Ton on voting

Way back before NC was a State, to vote in the local colonial elections a man had to be 25 years or older, own a certain amount of property, be a member in good standing in a local church and be in the militia, organized or unorganized. Those in the unorganized militia had to prove they owned a firearm and certain amount of shot and powered for their weapon.

Let’s think about this for a few moments. Voting is force; if you win an election you are literally forcing your will on those you disagree with and upon many more people then you could on your own power, even if you have a gun and those around you do not. Life was much harder then and a 25 year old man in the 1750’s likely to be much more mature then most 25 year old men today. You want mature men to vote. Compare that to those who vote today.

Property requirements ensure those who vote are invested in preserving the current system. Militia means you are willing to defend your blood and soil

Church membership here is a proxy for moral training and correct behavior. Whether the training stuck is difficult to ascertain but churches at the time had no problem with pulling membership from those who colored to far outside of the lines.

To this I would add a shit ton of disqualifications. I would not allow childless men to vote. They have no stake in the future. The college educated should also be barred, unless their schooling is in something useful and practical like engineering… useful engineering like those who build machines, roads, sewers, dig mines etc. Software engineers and the like need not apply. Otherwise, the college educated are generally stuffed full of silly shit that bares no weight in the world. They are also foolish beyond all accounting as the White college educated man lines up to vote for the party most likely to slit his throat. Those who are not the descendent of the founding fathers should not be allowed to vote. The nation was created for them and us, their posterity. There is nothing about a melting pot etc in their writings. Those descended from the men who voted for and fought for Lincoln should also be barred from voting. Their fore fathers demonstrated a remarkable lust for power and tax revenue or an unredeemable level of gullibility. Either way they come from questionable bloodlines. Anyone who draws their pay from tax dollars should be barred from voting while they take govt money. Military officers should be barred for life.

To be fair, most of what these people vote for are not inherently evil and much of it proved to work well in smaller, cohesive nations, but generations of voting patterns from these bloodlines have proven them unreliable from the stand point of small government and individual liberty. These people have been voting to increase government at the expense of liberty for generations now. They will not “change’ and liberty will not be restored while they are allowed the vote. The usa will continue on its path of destruction and varying rates until the work is done. In one generation, max, the usa will not resemble the nation I grew up in and any sense of the word. When I grew up, there were still men who could remember the usa as a mostly free nation. One generation from now that will not be true. One of the main points of failure will have been extending the franchise and then citizenship to people unsuited for life in a republic based on limited government.

As you can tell, there aren’t many men I think who should be allowed to. Its way to powerful of a weapon to not regulate heavily and do all you can to ensure men vote properly; keeping the government’s power much smaller than the collective power of individual men. History tells us, universal suffrage is a failure regarding preserving the rights of free men

Advertisements

21 thoughts on “Ton on voting

  1. redpillgirlnotes

    Interesting. I would agree in the past few decades we have lost a lot by turning to govt. to be our nanny, guiding and protecting is. One small example is raw milk. You would think it was toxic waste from how darn near impossible it is to sell or buy. Such laws ensure only the big corps. Can pay to play and the mom and pop farmers are squeezed out. Of course there are many bigger examples. Soon we will all be appendages of the state rather than directors of it. Not good.

    Reply
    1. sfcton Post author

      cannot let raw milk slide through, its against the rules and the govt must be obeyed in all things, 600k dead Southerners could tell you that and raw milk takes a few dollars away from the big corporate farms.

      Reply
  2. theshadowedknight

    I came up with a voting system that would work pretty well. Only married men of a certain age may vote, and only if they meet the requirements of voting, such as: member in good standing of the official state church, military service–not militia, as all men are required to do militia training and service–having at least one child, with the number of children being the times your vote is counted, and paying a tax in precious metals for the privilege.

    Children are the future, and the more you have, the more weight you have to influence the future. To prevent the lower classes from gaining control, a significant tax of precious metals restricts it to the wealthy. Military service is done in the place of compulsory militia training, which shows the willingness to go above and beyond what is required of the average citizen.

    The Shadowed Knight

    Reply
      1. theshadowedknight

        Most likely Orthodox Christian Church. They seem to resist the rot the best, better than Catholics and Protestants.

        The Shadowed Knight

    1. Sumo

      Being a Canuck, I obviously don’t have a dog in this fight, but I would take a second look at the “only men with children” requirement. I’m thinking specifically of those douchebags who have 20-some kids by 20-some different baby mamas.

      An extreme example, I know, but something to think on.

      Reply
      1. theshadowedknight

        It has to be a married man, with only the children of the marriage counting towards the vote. In addition, the precious metals tax should be enough to keep that sort of man out. Not to mention that by the time I get this established, that sort of thing will be a killing offense. By the time the first one is pregnant, he is looking at a trip to the church, either for a wedding or a funeral.

        The Shadowed Knight

  3. Liz

    Well…obviously I’m for whatever ultimately best serves my (and my progeny’s/loved ones) general longterm interests.
    So, military service (or some equivalent, haven’t thought of the specifics), children, I’d eliminate women from voting because the vast majority vote against what I’m for and for what I’m against. Also, no bronies and such. And only legal citizens vote.

    Reply
  4. Cill

    I’m a mechanic and plumber and electrician and carpenter and blacksmith. I also build boats and tunnels and bridges and dams. But I have never built children and never been married, so that rules me out.

    Reply
    1. sfcton Post author

      Remember I talking about an ideal world so there would be no welfare from the get go.

      well Cill my position isn’t about a man’s intrinsic moral worth. If you read through the list, I would not be allowed to vote either as I get a monthly check from the govt( I’ll explain that more in a bit)

      As far as a State church goes, I would endorse a specif branch of Christianity, but Christianity is the religion of the West so any Christian sect would do. This would also disqualify me from the voting rolls.

      Those disqualified from voting would still enjoy the full spectrum of rights and responsibilities of a Constitutional Republic. They would own firearms, property, have free speech (sort of) and the like. The only limit would be exclusion from the electoral process so they would not be able to donate money, post signs of support etc for a candidate

      as for welfare rolls….. I support the guaranteed income via Charles Maury and the fair tax. In effect everyone would get a check from the govt. That would be the extent of welfare. Govt employees and men like myself drawing a military pension would be excluded since we have a vested interests in the large size govt model.

      Do you really think the hood rat with 20 kids is on the birth certificate for them? I understand folks points on that and its a good one but its not how life plays out.

      Reply
  5. Artisanal Toad

    You left out one important point about voting, but I’m going to take a quick digression first. If you were to ask your average snufffie who the 1st President of the United States was, he’d say “George Washington” and he’d be wrong. The first President of the United States was Samuel Huntington of Connecticut. George Washington was actually the 11th President of the United States, although the first President under the Constitution of the United States. Today nobody is taught about the period of time the United States organized, existed and waged war under the Articles of Confederation.

    Just as history has been watered down and recast, the concept of voting has been changed. Prior to the war of Northern Aggression, voting was by right and public. There were no secret ballots and voting was done on the courthouse steps *in public.*

    After the war the Southern states were seized as prize booty and the “elective franchise of registered voting” was implemented. The fundamental change was that voting was no longer a right, it was a privilege. From 1865 to 1932 there was a bifurcated system of governance with the northern states being de-jure states and the southern states being quasi-states under federal control. With the bankruptcy of the US in 1932 the entire country was placed into receivership and the status of the northern (and western) states was reduced to that same level of servitude that the Southern states were subjected to.

    Another reason why I mention the Continental Congress is simple: Robert’s Rules of Order. After the Constitution was ratified and elections held, the United States had two governing bodies. In a formal ceremony the Continental Congress adjourned “Sine Dia” (without setting a day and time to reconvene) and thus according to parliamentary procedure dissolved itself permanently. If this is the procedure to dissolve a representative body, it should be obvious that everyone knew at that time that the Continental Congress was permanently adjourned. This is important because that’s exactly what the US Congress did in 1861 after 13 of the Southern States representatives got up and walked out. Congress no longer had a quorum and they had three options. They could call for a vote of quorum (which they didn’t have). They could set a date and time to reconvene, or they could vote to adjourn Sine Die. The latter is the choice they made, permanently disbanding Congress. The US Constitution had no procedure to reinstate Congress and thus the Government of the United States effectively ceased to exist. Lincoln rounded up every member of Congress he could find at gunpoint and after some members were ejected, kept them in session at gunpoint in order to rubber-stamp his illegal and unconstitutional acts.

    There is no living person in the US who has voted in de jure elections. There are no de jure elected officials. Everyone takes part in the “elective franchise of registered voting” and it’s all a sham. Focus on producing food and being able to defend it. Focus on local community and get a trusted crew together.

    BUNS IN OVEN. To quote the movie, “Sparta will need sons.”

    Reply
      1. sfcton Post author

        the two readers just finished up their schooling (nurse practioner and masters in journalism) I’ll see if they feel like reading but cannot say for certain

  6. Artisanal Toad

    5 novels in a series, centered on a Christian poly family through several generations, goes from about where we are now to a takedown of the US. 90% population reduction, heavy military involvement (Yes, there are actually a few decent officers, I worked for one back in the day, A.C. Zinni) and a lot of wild stuff going on. I’ll shoot you and email, you can forward if they feel like sampling. The journalism major would probably be helpful.

    Reply
    1. sfcton Post author

      I’ll pass it along AT

      Also noticed I left soemthing out. Catholics were not allowed to vote in colonial NC. I would not allow them to vote in the here and now

      Reply
      1. sfcton Post author

        I’d also not allow jews, hindus etc etc to vote either, or live withing the borders as anything but temporary diplomatic types stuff

  7. honeycomb

    Ton I know we have discussed this before on a different board/blog.

    I’ve been busy .. and over-stressed. But now that I have 10 days off I can catch-up on the man’sphere. This post being one.

    I would immediately re-institute the old ways. Your exceptions would not make my cut. I understand your reasons. I don’t dispute your claims. But a basic starting point or foundation is and would be all that would be necessary for effective change.

    As for our current “illegal to legal” problem (eg executive order of th potus) with voting .. it just got worse.

    And as long as women can vote or run for elected office (of any kind) we are screwed as a nation. But that is a whole other topic for another day.

    Keep up the posts.

    hc

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s