|
Who Shall Judge?
The followers of Rousseau’s
school of thought—who consider themselves far advanced, but
whom I consider twenty centuries behind the times—will not
agree with me on this. But universal suffrage—using the word
in its strictest sense—is not one of those sacred dogmas
which it is a crime to examine or doubt. In fact, serious
objections may be made to universal suffrage. In the first place,
the word universal conceals a gross fallacy. For example, there
are 36 million people in France. Thus, to make the right of
suffrage universal, there should be 36 million voters. But the
most extended system permits only 9 million people to vote. Three
persons out of four are excluded. And more than this, they are
excluded by the fourth. This fourth person advances the principle
of incapacity as his reason for excluding the others.
Universal suffrage means, then, universal suffrage for those
who are capable. But there remains this question of fact: Who is
capable? Are minors, females, insane persons, and persons who
have committed certain major crimes the only ones to be
determined incapable?
Clark Simmons, Webmaster
Copyright© 2000, The XLData Net |
Back
Return To: