The Insanity of Universal Suffrage

The concept of universal suffrage has continued its expansion from the point where reasonable minds may differ, to levels of insanity that should make even the most fervent advocate of democracy give pause. The latest from the left is that ‘Disability is No Reason to Strip a Person’s Voting Rights.’ The meat of the argument for this is laid out in the following example of a worldview utterly divorced from reality: ‘Proponents of such laws claim that people with developmental disabilities or mental illness may not fully understand our complex government or be able to make a “good” choice when they mark their ballots. But even if this were true (and it’s not), this makes them no different from their nondisabled peers.’ In a word, a developmentally disabled person is no different from a ‘nondisabled’ person, which is why there are no legal, grammatical and ethical distinctions between the two at all.

The 1965 Voting Rights Act, among other things, enshrined the ability of the illiterate and uneducated to dilute and disrupt the votes of those capable of carrying on Western traditions of government. The prima facia case was that literacy tests ‘disproportionately impacted’ minorities. However, one is only left to wonder why the solution to illiteracy is the destruction of the voting franchise rather than the raising of the literacy rate. Surely the solution is not to give those incapable of reading the keys to the kingdom, but rather take those incapable of reading and raise them to the level of stewarding the burdens of citizenship. The current push is to expand it beyond the illiterate, to the mentally incapable. The key to ‘safeguarding our democracy’ I’m told, is to allow those with severe developmental disabilities to choose who controls the largest and most deadly nuclear arsenal in the world. The argument that ‘nondisabled American’s can vote and cannot pass a basic civics test’ does not warrant inclusion of more voters. On the contrary, it is objective proof we allow too many people to vote.

To establish guardianship over an individual most often requires the durable power of attorney or in the cases where this is not present, a court determines who that person will be. The entire premise of guardianship is the legal way in which the assets and financial, medical and legal decisions of a person the court determines is unable to make for themselves are vested in another party. It is not a handshake agreement, but rather a legal status. The guardian now becomes liable for that individuals welfare, financial and otherwise. Due process is followed. Remedies are available. Reality can be cruel, but we also must conform our views to it.

We now live in a world where we pretend those a court of law has found unable to function as adults are a voting bloc. I write this not to disparage or demean those through unfortunate accidents or genetics have developmental disabilities. They are no less human or worthy of the same dignity we all are. However, we also must confront the ramifications of it. Given my philosophical bend, I disagree with the concept of the voting franchise as a whole. The natural end state of democracy will be true universal suffrage, children, non-citizens, and I’m sure the West Coast could include animals and plants into the voting public as well. After all, dogs are sentient beings and should have a say in the environment in which they live. What is not earned is meaningless, including citizenship. For us to continue to pretend a pulse is the sole requirement for voting is to embrace utter chaos. Then again, that is the end of all democracies, chaos, tyranny and bloodshed. Plato warned about this. I guess it is a good thing we have a piece of paper telling us we aren’t a democracy, despite all the evidence to the contrary. I had almost forgotten the convenient lie.

Spread the love
                

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

About the Author: admin

19 Comments

  1. @randyb450 May 13, 2018 at 15:42

    Is this the place to point out schizophrenia and PMS are difficult to tell apart?

    • Kit Perez May 13, 2018 at 18:12

      Depends on the time of the month you point it out, I suppose. ;)

      • @randyb450 May 13, 2018 at 19:28

        Clinically insane 25% of the time: Here’s your ballot. Should require a doctor’s note to vote. Along with picture ID….

        • Jesse James May 13, 2018 at 20:04

          May I save you some ducking and/or an emergency room visit, and point out Mother’s Day may not be the optimal time to bring that theory up at home…

  2. Frank Pinelander May 13, 2018 at 20:45

    Having been down this road before, I can answer this:

    “To establish guardianship over an individual most often requires the durable power of attorney or in the cases where this is not present, a court determines who that person will be.”

    This is F.I.C.A. Federal Insurance Contributions Act. Otherwise know as Social Security. By signing on to this, one changes their Status at Law to that of a Pauper. Which the court has determined government guardianship over. The other part, durable power of attorney, is when one admits to being a “citizen” of the US.

    Black’s Law, from the 90s, defined “citizen” as: one that has given power of attorney over their affairs to another. SMB go my copy of that edition.

    There is remedy, because what was done by the government constitutes fraud. But the remedy scares people, because you have to step out and go it alone.

    • JC Dodge May 14, 2018 at 11:52

      When you say you’ve “been down that road before”, are you saying YOU “Stepped out and went on it alone” Frank, or you’re just discussing the theory?

      • Frank Pinelander May 14, 2018 at 21:18

        Why, you looking to do it?

        • JC Dodge May 16, 2018 at 19:55

          Here I thought what I asked was pretty cut and dry. It’s ok Frank, you don’t have to answer.

  3. Anonymous May 14, 2018 at 07:24

    5

  4. Anonymous May 14, 2018 at 08:18

    4.5

  5. Fred May 14, 2018 at 14:13

    Re literacy rates; ‘Nobody is going to give you the education you need to overthrow them.’ – Seen on the interwebs.

  6. streamfortyseven May 22, 2018 at 02:29

    Elections on the national level are more of a means of manufacturing consent for predetermined policies rather than an actual choice between candidates who represent opposing, or at least significantly different, policies. For the past 36 years this has been the case, the “choice” has been between two neoliberal/neocon candidates with nearly identical policies. Trump was supposed to have been the “populist” outlier, but this isn’t how things have worked out with, say, Kushner et al setting policy or acting it out, the foreign policy of the US is still firmly in the hands of the neocons/neolibs. Then there are the ballot access laws, which legally set the Duopoly in concrete – and the phony debates which exclude all but the Duopoly candidates. Finally, there’s the fact that both the Democratic and Republican parties are legally considered to be “private associations” which means that the leadership of both may select candidates by any method they choose, may change the rules by which candidates are chosen, at any time they please, and so forth, to the dismay of Ron Paul and his supporters in 2012, and likewise Bernie Sanders and his supporters in 2016 – and there’s lots of good case law to back this up. You could have the most literate and erudite set of voters in history – a nation of Jeffersons – and they would not be able to overcome this rigged setup by electoral means. It is, at least at the national level, a very tightly constrained choice, and this is by design – and it would not change the final result one bit if every illiterate, legally incompetent, mentally retarded, or otherwise disabled person were able to vote.

  7. […] Democracy, my ass. […]

  8. Wade Jensen June 4, 2018 at 09:59

    I have to agree with Steamfortyseven that the system is indeed rigged, and we can not change it by voting. I here am confessing to being a slow learner myself, since it took 40 years of trying to change the system by voting. However, I do want to say that Jesse James bio is what I, at 65 have finally come to after a lot of changes due to new (to me) evidence. Congratulations to Jesse for getting it right so young.

    Wade

  9. Stealth Spaniel June 4, 2018 at 11:57

    What’s the old saw? “Voting got us into this mess.” We just had a vote here in California. The powers that be decided that we should all vote by mail; although there are “voting centers” where you can drop a ballot off. The whole thing is so sordid, that I decided this is my last vote. No one is paying attention to what I want, what I think is important, or what I feel the country is facing. It is literally a circular firing squad. The only think voting has done for me is to get me up to US FED court for 30 days as a juror. And yes, all the threats that were fit to print: your including your ss# is voluntary, but we need to report any amount over $600 to the IRS, we only validate for 1 garage downtown, so if you park somewhere else, screw you…………I guess that I am just tired of PC,diversity, civic duty, fairness, and other assorted BS principles of conduct.

  10. Anonymous June 4, 2018 at 18:21

    3.5

  11. Eigen June 4, 2018 at 19:27

    Nice and clever articulation here. Actually, a great segue to even a more ‘inhumane and unethical’ discourse. The next 30 years will be challenging, interesting, and perhaps universally without suffrage. Even elites are human and vulnerable. Gov and corps susceptible to.

  12. Michael Gladius June 4, 2018 at 23:10

    If democracy is to work, it must be tied to something more than just existing. It used to be ted to conscription. Starship Troopers required 2 years of volunteering for public service (not just military, but this was obviously the most popular option). Some people today say that only property-owners should be allowed to vote. Others say literacy tests. Or only taxpayers, or only people with no government income.

    America is no place for monarchists like me, but democracy *can* work, just not like we have it today. What we have today is mob rule, kept in check only by the electoral college. :P

    • Jesse James June 4, 2018 at 23:18

      There is a place for monarchists. At least two of us here at AP are. Democracy is working, you see it in Portland, Baltimore, Chicago, San Francisco and the list goes on. We are enjoying the pinnacle of democracy at this very moment. Some of us are intellectually honest enough to admit it, others fault the fruit for existing, never pausing to consider what kind of tree they planted. I disagree democracy can be anything other than the degenerate chaos it is right now, it’s the very nature of the system. I’ll at least grant that reasonable minds can differ on that fact, in theory.

Comments are closed.

GUNS N GEAR

Categories

Archives

Spread the love