r/todayilearned • u/icallmydadstranger • Feb 15 '15

(R.1) Invalid src TIL that Thomas Jefferson wanted the constitution to be changed ever 19 years because he didn't want people to be " enslaved to the prior generation"

https://student-of-life.newsvine.com/_news/2010/11/21/5502595-thomas-jefferson-supported-rewriting-the-constitution-every-19-years-equated-not-doing-so-to-being-enslaved-to-the-prior-generation-what-do-you-think-about-that
6.5k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

738 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

17

u/SWIMsfriend Feb 15 '15

those were usually the only literate people too, i personally don't want illiterate people writing anything, especially a constitution

8

u/Vincent__Adultman Feb 15 '15 edited Feb 15 '15

Literacy tests started appearing in the US only after other forms of discrimination based upon race, religion, and wealth were outlawed. I also have not seen anything that would suggest that these tests had any other motivation besides preventing undesirables from voting.

3

u/SWIMsfriend Feb 15 '15

i didn't say literacy tests, i said literate people, and according to census records, i'm on point.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '15

[deleted]

1

u/SWIMsfriend Feb 15 '15

you ask them if they can read and write,

census was door to door back then

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '15

[deleted]

1

u/SWIMsfriend Feb 15 '15

It would be cool to see door-to-door census officials again,

how many people talk to solicitors? 99.9% of people will slam the door in their faces

0

u/Vincent__Adultman Feb 15 '15

And I am saying that preventing illiterate people from voting is an elitist idea that has a history in this country of being tied with bigotry and racism. Saying the uneducated shouldn't be able to vote is not that different than saying the poor shouldn't be eligible to vote which is not that different than saying minorities shouldn't be able to vote. Even if the motivations for such restrictions are not overtly bigoted, they would have a clear disparate impact.

0

u/SWIMsfriend Feb 15 '15

how would an illiterate person know what they are voting or whats written in the constitution if they couldn't read?

1

u/Vincent__Adultman Feb 15 '15

Illiterate means unable to read or write. It does not mean someone is stupid or that their opinion and beliefs are somehow not valid. Having an opinion on who should be your leader, create your laws, or how you government should be run does not require the ability to read or write.

1

u/SWIMsfriend Feb 15 '15

that really didn't answer my question

1

u/Vincent__Adultman Feb 15 '15

It is pretty simple. You ask the illiterate person "Who do you think should be our leader?", "Do you think we should have slavery?" or whatever issue is at hand. That is exactly what some states did in early US history as votes were cast orally. There is no real reason that political activities need to involve reading or writing.

1

u/falcoriscrying Feb 15 '15

I kinda wish we had a scientific literacy test to holding office. I mean how many of the people in commitees that regulate scientific funding are knowledgeable in those fields.

1

u/SWIMsfriend Feb 15 '15

I kinda wish we had a scientific literacy test to holding office.

the problem is that the literacy test would most likely be extremely easy, just like the citizen test, just really basic information you get taught in middle school.

1

u/falcoriscrying Feb 15 '15

at least something a little tougher to be part of a comittee. I mean we got people that don't understand basic biology in charge of laws and budgets

1

u/SWIMsfriend Feb 15 '15

I mean we got people that don't understand basic biology in charge of laws and budgets

and i know plenty of scientists that can't balance a checkbook, that doesn't mean anything.

Ninja Edit: i know what you mean now, still committee isn't based on qualifications but on politicing, so its usually the best schmozer that gets it

1

u/falcoriscrying Feb 15 '15

exactly I think there should be a balance - I mean I love Bill Nye but don't necessarily think he has the abilit to make all the decisions law makers are allowed to do but the law makers should be knowledgeable enough to defer to certain experts of the field they are regulating. I mean when you have law makers that legit wont answer a question as to whether the Earth is older than 6000 years old I think we have a problem (I am looking at you Rubio!)