`One Man One Vote’ is Out of Date

August 23, 2024 by Doctor Vernon Coleman

The following essay is taken from my book `Bloodless Revolution’


We need to overhaul our voting system.

We need to reconsider the principle of `one man one vote'.

Voting in England has become something of a joke in recent years. Shareholders who vote against company directors pay are likely to have their vote ignored. Television viewers who pay to vote for selected contestants in reality show competitions may find that their votes have not been counted – even though they have been charged. And electors who vote in parliamentary elections are wasting their time. Political manifestos, controlled by parties which have no interest in the welfare of the electors or the country, are an irrelevance. No one takes them seriously. Politicians know that they will ignore them. And so do the voters.

Politicians now know that they can safely ignore the wishes of the electorate as long as they cater for the whims and wishes of a small, controlling group of voters. This small controlling group consists of those who rely upon the State for their income – either as employees or as dependants.

The politicians who run the country are self-serving and the people who put them in power are self-serving too.

The time has come to reconsider the validity and fairness of the sacred principle of `one man one vote'.

It is generally accepted that the principle of one man (or woman) one vote is a fair and just one but the truth is that this method of voting has created a society in which those who work, pay tax and (literally) support society are ruled by an unholy alliance of those who either fail to work at all (because they are unemployed, unemployable, sick or lazy) and those who work for the State.

The original concept of giving every man and woman a vote was based on the unarguably fair notion that everyone who contributes to society should have a say in how it is run.

But when the vote was given to all, it was never envisaged that a dominant part of the voting would end up in the hands of the unemployed, the long term sick, the non-taxpayers, the professional users and the parasites; takers not givers.

But things have changed.

Today, it is perfectly possible for a government to win power– and to hold onto it – simply through winning the votes of people who make no contribution to society.

It is because they know that this where their votes come from that politicians have made no serious attempt to stop the epidemic of benefit fraud which is destroying the welfare state. Political parties don’t care too hoots that those who are genuinely in need are being pushed aside and abandoned. All the politicians care about is staying in power and enjoying the perks and the money that come with the power. If this means pandering to those who prefer not to work then this is what they will do.

So many millions now receive state benefits, and are wholly dependent upon the government for their income, that all political parties now pander to them, in order to win their votes, while at the same time ignoring the needs and rights of those who work and pay tax.

Today, a political party can win an election with 20% of the national vote. And a party can reach this vote by pandering to and attracting the votes of the unemployed, those receiving incapacity benefits, public sector workers and scroungers. The result is that tax payers are disenfranchised. The country is run on behalf of people who are `takers', who contribute nothing but who take a great deal. Things have gone too far. Today, the inmates are running the asylum for their own benefit.

Votes should now be limited to those who contribute.

It is a long standing part of our electoral tradition that prisoners do not receive a vote. Why, after all, should people who do not make a positive contribution to society have a say in how society is run? (It is worth noting, however, that the European Union is changing this and giving votes to prisoners.)

It would make just as much sense to withdraw the right to vote from those who are long-term benefit claimants or who never work. Voting rights could, perhaps, be given only to those who have worked and paid tax for, say, twenty years. Those rights, once given, would be for life. State employees would not be on the voting register unless they had worked outside the state system for twenty years.

Our present system is ludicrous and quite unfair. It's like allowing those who receive donations from a charity to decide how the charitable contributions should be distributed and how much those who contribute to the charity should give. Why should people who choose to never pay tax have any say at all over how taxes are raised or spent?

In a fair world only private sector taxpayers would be entitled to a vote.

In our current system taxpayers pay for everything, are constantly persecuted and abused by the authorities and receive very little in return.

No political party would contemplate even discussing the change I have suggested. The big three political parties know that their power depends upon their being able to buy votes from those electors who are dependent upon the Government and who will, therefore, vote for whichever political party offers them the biggest bribes.

We need to get rid of political parties – and vote for independent candidates. That’s the revolution that is the basis of my book `Bloodless Revolution’.

NOTE

The above essay was taken from `Bloodless Revolution’ by Vernon Coleman. You can purchase a copy of Bloodless Revolution from the bookshop on www.vernoncoleman.com Or CLICK HERE