view the rest of the comments
Unpopular Opinion
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
6. Defend your opinion
This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
Restricting is hardly ever a solution for anything. You might have an 80+ better informed than a 30/40. What about people with mental issues, even if temporary (like depression) ? Sure you could have a system to validate who is "apt" to vote, but that system and the people who enforce it can be rigged. The better option (not that it's easy or even feasible) is to flip the issue around and try to provide good, impartial information to everyone.
↑↑↑
The median age of people 18+ in the US (total potential voters), is 47. The 80+ demographic is really small. If those folks are voting in ways that are detrimental to others, the solution is to increase voting among other groups.
Make election day a mandatory holiday for anyone outside first responders, and guarantee those folks a half day. Expand mail-in voting. Expand early voting.
There are dozens of solutions that don't include telling people they don't get all the rights of full citizens.
You can provide the information but people aren't obligated to consume it. Most won't, because they either have already made up their mind or they simply don't care. They're swayed more by a loud voice saying what they like to hear than the reality of complex issues. And you can't force them to care.
Yeah i actually agree on this being the best solution though that means that minimum vote age should be decreased because for the same way of thinking, there are many 16 years old who are better informed than 30 years old people
Actually, my issue is just the incoherence of all this fluff which is what prompted me to make this (stupid) unpopular opinion
Not saying what we have is perfect, but its probably as good as its going to get. Its quite coherent actually, as soon as you are a legal adult, you can vote and that right can't (in theory) be taken away from you. Even as it is, evil people try to find all types of way to dissuade, invalidate and suppress voting. I actually think the majority of people wants the best for everyone, that's why there is all this effort to remove as much votes as possible. Restricting by age would would add to that.
...and it gets even worse down the numbers. 16 year olds have the strongest wishes and opinions based on the biggest nothingness