Years and Years Episode 3 | "In order to vote, every British citizen must take an IQ test"
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 06. 2019
- Following the collapse of the banks, Vivienne Rook suggests a radical change to voting.
Years and Years is a British television drama series which began broadcasting on BBC One in the United Kingdom on 14 May 2019 and will premiere on HBO in the United States on 24 June 2019. The series was created and written by Russell T Davies, and stars Emma Thompson as Vivienne Rook, an outspoken celebrity turned political figure whose controversial opinions divide the nation. - Zábava
1:48 anarchism is not when you rip up democracy. Anarchists favor democracy, it just has to be direct democracy without a state.
True but it’s pretty much the case Edith goes from this to pure nihilist after Hong Sha Dao gets nuked because she concludes a better world is not possible.
if you vote didn't meant something, they wouldn't try so hard to take it away
and how often do you see them try to take the vote away? if voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it
@@xandermoore6485 voter id laws in london - oyster card for older people is valid id for voting, thr exact same id for younger people isnt
@@persononinternet7868 source?
The right to vote should be the same as the right to drive. Everyone can do it, but there are tests on knowledge and ability.
Has anybody seen Viv Rook and Ann Widdecombe in the same room at the same time? 🤔
"If voting made any difference, they wouldn't let us do it."
If voting didn’t make any difference, they wouldn’t try so hard to keep us from doing it-especially in certain precincts.
@@terry9238 you vote for a NO, but they do whatever they want anyways...
@@terry9238They don’t though, I don’t know what land you’re living in…
@@user-ki6id4vt8u here's why you're wrong:
* Laws, bills, and policies were passed/implemented to prevent black people from voting, long after the 15th Amendment was passed in the US (1870). This also applies to women, queers, and people with disabilities. The poorer you are in society has also historically been a determiner of your civil rights and whether you can vote or not.
* The FPTP voting system in the UK has been intentionally prevented from properly entering the Parliamentary debating foray, because both Labour and Conservative are fully away that it would be the end to their dominance in the establishment, and a proportionate representation electoral system would lead to a multi-party state, much like we see in Germany.
* The education system is designed so that young people are not educated about political systems, and is only really available at college (which is only really possible because intellectuals can perform more independently to the state/private institutions, have greater freedom to teach), by which point most children take on what they have been socially conditioned to believe. The education they then receive tends to only entrench those values without actually developing their critical thinking skills, owing to the education gap in the psycho-cognitive development of these children, they tend to lack the emotional capacity to be rational and open-minded.
* All groups from lobbyists to the media and businessmen with vested interests in politicians, deliberately simplify narratives and actively misinform the electorate, and those who are yet to be the electorate, to ensure that if we do choose to vote, we will stick to the status quo. Whilst at the same time, keeping us numbed with pseudo and anti-intellectualist culture, which is only more prominent in a post-materialist, hyperreal world (just look at how our sociopolitical attitudes have generally degenerated over the last 20 years).
* Then there's the ban on political parties and their activities and the increased political violence, which all can be attributed to the dilapidating effects of neo-conservative thought that is now dominant in economic and political bubbles. The Federalist Society in the US for example that has an incredible amount of influence in almost every country, which controls their courts, deliberately persecute those who do not follow radical libertarian ideas in court cases and beyond.
* Then there is is what I believe your reply to the person's comment is referring to, which is gerrymandering - just look this up, it's too long to explain here.
* To that end of inequality, there's clearly targeted redlining policies in terms of the quality of education provided, and what is being taught. Worse still, those who teach PPE tend to be severely underperforming and unqualified, especially in the US, and you can only imagine how the media portrays that...
Even in these cases where governments/elitist groups are not trying to prevent you from actively voting, withal their money and connections, they sure know how to stop people from even thinking about it, and to inevitably force them to take a side in the dishonest discourse. Some of which I would say are artificially crafted rather than dialectical as they are so often made out to be (take the culture war for instance, and attempts from certain groups to amplify their conflict to stir division, chaos, and ultimately shore up profits from the content people engage with). And people are stupid enough to buy it.
if you vote didn't meant something, they wouldn't try so hard to take it away
At least a test on what you're voting on
The funny thing is, she says that someone must score above 70 to be allowed to vote, yet 70 is actually a REALLY low score - we're talking a score that is classified as "borderline impaired"; if you've watched "Forrest Gump", you'll know that he was found to have sub average intelligence with a score of below 75. This doesn't "refine the process" as she claims it would, it just makes idiots feel empowered to believe they're geniuses, because they're going to take said test, obviously pass, and not even bother to look it up, because why would they?
Yeah, that was my first thought. 70 is very low, about third or fourth grade equivalent. 80 would be considered the baseline of average adult IQ. To have any effect, any qualification for voting would have to start at 85-90.
115
Exactly. An IQ of 70 is severe intelectual disability. In a lot of countries, including Australia, people can already be taken off the electoral roll for "unsound mind", if it's deemed by a medical practitioner that they are unlikely to understand the nature and implications of voting. So that's not even overly controversial.
I watched this episode for the first time last night on HBO and I am starting to prepare for a worst-case scenario for the wonderful Lyon Family members. Forever an optimist that good will overcome bad will not work in this story and I think that is the point of the writer.
Hi I just discovered this program. Now?
I love it I want to watch all episodes?
I DON'T HAVE TV
Can I get it on netflix
Or what was that you said hbo or something.
What's best thing for me do you think? I'm not very computer literate over 65 just have my Huawei pH.
I want one of those phone chips thay have lol.
@@johnwhelan1193 it’s available in its in entirety in bbc iplayer
@@johnwhelan1193 just pirate it
@@johnwhelan1193it's on HBO max
Vivienne Rook is like a cross between Jess Phillips and Katie Hopkins (she even looks like the latter).
I was traumatised by this series
Did mummy tell you it wasn’t real, it’s just a television show?
@@JohnnyCrash-ug8zt Did you actually read some of the comments? Seems it's becoming a documentary.
This series was so overblown and completely over the top, and I'm left wing.
@@Gerishnakovyou mean unrealistic?
It’s a very good idea, same goes for being on a jury and holding public office. Universal suffrage doesn’t work.
Funny thing is we’re about to live through this in real life. We thought we avoided it we didn’t the world is about to get a lot worse.
2026, that's 2 years away
This was a flawed show, but a really interesting and prophetic one.
Totally agree
I don’t understand why she’s neoliberal when she hates the banks
Trump says the same rhetoric in order to get votes but then he turns around and supports only his rich cronies
The point of Viv Rook is she'll say and do anything to get stupid people's votes. There are plenty of stupid people who'll vote for the right while ripping on bankers. She's exploiting that cognitive dissonance.
She's a populist. She says whatever she thinks will bring her votes.
A test to make sure that the voters properly understand what they’re engaging with might not be the worst idea in the world
Yes, I mean Brexit
I feel like educating people on voting in the first place is a better solution than taking away the right from those who never got that education
What does Danny says to Viktor?
He is trying to say "if I could vote, I'd vote to have you right next to me" in Ukrainian, it is not totally correct but I know that is what were going for, haha, basically he is flirting
Doctor Krippin!!
Take an IQ test to vote, interesting!
Can we bring the IQ test to real life voters? 😂😂😂 im 100% all for it
Yippee I love selective democracy. I love when we remove the rights of the disabled and intellectually challenged to have input and make changes in the system.
@@jamesslater9098 cry harder karen.
Im talking about an IQ test and you wanna start bringing up disabilities.
Well heres an example clown, people with severe autism and downsyndrome often dont vote NOW, so it wouldnt change that.
Next time you want to be offended, try uaing a single braincell
@@jamesslater9098 you think it would take away rights from people who dont vote currently now 😂😂😂 you arent too smart are you? Gues you wouldnt pass the IQ test and get to vote 😂😂😂
When is the last time you saw a mentally handicap person in a voting booth? 😂😂 never.
That means we can discriminate against those who can’t vote. As they will have 0 power to change.
@@Toodyslexicforyou you think everyone votes now? 🤣🤣🤣
Excellent idea
eugenics moment. IQ tests are an extremely flawed method of testing intelligence
IQ test... bloody good idea.
And age caps too.
Of course it would be hilarious if those who supported an IQ test before voting failed the test, then moaned about it because they were too thick to vote..😂
good idea just bad execution, in order to vote you should have to answer questions about what you want from the candidate and then get a selected candidate based on those ideals
It shouldn't be an IQ test, it should be an exam on critical thinking. For example, applicants are given 4 texts to assess. People would then need to assess what the purpose of the texts are and what sort of aims the writers have. Doesn't need to be hard - just needs to be enough to see through Daily Mail level bullshit dog whistles.
Shl would make a fortune!
So GCSE English Language and Literature at a grade 5 then?
@@lewis7278 English language, sure. However, Critical Thinking would be most apt. People need to have the ability to pick apart persuasive language, and understand basic information presented in different forms. People who believe flat earth for example, lack those basic skills, and therefore shouldn't be allowed to vote.
Is this seriously controversial. I've been saying this for years. If you don't understand what you're voting for, why should you be voting at all?
You do realize the woman speaking is the bad guy, right? And by your own rule, you should lose your vote
@@issecret1 How do you reach that conclusion? I understand the policies I vote for as I actually take interest when an election is coming up. I'm aware of politics and know what each party stands for. That is more than can be said for the countless people who just vote one way because that's the way they always have, regardless of any changes over time. Without trying to sound conceited, I'm confident I could pass both a political awareness test, and a general IQ test (especially if all that is needed is a score of 70).
I'm also well aware that Vivienne Rook is the 'baddie' in this series, but that doesn't mean she is without her merits. In fact, she was an excellent voice for populism in the first half of the series and raised a few concerns that the public genuinely have. She represented what people want in a politician, but very seldom get; honesty. Of course, it didn't last, but in my opinion we do need a figure like Mrs Rook in British politics. Obviously not quite to the extent of the character in the programme, but for the most part, I'd vote for her if I could.
Tell me I'm wrong, but rather aptly, I don't give a ****.
@@user-go6xo9md6b Perhaps if your politics were not aligned with the incumbent government you wouldn't pass an intelligence test or an IQ test! Also under one person one vote, people can vote for change if their quality of life is in decline even if they are not very clued up about what they are voting for. I think it is a cornerstone of democracy.
There are people who work, contribute to society, pay their taxes, has a life on their own and they are not brillant. A person working in the camp? A janitor? There are brillant people who do not care about pollitics and just vote for their parents candidate, friends candidate, without knowing anything. As long as you live and have some level of rationality you have to vote.
@@user-go6xo9md6b im a little late but disenfranchisement is a serious issue that consistently is abused past its potential, the best example would be the use of disenfranchisement across America especially in the southern states over the ability to read especially in the civil rights era and now the disenfranchisement of those without a "valid" id with disproportionately affects poor hispanic and african americans. The fact is these policies are almost always double edged swords and made to force people out, funnily enough this one in particular is also bad because general IQ tests are not that good at measuring intelligence at a general level and also would be expensive. Unless the government funds every single iq test every single election in which case thanks for fucking spending so much on something so pointless then iq tests will cost money and time and straight away you disenfranchise people who cannot afford to pay for said test. These sorts of tests inevitably disenfranchise the poor which is why rich people support them and they are quite frankly a stupid change, if you genuinely cared about intelligence this would be such a minor issue its not even funny nor does lack of awareness over a political issue indicate stupidity.
The fact that you dont understand these factors demonstrates you yourself should be disenfranchised on the matter of deciding our voting laws luckily im not a cunt so i wont advocate for that
I’d go further and demand that voters should be in the IRS register, make one year of military service and the IQ test.
So Starship Troopers
This is the UK, the IRS doesn't exist.
So you want a compulsory year of potential indoctrination before you're allowed to vote? Bro just go live in North Korea if you're that fond of boot leather
@@RaptorOfTheWest Starship Troopers is unironically based.
@@nicholasstokes8739 It is for people who actually understand what it's about
Ha ha ha small tiny island like England 😂😂😂 can do really little ... ( I will bring them for trial 😂😂😂😂 in your dreams only ...
You realize this is fiction right?
Hahah, UK ruled half of the world and invented the radars, they are nothing less than the murican boomers
England is not an island.
Thing is… this is supposed to be a joke but she’s right.
Everyone needs to be a British citizen, a taxpayer and do a political test to vote.
Voting should be a privilege not a right.
Read 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' and it explains a lot of what humanity is suffering from.
No it doesn't, unless you're a moron
This is antisemitic nonsense that was a Russian imperial anti-Jewish forgery.
The IQ test is a great idea. The average IQ of a welfare recipient in America is 90.
Seventy is to low a cutoff. You should have an IQ of at least 100 (average) before you can vote or run for political office.
That would exclude the current President of the United States from even voting. Just saying.
@James Dowds
Companies choosing to raise wages on their own is free market.
Government telling businesses the minimum they can pay their workers regardless of experience is socialism.
www.cato.org/publications/commentary/minimum-wage-socialism
@James Dowds
I'm not angry at anyone. I just want to bring about an end to poverty and the only way that will happen is we stop electing people who keep adding to the social safety net. One way to do that is to minimize the supports of those candidates, who just happen to be majority, poor and of average and below intelligence. You never let a child decide how many cookies it can have.
@James Dowds
If we can eliminate the 1 trillion dollar a year in social safety nets we can give tax breaks to everyone. The simple truth is that without those tax breaks those corporations would look for a better deal somewhere else, like China, and that would put more Americans out of work.
@James Dowds
Imagine an America where no one has an IQ below 115, and everyone has a job. An America where there is virtually no crime, and zero poverty. That America can be a reality if we start paying the less desirable to not have children.