at the top would have a vested interest in keeping the general population dumb but happy. Everyone should have a vote and use it wisely. Then it is up to the politicians to make their case. People soon learn to spot the ones that are making hollow promises and avoid them next time.

Democracy is a learning curve. We don't all wake up one morning wise to the ways of politics and politicians...but we might get there in the end with practice.

Answer 6

That would be great, so they stop voting the wrong candidate... In my country, unfortunately the analphabetism is high and these people most of the time are easily guide to vote for the wrong candidate. I think voters should not be force to vote.. so the ones who do it, do it because they want to have a change, or believe in their candidate.

The people who vote should have a clear idea of their options, and a conviction at the moment to vote. And, like in my country, would not go to vote just because they do not want to pay a fine.

Answer 7

nicely that's no longer a coverage. that's a call for of the form. there is not any longer something interior the form that the folk did no longer approve by using their representative government. If the folk substitute their minds approximately that throughout the time of sufficient numbers, the folk could make that regulate. in actuality the folk desperate that the means of the incumbency too super to circulate unchecked. i think of the folk erred on that one for 2 motives. a million. only one individual ever became elected greater advantageous than two times. 2. i do no longer think of the different even ran for a third term whilst in place of work in his 2d. So it became no longer a topic to handle. I choose the 'Washington Doctrine" to self shrink oneself to 2 words. the single exception we had have been impressive circumstances. Such impressive circumstances would circulate to us returned.

Answer 8

That is a good question. If the uneducated are the majority they will undoubtedly shift the government. Voting is a right. But would you want a bunch of uneducated fools making the decisions about your life?

Maybe instead a policy should be using IQ tests. So if you are to stupid to make decisions on reality you lose the right to vote.

Answer 9

it is the right of people to enjoy the right of suffrage... meaning VOTING... to limit an election for educated citizens is stamping out another man's right to vote... as simple as that... would any one let their right be trampled upon and be enjoyed only by the elite? of course not... we are all equal, we all have rights to enjoy, we all must enjoy such freedom. killing it is more of murdering a man's freedom, a man's right... why call it a democracy then?...

so my answer is... NO. all men are created equal and every one must enjoy his freedom, his right.... uneducated or not. else, why call it a democracy...? isn't democracy a freedom of choice?...

Answer 10

No it's not ok, because that would be unconstitutional. Everybody from age 18, wether we like it or not, has the right to suffrage.