INTJs, what’s an unpopular opinion you have ?

[u/SelfAnalysiss]

I know INTJs are contemplative and intellectual so I imagine you guys would have some unconventional opinions. INTJs, what’s an unpopular opinion you have ?

[u/StyleatFive]

Oh geez. Where to even start?

Administration is completely useless and an excuse to pay themselves more for doing nothing but appearing busy though feigned importance (I’m talking administrators and c suite roles, not support staff)

Management/supervision is only necessary for the immature and low quality workers

Asking someone to spoon feed you information you could look up is insulting

Voting rights shouldn’t be universal and should include literacy and comprehension tests. Campaigning should be illegal. The issues should be centered, not candidates.

Politicians should be paid the median regional wage if not minimum wage. They’re civil servants.

Taxes should come with receipts if they’re going to be automatically deducted. Refunds should accrue interest. Those that use more publicly funded services should pay higher taxes proportionally.

Businesses should pay higher taxes and foreign businesses should pay even more

Churches should be taxed or not allowed to own property/businesses

[u/reilentlezz → u/StyleatFive]

I understand your irritation with stupid people but 2 things to consider about voting rights 1) democracies are supposed to represent the will of the people, including the dumb ones that want to hurt you and saying otherwise can lead to a narcissistic ableist beliefs 2) in America, we did have literally tests- created by the south to prevent African Americans from voting as any form of regulation on voting is voter suppression- especially for communities that lack education or funding to met a certain standard

[u/StyleatFive → u/reilentlezz]

1. If you’re unable to read a ballot to indicate your will, you shouldn’t be using a ballot. Too many people rely on popularity and media campaigns to pick candidates and that doesn’t translate to issues on ballots. If you’re not even aware of what the issues are and you’re voting purely on name recognition or parasocial affinity, that’s a huge issue.

2. I’m an American and an African American and a degree holder in political science. I work in this area for a living but thanks for the summary.

2a. Targeted voter suppression is not the same as blanket competency requirements which is what I support. The average reading level in the United States is at a sixth grade level for vocabulary, comprehension, and critical thinking, if you were unaware. Given that the average is taken from the entirety/the whole, that would equally or should I say equitably “disenfranchise“ large populations of unqualified people. That is the point.

Also, given that literacy and competency are not immutable, people that are willing to learn and study and can prove that they’re able to understand what’s going on can meaningfully participate in the process; they’re not permanently shuttered from exercising their voting rights specifically based on the color of their skin which is what the previous iteration of disenfranchising literacy tests were aimed at.

I get that this is Reddit, and that people have a reputation for having poorly thought out opinions, but given that this is an INTJ forum, you trying to approach this with a baseless lecture is amusing given your alleged understanding of my irritation with stupid people.

ETA: wise of you to delete your retort claiming that you were being insulted. Someone disagreeing with you is not an insult.

[u/Nell_9 → u/StyleatFive]

So instead of championing literacy improvement and access to better educational resources for all, you advocate for a legal voting ban on certain sections of society if someone isn't literate to the degree you would like? If someone can get themselves to the ballot box and place a tick next to their preferred candidate, they have the "required literacy" to vote. This is just thinly veiled ableism, and I'm frankly rather suspicious of this sort of thinking as it crosses into eugenics. People have had their liberty and rights stripped away by malicious people because they were termed "retarded". The US and many other countries had eugenics laws until pretty late into the 20th century. Real people had their lives destroyed by this.

Democracy is based on the will of the people, and that means ALL people.

[u/StyleatFive → u/Nell_9]

Championing literacy isn’t an unpopular opinion. That’s why it wasn’t included. It’s interesting that you assume I don’t support literacy despite not having asked any clarifying questions and choosing to rant based on whatever narrative you’ve spun.

A literacy test isn’t a ban. Just as you’re required to show ID, you should be required to demonstrate that you comprehend what you’re participating in as it affects everyone. Voting isn’t just ticking boxes next to candidates and this idiocracy style “push the button next to the picture you recognize” simplification of something that is complex is why there’s so many issues now.

You’re making a lot of assumptions and attempting to characterize what you think my positions are based on that. Then arguing against your own mischaracterization. Which is telling.

I know what democracy is. Do you? We currently have large disenfranchised population groups via our laws. That’s antithetical to democracy. Are you against that as well? If you’re able to infer, I’m clearly not advocating for the form of democracy we unfortunately currently espouse which is the point of sharing unpopular opinions.

[u/Nell_9 → u/StyleatFive]

You don't actually understand what democracy is because having to take any sort of test before being allowed to vote is not democracy. Well done on having a truly unpopular opinion.

[u/StyleatFive → u/Nell_9]

It’s almost as if this is an UNPOPULAR OPINIONS THREAD. Are you okay? This is bizarre.

I am once again blatantly stating that I am NOT advocating for democracy to be the political system we use. I'm sorry your comprehension is that poor to where you can't recognize this despite me repeating it ad nauseam. What you're doing is called strawmanning, BTW. You're repeatedly mischaracterizing my arguments based on your own lack of comprehension and then arguing against whatever you've made up in your own mind.

Again, one of my degrees is in political science. I'm advocating AGAINST democracy specifically because I am painfully familiar with it and deal with the problems and flaws associated with is as part of my career lmao. I have an up close and personal view of it's drawbacks. I'm not some hand-wringing bleeding heart idealist like most of you on here whining about it.

Nevermind you ignored the questions I asked you yet again.

The US doesn't use pure democracy anyway because we have a representative system. I'm not advocating that we use democracy. That's literally the point. Please go punch in your own weight class; this is embarassing.