[TenOhms]

Isn't he saying that the welfare programs have effectively subverted democracy by locking certain people (and women especially) into a certain constituency group, which once locked, are extremely difficult to escape (and those people's vote are extremely easy to manipulate)?

[msbot]

He's also citing the inclusion of women's right to vote. To even question a demographic's right like that makes him incredibly suspect in my eyes.

[rayiner]

Thiel isn't questioning womens' right to vote. The statement is descriptive, not normative.

Consider the statement: "The fact that Louisiana and Alabama have votes in U.S. elections means that policies like DADT and DOMA survived much longer than they otherwise would have."

The most reasonable construction of that statement is not: "People in Louisiana and Alabama shouldn't be allowed to vote."

[throwaway76543]

He isn't questioning it. He's reasoning about its effects.

I think everyone agrees about those effects, don't they?

[nanistheonlyist]

If you are not subject to the draft then those that are should not be subjected to your vote.

[Jtsummers]

> If you are not subject to the draft then those that are should not be subjected to your vote.

Makes sense. Only 18-25 year old, healthy men should be able to vote. Totally makes sense.

[tanderson92]

Even unhealthy males must register with the selective service[1]. Furthermore, males who are now over the age of 25 must have been registered at one point (excepting those born prior to 1960). The point made by nanistheonlyist broadly holds.

[1]: https://www.sss.gov/Registration-Info/Who-Registration

[Jtsummers]

Even so, they aren't truly subject to it for this purpose.

And the idea that only those subject to the draft should be voting is absurd as it neglects the rest of the current military.

Along with neglecting every issue that's effected by voting (well, by our representatives) that aren't military/war. Everyone in this country is a stakeholder in these elections.

[tanderson92]

I would rephrase it to be "only those at risk of dying in a foreign military conflict" should, in a just world, vote on matters of international "engagement" (the euphemism pols like to use). It's not an irrational position as long as we have the draft.

True all people in the country are stakeholders but not all are similarly exposed to the risks of war (the military is primarily poor and filled with minorities--but that's a separate issue).

Fortunately women will soon be required to register with the selective service so this critique will be outdated.

[remarkEon]

"Service Guarantees Citizenship."