kek.. no offense.. but the testing situation and many other nice sounding alternatives kind of fall into a similar circular problem.. like.. what's so great about a test versus an election? if the election can be rigged, why couldn't the test be rigged? Is the test going to be multiple choice, or open answer graded by AP, MSNBC, FOX & CNN panelists… does it test for people being crazy? such as those who might subscribe to the deranged theory that many elites are corrupt/acting unlawfully or directing unlawful activity of others? Is part of the test sucking Dr Faucis dick and delicately handling his testicles? how do we agree what goes into the test? do we vote on it? do we have a test for the testers? No matter what it kind of comes back to quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Wow, such model responses, sincerely appreciated..
I can of course concede that testing would be a better model than voting under the assumption that the originators of this process were acting in good faith and possessed at least formidable competence.. and that these traits were maintained by future arbiters of the process.. but the testing isn't the immediate answer to the current predicament of a corrupt and flawed system, those originators taking control prior to implementing the test would be.. and anyone who stands up and claims to be fulfilling this role in reforming our selection process is gonna be susAF in my book, and probably on all sides… unless they somehow unite the majority in trust or gain a position where trust isn't necessary to implement the tests.. idk..
The "rule by mob" nature of democratic election is pretty easy to lament… I still believe in elections though and it goes beyond the material analysis in any test I can imagine.. because there's a spiritual component that's difficult to capture in a controlled test.. But I'm all for some kind of reform.. I'd like to see a short-term payoff to singles and non-child bearing couples in exchange for a lasting weighted voting system giving head of households a larger say.. doesn't matter what you're income is, doesn't matter how few or how many kids you have (1 kid is same advantage as 9), but an adjustable weighting system that gives people with kids a majority of the votes over the young, the idle, the inexperienced and the dead-ends with no descendants taking over burden/bounty in the future.
Still though.. who watches the watchmen.. if history tells us anything its that human nature eventually takes a shit on whatever great men implement.
with or without adams apple, cringiest fuckin photo..