Britain, that Sceptred Isle, loveliest of lovelies, tiny bastion of freedom and dignity. What happened? Musical chairs, that’s what. Now, vote! Please, with all your might, vote! Britain needs the guys you like best in charge this coming May. When election day looms you remember what it is you want from life, and remember the promises offered by all the parties, and then vote for the candidate who will give you the best deal! All of history has been a struggle for representation where it really counts, the palaces atop our social hierarchies. Now we’ve almost won, there seems only one tiny problem left; young people do not seem that interested in taking part. And there are heathens who even refuse to do so.

Once or twice in recent years the subject of decreasing the minimum voting age has crested wave-like into public discourse. Would it be beneficial to expose a younger age group to the rigour of enlightened public service and civic duty that is the citizen’s greatest right and responsibility come polling day? Is it possible that swathes of the public are even now being short-changed out of the political process, and that the reason young people don’t vote is that they can’t at their most impressionable, curious age. Yes! I am of course referring to infants! With the infant vote finally mobilised we can smash the inhumane and absurd barriers that prevent our democracy from being truly democratic.

This represents the final extension of the franchise, to anyone who can cast a ballot unsupervised. Just think, on voting day games of musical chairs can be played as children line up and wait their turns to vote. Waiting in line is a proud British tradition, and children will learn quickly that this is the path to a good and responsible adulthood when they cast their lot for whatever party they believe in and see the results over the next few years until the next general election. And what result’s they’ll be!

Naturally the threat of coerced voting decisions must be taken very seriously by the authorities, for it is they that know how their paymasters should be elected. Children must be interviewed before they vote, along with their parents or guardians, to assure the authorities that sound voting decisions are to be made that day. For the purposes of avoiding red-tape – the stupid libertarians among us are finicky on this point – we shall simply give the officers asking the questions complete authority in deciding whether or not the child or adult being interviewed will be allowed to vote. The reasoning here is that since humans suspend their selfish wants when they take up employment in the public sector they will as often as possible make good calls about who can and can’t vote.


Sincerely, this seems a perfectly logical extension of what already exists in the United Kingdom and United States; the rationally ignorant trying to choose the senior management of the total state. In the UK there are 650 seats in the House of Commons, and nearly all of them are up for grabs in 2015. It seems the decent thing to be honest and admit that no voter is informed enough to make a sound decision with their vote, and neither is any one Member of Parliament truly powerful enough to do anything but occasionally try to protect some of their constituents from the callousness of the civil service. On top of which, if there are 650, no one member is really going to be an agent of great and good changes against the grain of any consensus then prevailing

So there is a problem at the heart of everything we hold dear. Frankly, if any UK parliamentary candidate could truly match any one child or adult voter’s utmost desires – free ale on Thursdays, and a one-steam-locomotive-per-child welfare program – then they would fail to satisfy anyone else’s well enough to get elected. Luckily in the UK the parties give budding candidates a nice simple hymn sheet to follow. It may as well be the same for every party, considering how little anything changes in between elections. But won’t somebody please think of the children?

“We have to get this play centre built”, “we owe it to future generations”, “I will fight to preserve our public services” on and on goes the drivel. The promises are always the same, with slight variation where the constituents’ concerns vary. For example, in Portsmouth a wannabe MP will promise to keep the port open, in Glasgow they might pledge to fight for military shipbuilding, and anywhere you care to name they will determinedly declare their intention to preserve the things government pays for, and where they can offer more. The flipside is that they will declare over and over their opponents’ desire to ‘slash’ spending, to ‘eviscerate’ public services, to ‘rout’ public-sector workers, and on and on.

And what do the voters have to say for themselves? Nary a peep that doesn’t completely play into the script described above. It’s like a theatre troop of monkeys slinging faeces at each other until one is arbitrarily declared the winner. This can all change with just the addition of the voices of our children to the political debate. If you can walk up to a ballot box and cast a vote, you deserve to be allowed to vote, and the state deserves to be allowed to check whether you’ve been coerced. It’s no sillier than the status quo. So let’s gt out there, mobilise big time, and get busy voting harder than we ever have before and bring about the change we want to see in the world!