Who Shall Judge?

by Frédéric Bastiat

　　The followers of Rousseau's school of thought -- who considerthemselves far advanced, but whom I consider twenty centuries behindthe times -- will not agree with me on this. But universal suffrage-- using the word in its strictest sense -- is not one of those sacreddogmas which it is a crime to examine or doubt. In fact, seriousobjections 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 makethe 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, theyare excluded by the fourth. This fourth person advances theprinciple of incapacity as his reason for excluding the others.

　　Universal suffrage means, then, universal suffrage for those whoare capable. But there remains this question of fact: Who iscapable? Are minors, females, insane persons, and persons who havecommitted certain major crimes the only ones to be determinedincapable?