Comment by idiotsecant

4 years ago

There is, on the other hand, a strong incentive to keep poor people from getting ID. If you don't have ID you can still mostly do the peasant work that is required for those in power to stay in power but you can't remove them from power by voting because those in power are increasingly linking the ability to vote with the ability to get documentation which they are continuously working to make it more difficult for poor people to get.

Reap all the benefits of the slaves doing their work, avoid any of the downsides of having to actually listen to their needs.

Is this your true belief? Do you really 1: conceive of anyone without an ID as a "slave," and 2: believe that things like Real ID laws, which are broadly supported by 80% of citizens[0] are here just to keep the poor down?

This seems utterly inflammatory, and somewhat divorced from reality. I absolutely understand systems thinking, and specifically can see the argument for posiwid here, but even then... This sort of conspiracy thinking strikes me as profoundly not useful.

Before attributing laws requiring IDs to the evil evil overlords, first ask yourself why 80% of citizens approve of these laws? Is everybody just all working to keep a tiny group of people down? Might it instead be that complex systems have edge cases and people who are already on the margins of society hit these edge cases more? The reason I ask is because we can fix bugs, but obviously we can't fix a global conspiracy, so I'd really like to know which I'm dealing with. If it is a conspiracy this makes it seem like there's nothing I can do to solve the problem.

[0]: https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthp...

  • I concur that the GP was a bit dramatic in their use of the term "Slave," but they raised a valid point.

    Voter suppression is a real thing in the United States. It's a strategy often used to hold and retain power by the minority (often richer, privileged) party

    See https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-the-vote-vot...

    > Suppression efforts range from the seemingly unobstructive, like strict voter ID laws and cuts to early voting, to mass purges of voter rolls and systemic disenfranchisement. These measures disproportionately impact people of color, students, the elderly, and people with disabilities. And long before election cycles even begin, legislators redraw district lines that determine the weight of your vote.

    " The reason I ask is because we can fix bugs "..

    These problems can be fixed, but they require effort by all citizens to vote and put pressure to make voting equitable.

    Fortunately I live in New Zealand so our democracy is quite healthy, though it could always be better.

    • Purging voter lists is not suppression unless you view dead people or those who have moved out of the voting jurisdiction on the voting rolls as legitimate voters. No different than a company purging email or address lists of outdated names

      1 reply →

  • But the fake IDs we had before Real IDs were also fine. Was there a lot of fraud with the fake IDs ? You had to give one address proof earlier, and now you need to give two. What's the advantage of that ? A lot of post 9/11 measures have questionable use (e.g., TSA). People approve all sorts of nonsense when they are not being rational.

  • Absolutely it's a sincere belief. "Slave" is hyperbole, but only just barely.

    The link you posted indicates that 80% of people think it's reasonable to show ID at a polling station. I think you'd find that's a pretty common opinion on it's face because it's perfectly reasonable to show ID to do things like vote or get social security benefits or register property you own or all those government-y things.

    The trouble comes when you hijack that perfectly reasonable expectation by then making ID preferentially difficult to get for certain classes of people. You don't need to trust that this is the case - it's apparent from the statistics. More than 10% of adult US citizens don't have ID. Why not? Because it takes time and money - you need to pay fees, you need to travel, you need underlying documents that can sometimes take hundreds of dollars of fees themselves to generate, etc. Politicians also can 'tune' what counts as ID to preselect the voters they want. TX for example, counts concealed carry cards as ID but does not count student IDs.

    In fact, in 2014 the GAO itself found that strict photo ID laws reduce turnout by at least 2-3 percentage points on average with significantly higher proportions in economically depressed and racially diverse areas, and it's well documented that the people impacted by that lower turnout are overwhelmingly members of specific demographics that tend to vote for specific policies. That's a pretty big incentive to marginalize these people if you don't agree with those policies.

    It's undeniable that for many of the most vulnerable and powerless members of society obtaining ID under the current regime is in direct conflict with simple survival, and is unlikely to be a priority. If we want to require ID for voting we should make the process of obtaining that ID require as little economic power as possible - a task that is easily within our grasp.

Please provide evidence of this? Lots of evidence in the form of entitlements to those of low income to the contrary.

How does this work? You don't just go to local city hall or similar office to get a free ID when you turn particular age (15 in my country)? What is required to get an ID?