Every “so-called” democracy defines suffrage in its own way. There are always some restrictions on who is permitted to vote. There is always a minimum age to qualify – but not a minimum wage. There is usually no maximum age either. Some mentally disturbed may be disenfranchised but there is no intelligence or knowledge requirement. Some civil servants or military personnel may be barred from voting.
In Party democracies, which individuals may be voted for is restricted by the parties. In countries practicing proportional representation, voters choose a party who each have their lists of individuals to be elected. The individuals are themselves chosen by party members in various ways. Once chosen representation is nearly always for themselves first, parties second, party supporters in their own constituencies third, party supporters in other constituencies fourth and non-supporters in their own constituencies only after that. “Block voting” is common – by ethnic or language affiliations or caste or tribe or community affiliations. Voters can be “bought” and are. Polls can be rigged and are.
Criminals may vote and may even be eligible to stand for election. Idiots and the ignorant have the same vote as the intelligent and the knowledgeable. Personal wealth is not a criterion in having the vote. A responsible person has the same vote as an irresponsible person. Lunatics may have the same vote as the sane. A mental cripple may have a better chance of exercising his vote than a physical cripple. A large tax-payer has the same vote as one who lives on hand-outs. “No taxation without representation” it is said. Corporations usually pay more tax than individuals but they have no vote. Individuals who don’t pay tax don’t lose their vote. Those who are paid by the public purse have the same vote as those who provide the public purse.
“One vote for every person” is fundamentally inequitable.
And yet this is the “best” system we have.
Two-thirds of Americans cannot name a single Supreme Court justice, former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor told the crowd that packed into a Boise State ballroom to hear her Thursday.
About one-third can name the three branches of government. Fewer than one-fifth of high school seniors can explain how citizen participation benefits democracy.
“Less than one-third of eighth-graders can identify the historical purpose of the Declaration of Independence, and it’s right there in the name,” she said. ….
It cannot be the optimum when representatives are chosen by a majority of the ignorant. Rule by a simple majority has already been discarded in the name of party politics and party lists and minority parties holding the balance of power.
I can’t help but think that if we are to improve the manner in which our democracies function then the “right to vote” has to be elevated in status , has to be “earned” and has to carry some duties. It is just too easy to be qualified to vote. Knowledge and intelligence must have some say in the matter. Being a giver or a taker must also have some say.
Or perhaps universal suffrage can give everybody a base vote with additional votes being earned by individuals for whatever a society values. For example, why not one vote at birth but only activated when some threshold of knowledge and/or intelligence is attained (not age)? A further maximum – of say 10 – votes to be earned by intellectual, service or economic achievements. And why not 10% of all votes for corporate tax payers?
The k2p blog 