UK General Election
Why You Must Go To The Ballot box
For decades, there has been a concerted effort to disenfranchise you and dissuade you from participating in elections. But what is the reason behind this?
become a member
What To Do At The Next UK General Election
If at the next UK general election you feel like none of the political parties or candidates truly represent you or your values, there is still a way to make your voice heard at the ballot box. By spoiling your ballot, or intentionally marking it in a way that makes it invalid, you are sending a powerful message of resistance against the current political system.
When spoilt ballots outnumber the votes for political parties, we can show that we do not consent to being governed in this way. Your spoilt ballot is recorded and sends a message of non-compliance with the current system, while abstaining from voting is seen as apathy.
In 1703, the court case Ashby vs White established the concept of consent to be governed. By not voting, you are seen as tacitly agreeing to be governed. However, spoiling your ballot shows that you actively reject the current system.
Some messages you could include on your spoilt ballot are “I do not consent,” “No more war,” “Parliament is not sovereign,” “I am sovereign,” “Not my king,” “Release Julian Assange,” or “I was never asked.”
So, remember, a spoilt ballot is a vote for the resistance, and by doing so, you are legitimizing your non-consent with all laws except for the common law. The current system is broken, so why not vote for Mr. and Mrs. Spoilt Ballot instead?
What To Do At The Next UK General Election
It is Important to consider the following points to understand why spoiling a ballot at the next UK General Election by writing “I DO NOT CONSENT” is in fact the only REAL PROTEST VOTE: Which means, your spoilt ballot counts. Spoilt ballots are recorded and the returning officer MUST by law show the King by declaration at the count and return to the King the dissenting ballots “opposition ballots”. A simple search of hansard shows evidence of debates and records of spoilt ballots are held by official returning officer at councils. If you do not vote, you abstain, abstention is agreeing with the system. Voting for any “political party” is voting for the current system, by profound irony so is abstention [not voting]. They use abstention against you. The main stream media are part of the lie. They say voting UKIP or Reform or x is a “protest vote”. It is not. It is voting for the system the same as abstention. “Abstention from voting only empowers tyranny further, as proven by our current governance. The greater the abstention, the greater and more prolonged the tyranny.” Graham Moore.
– “Only cowards and fools abstain from voting” Abraham Lincoln.
i.e.
“Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that nine votes in the House of Commons are just as important as nine in the constituencies?” Sir W. Darling MP
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1950-03-14/debates/1750634d-af30-45ef-b43c-e5137396929c/SpoiledBallotPapers: Mr I DO NOT CONSENT
From an inspiring student of common law who reads law. Keith also runs a website called the secret people.
“Just bought a book called The Judgements Delivered by The Lord Chief Justice Holt in The Case of Ashby v. White and Others, and in The Case of John Paty and Others.
I believe that the wording of Ashby case that is online is a summery??
These are the words of John Holt from the Ashby case written in that book. What I find encouraging in this case is that it explains in great detail everything about the vote and why we have it.
You’ll notice that he expressly mentions that along with laws, no tax can be imposed without consent. This is not mentioned in the summery version, so I think it’s a great authority to show and convince people.
I believe that this case represents the reason why all knowledge of our Constitution has been removed from public knowledge. I also think that if you didn’t, then maybe it would have been a great argument in Charles’ case for the voiding of the torture abstention clause, because who in their right mind would consent to Parliament enacting such a repugnant piece of legislation?
“” … 3 This is the proper remedy which the plaintiff hath pursued, being supported by the grounds, reasons, and principles of the ancient common laws of England.
For first, which is to show the plaintiff hath a right to give his vote at the election of parliament burgesses for his borough.
It is very well known that always the Commons of England had, and still have, so considerable share in the property of the nation, that from thence, in this well-balanced Government, they become justly entitled to an equal share in the legislature of this Kingdom, without whose consent no tax can be imposed nor law enacted, but because of the immense number of individuals which constitute that vast body, it was impossible to have it executed by them in person, it was therefore so established in the original constitution that a convenient and proportionable number from amongst themselves should by them be chosen and invested with a plenary authority to deliberate, advise, and determine, for themselves and those who sent them.“” – Lord Chief Justice Holt, Ashby vs White & Others: The Judgements Delivered by The Lord Chief Justice Holt in The Case of Ashby v. White and Others, and in The Case of John Paty and Others (p3).
Keith.”
My response:
“
My explanation of that Judgement (Ashby v White 1703) and Knowledge of the constitution and reading law.
In the context of laws being made within the limitations of the constitution, “a plenary authority” refers to the complete or comprehensive power vested in a governing body to create laws. However, this authority is subject to the limitations imposed by the constitution. The constitution acts as a framework that sets out the fundamental principles, rights, and boundaries within which the legislative authority operates.
Taking the example of the English Bill of Rights 1688, this law codified and recorded common law rights into positive law through a statute. The Bill of Rights 1688 was enacted and established by a revolutionary convention parliament, and it holds a special status. An ordinary parliament does not possess the power to change or modify it. In effect, it is outside of the jurisdiction of an ordinary parliament to nullify or restrict your rights and the judiciary should step in or indeed the monarch, in the case of Ashby v White they both did.
This illustrates that the English Bill of Rights 1688 places restrictions on the plenary authority of the legislature. It recognizes the authority of judges to invalidate primary legislation if it conflicts with the provisions outlined in the Bill of Rights. In this sense, the constitution, as embodied in the Bill of Rights, acts as a limitation on the otherwise plenary authority of the parliament, ensuring that laws created by the legislature do not violate the established rights and principles enshrined in the constitution.
Therefore, the authority of judges to void primary legislation, as stipulated in the Bill of Rights 1688, serves as a safeguard against potential encroachments on individual rights and the constitutional framework by ensuring that laws are consistent with the limitations imposed by the constitution.” Graham Moore
Active Participation: By casting a spoilt ballot, individuals are actively participating in the electoral process rather than abstaining altogether. It signifies that they are taking the time and effort to engage with the democratic system and express their dissatisfaction with the available choices.
Dissatisfaction with the Options: Spoiling a ballot communicates a clear message that none of the candidates or parties on the ballot represent the voter’s views, values, or interests adequately. It demonstrates a refusal to support any of the existing options and sends a powerful message that the electorate demands better choices.
Expressing Dissent: Spoiling a ballot is a form of peaceful protest and a legitimate way to express dissent. It allows individuals to exercise their freedom of expression by visually and symbolically demonstrating their dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs. It’s important to remember that democracy thrives on the ability to voice dissent and challenge the status quo.
Holding the System Accountable: By casting a spoilt ballot, individuals are questioning the legitimacy of the electoral system itself. They are raising awareness about its shortcomings and demanding improvements. Spoilt ballots can spark discussions, debates, and even reforms aimed at creating a more inclusive and responsive democratic process.
Freedom of Choice: Ultimately, it is essential to respect the individual’s freedom to express their political views and make their own decisions. Just as casting a valid vote is an exercise of choice, spoiling a ballot is a legitimate choice too. It is a means for individuals to voice their dissatisfaction without resorting to more extreme or disruptive methods.
It is crucial to address the misconception that abstaining from voting can effectively counter tyranny. While abstaining may be a personal choice, it ultimately disengages individuals from the democratic process, thereby diminishing their ability to influence the outcome. In essence, abstaining doesn’t directly challenge or hold those in power accountable. To effect change, it is vital to actively participate in the democratic process and utilize available methods to voice concerns and dissatisfaction “I DO NOT CONSENT”.
In majority numbers spoilt ballots serve as a powerful tool for expressing discontent and questioning the legitimacy of governance. Spoiling a ballot involves intentionally writing a clear message indicating dissatisfaction. By casting a spoilt ballot [it is valid, counted, recorded and returned] individuals are not abstaining but actively participating in the electoral process while registering their protest.
If spoilt ballots were to reach a significant percentage, such as 70%, it would send a strong message to those in power and to the broader society that a considerable portion of the population is dissatisfied with the available options or the state of governance. This serves, as a trigger to the law lords for an election court hearing [a common law court hearing], forcing a constitutional crisis. When spoilt ballots and “I DO NOT CONSENT” are a majority vote – there can be no government, no laws made and no tax imposed. It also enforces the constitutional position of separation of powers. All three are brought to heel by the electorate. Parliament is not sovereign – YOU ARE. By abstaining you give up your sovereignty and hand it to unelected officials (King, Judges, Crown Servants and political parties). – “Only cowards and fools abstain from voting” Abraham Lincoln.
Moreover, a high number of spoilt ballots can also lead to increased public scrutiny, media attention, and debate about the legitimacy of the electoral system. It encourages discussions about the need for better representation, electoral reforms, and policies that address the underlying issues responsible for voter dissatisfaction. This scrutiny can foster a more transparent and accountable political environment in the long run.
In conclusion, spoiling a ballot should not be seen as engagement or agreement with the existing governance. It is an active form of participation, a means to express dissent, and a call for better options and a more robust democratic process. It is crucial to recognise and respect the diverse ways in which individuals choose to engage with and critique the electoral system. Spoilt ballots serve as a more powerful means to express discontent and challenge the legitimacy of governance. By actively participating and casting spoilt ballots, individuals can make their voices heard, put pressure on politicians, and promote discussions about improving the democratic system. – “Only cowards and fools abstain from voting” Abraham Lincoln.
Backed by English Common Law, Constitutional Case law and historical event Ashby vs White 1703. Any party that sacrifices itself for its Country and not the other way round is good. Any party that proposes spoilt ballots as a method of dissent is showing their loyalty to Country first. England in this case.
and
https://www.votenone.org.uk/protest_votes_count.html
So if at the next UK General Election you feel like none of the political parties or candidates truly represent you or your values write “I DO NOT CONSENT ASBY VS WHITE 1703” on your ballot paper, if you continue to do the same thing, nothing will change.