this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2026
768 points (98.4% liked)
Aged Like Milk
366 readers
1 users here now
A community dedicated to all those things in media and elsewhere that didn’t stand the test of time, at all.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
People are just too fucking dumb. Most can only rationalize that current thing bad = current leader bad = different leader better, and there's no end of grifters taking advantage of that.
yeah primaries was a train wreak in slow mo. like I was telling people I did not give a crap that Kamala was chosen by Biden as a successor she's still better than trump by far. I couldn't really think of any reason from them to vote for trump
sexism and racism is what they voted for, cant have a black person they made that mistake in 08 with obama, plus no women ever.
I'm glad people are coming around on the idea that people are too stupid to vote.
Yeah, that's not what I said.
Maybe not, but these statements are directly applicable to voters and I think voting in an environment where bad actors can easily manipulate voters is irresponsible.
Do you not agree?
Who decides who is allowed to vote?
Quis custodiat ipsos custodes?
Everyone gets to vote or no one.
You can see in one of my other comments that i disagree with that statement.
Also, you didn't answer my question.
I did answer your question.
Everyone has a vote (democracy) or no one has a vote (dictatorship because the flawed system where you exclude certain voters always ends up like that).
are there any better options?
Not in real life.
I do dream of a government composed of a council of experts. Each person would be an expert in their field and they would br elected by their own peers. I think something like that would be better for humanity. If you look at the science communities you will see a lot of collaboration across boundaries and i think that's one of our biggest problems.
I'm not so delusional as to think it faultless, but an improvement, surely.
The problem tends to be that (1) experts are only experts in their own fields, but have a distressing tendency to think that makes them experts in all fields and (2) an expert is often only an expert if unchallenged. Plenty of ‘experts’ have had their research get supplanted—or attempts have been made to supplant it—with newer, more accurate research, but the older so-called experts often fight against that newer research so as not to lose their exalted status. Sadly, you see often in science (look at how Louis Pasteur was treated when he dared to suggest bacteria caused disease).
Yeah, absolutely. There would have to be levels of checks and balances just like any other governmental system.
Yet, even with these problems i still think it would be an improvement.
You've just reminded me of that clip of I can't remember which middle-eastern dictator expressing his views on democracy and the average person's intelligence
If you can find it, i'm curious.