Monday, July 29, 2013

Rethinking One-Man One-Vote

The moral and industrious majority in America has always affirmed the belief in the concept of majority rule in elections whose precedent goes back to Greece and the voting record of the 35 tribes of Rome. When most of the population believes in the election process, all is well. It didn’t even take a leap of faith for most to have revered those who guarded and preserved that process when the U.S., settled by the English, was temporarily galvanized into a reasonable defined homogeneous nation by its melting pot.  Few challenged the concept or its rules.

The key to understanding the problem of one-man, one-vote now is who votes and who doesn’t.  After years of rigged elections the center collapsed and with it the Silent Majority.  Two extremes are left: predatory capitalism and socialism. The majority dropped out and the majority voting now is the minority.  It’s an interesting state of affairs and how it got that way is even more interesting because the trouble with the Silent Majority is they are silent – so silent to the point where the relentless toxic activities of the worst elements has made the latter dominant.  
 
The precedent for adding votes to contributing individuals is there.  When the crimes of individuals become egregious, they lose their right to vote.  Shouldn’t the constructive efforts of the best elements be rewarded? Is it too much to give those with military service an extra vote?  After all, they risk their lives defending the framework from which all the goodies for the worst elements flow.  That’s not to say most Americans do not contribute, but the numbers and activities of the worst elements are always disproportional to the numbers of constructive individuals.  A businessman should get an extra vote because he employs others in the same manner as a nobleman guides the affairs of his manor.  America is, after all, a collective endeavor of all those estates run by a president – the chief business agent for the country.
 
So what does it boil down too even if the election process is rigged?  At least the new system would acknowledge the contributions of the best elements.  It’s also not a reaction to the browning of America because the idea of rewarding those who build and preserve any country is a universal one. All colors comprise the best elements.  The inevitable results of one-man, one-vote is socialism or worse when incentive takes a back seat to political commissars intent on playing God and who will justify their abuses by a representation based on the dead weight of the masses.  When the new majority is proclaimed by the worst elements, it will be an artificial one.