Universal Suffrage

The new Fagin, formerly the Butcher, is talking with Hubert, the secretary of the France embassy, in a safe house.

"Fagin, the liberation of Britain workers, fundamentally, can only depend on Britain own awakening and efforts. For now, this is all the assistance we can offer. Given the current situation, I suggest you accept this compromise: change the name 'Textile Workers' Union' to 'Textile Workers United Club' to avoid related legal issues. Furthermore, considering the club's future legal activities, I advise you not to use the name 'Fagin' lightly anymore. Do you have any other names you could use?"

"Then we might as well just call ourselves the Textile Workers' Party. As for the name, we'll use the one on my identity card, Gervin Plan," Fagin said. "As for the temporary agreement with those guys to resume work, we can talk about that after the police release our comrades. I know we have to take it one step at a time. But will changing our name really protect us from the Britain government's crackdown?"

"Of course not," Hubert replied. "That's just giving them a way out. What truly frightens them isn't legal loopholes, especially in a country like Britain that practices common law. The key is that your struggle puts pressure on them, which is why they're willing to compromise. For example, in France, workers' status and income are significantly higher than in Britain. We don't have child labor in France because all school-age children are required to receive compulsory education. France workers' incomes are also far higher than in Britain. Why? Is it because France factory owners are exceptionally benevolent? Hubert course not. It's because France workers demonstrated their power during the France Revolution. Therefore, those factory owners naturally respect powerful workers. As long as you maintain your organization and strengthen your power, they won't dare to act recklessly anymore."

"If that's the case, I don't think 'The Textile Workers United Club' is strong enough," Fagin, or rather, Gervin Plan, laughed. "We might as well just call it 'The All-England Workers' United Club'."

"Ah, bread must be eaten one bite at a time, Mr. Pran. I suggest that for now, you consolidate your core business, set an example for other industries, and then consider the next step. As for the near future, I know that some wealthy people have a lot of dissatisfaction with the issue of voting rights, and they hope for changes in this area. My personal suggestion is that you can take this opportunity, in addition to fighting for wages and the like, to carry out a campaign for universal suffrage."

In Britain at this time, an electoral system already existed, but this system had very direct dual barriers of property and birth. As a result, the proportion of people with the right to vote and be elected in Britain at this time was only about two percent of the total population. This proportion was even less than the proportion of Active Citizen in the general population in the concept of Active Citizen and Passive Citizen created by Lafayette and his contemporaries at the beginning of the France Revolution.

In the Britain House of Lords, members must naturally be nobles. The House of Commons, or the House of Commons, has various restrictions on its members during elections. Firstly, there's the issue of electoral districts, a complex matter. In Britain, House of House of Commons elections were initially based on districts, not population. This resulted in numerous rural districts, while densely populated urban areas received fewer seats.

These small constituencies, set up based on geographical area, were highly advantageous to conservatives, or more specifically, to landowners and landed nobles. Their control over small rural areas was deeply entrenched. As a result, a strange phenomenon emerged in the Britain Parliament: members of the House of Lords rotated frequently, but some seats in the House of Commons became hereditary.

This phenomenon also occurred in a certain East Asia country later on. East Asia country, having been defeated in a war, was forced to adopt a universal suffrage system. As a result, the left-wing Socialist Party suddenly became powerful, even rivaling the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), an alliance of ethnic Chinese and wealthy businessmen. Consequently, the country immediately adjusted its electoral districts, changing the original large constituencies into smaller constituencies. Then, almost every constituency elected hereditary members of parliament. As for the Socialist Party, which had once rivaled the LDP, it was quickly reduced to a handful of members.

The current electoral system in Britain also displeases many wealthy business owners because there aren't enough people in Parliament who can directly represent their interests. While they could bribe landowners, wouldn't it be more appealing to simply run for office themselves, without spending as much money?

So now, a group of factory owners are also clamoring for changes to the election plan, hoping to allocate the number of members of the House of Commons according to population. This proposal is currently causing quite a stir in Britain.

"Striving for universal suffrage? How much of a difference would that make for us?" Gervin Plan asked.

"Universal suffrage is our livelihood," Hubert replied. "Look at France. Any adult male, as long as he hasn't committed a crime or has any particular mental disability, has universal suffrage regardless of his wealth. Under such circumstances, no member of parliament would dare to propose such an outrageous bill as prohibiting workers from forming unions across factories. We even stipulate that there must be unions in factories."

There's one point that Hubert didn't make clear: the unions in France factories didn't necessarily represent the workers. More accurately, given the high turnover rate of workers in France factories, unions basically only represented the less mobile "skilled workers," or what was known as the "working aristocracy." But there was no need to explain this so explicitly to the Britain.

Gervin Plan was completely unfamiliar with elections and such, so he thought for a moment and replied, "I don't quite understand universal suffrage yet; I need to study it more and think about it. I'm sorry, I can't give you an answer right now. Oh, by the way, do you have any books you could recommend for me to learn about these issues?"

Hubert was not surprised by this result. The new Fagin did not have the same erudition as the old Fagin, but there was a reason why the old Fagin chose him as his successor: he was very steady.

On the other hand, Hubert also believes that Gervin Plan, after careful consideration, would support this direction, as it would indeed be in their best interest.