Reconsideration of Rights to Vote

This paper aims to elucidate how the weight of vote may be allocated in the current democratic systems to properly administrate a society on the basis of justice rather than simple equality that is today well accepted internationally. Towards this objective, the notion of current democracy will be briefly clarified within its historical origin. In this sense, the pros and cons of the current democracy approach will be examined to see its problematic issues. This examination will indicate that today?s democracy is incapable of creating an efficient representation in the political area due to the methodology of voting system that is unjustly one person to one vote. The content of ??weighted voting?? system will be investigated suggested by John Stuart Mill whose claim would be better solution for the problems of today?s democracy. Mill?s ??weighted voting?? looks fairer and more effective in the implementation of proportional equality that includes absolute equality. While the conception of contemporary democracy takes mainly the term of ?absolute equality?, Mill?s approach accepts the term of ?proportional equality? that is the cornerstone to promote justice, which I also concern with the highest priority, both in theory and in practice. Mill?s approach argues for ?equality of equal?s? and ?inequality of unequal?s? shaped in social life dependent on individuals? own preferences, since this hierarchical structure is not natural or permanent but temporary and transitional in a community, besides equality of opportunity does exist for every persons without exclusion of anyone. Although it may seem to be against the principles of today?s empirical democracy, in fact his proposal may be considered as progressive. This progressive approach can develop both individuals and society and reveal better administrative. Then, this work will search for moral justification in order to demonstrate its fairness and qualifications to elect the best possible representative. Consequently, this work will end with two conclusions. Firstly, current democratic voting system might create injustice in treating unequal as equal due to equal voting although the main aim is to promote fair representation. The second is a normative one that the best possible democratic system might adopt the principle of multiple votes that treats not only unequal as unequal but also equal as equal. Both phenomenological and analytical manners are utilised as methodology. The coherence of concepts is debated in itself within the necessity of ?justice?.