Your argument is that this proposition is valid notwithstanding the very real power struggle in society. Why would one want to even put someone through something as humiliating as an intelligence test to determine their rights. It reminds me of the reading tests during segregation to suppress black voters. If we would have implemented this test then, tell me would they have a fair chance in society?
At least from my perspective, the government is fair game for everyone. Already our best and brightest are working for us, however power is incredibly corrupting. The issue isn't the voter, it's the system that seeks to suppress and deny the will of the voter. The voter should have full responsibility, just like someone who decides to take unsanctioned drugs
Why would you put someone through something as humiliating as a college education, and their final exams? Presumably you want a measure of their knowledge and capability. In my system, no one has the right to become a representative. It's a job like any other, that requires non-standard admissions procedures (namely random sampling) to avoid corruption. I'm unsure if traditions could be enshrined to make my system stable, as it doesn't have a fiction as beautiful as the people's will to justify its existence. But I do think it's worth considering.
Maybe there could be 2 parallel branches, like the House and Senate, one of which uses this random sampling / testing system. The other uses something resembling a popular vote.
>How does this test help against those that are disenfranchised and without privilege?
In the best possible way. By providing them with a competent government.
>How do we challenge those with privilege and power and their positions and goals?
Could you expand on that without using the term "privilege."