Quote:
Originally Posted by kirklancaster
They are not all as intelligent and informed as you Jack. There are a LOT of 16 year olds out there who have not a clue about political issues - many of whom are too easily persuaded by propaganda or others who may not have their best interests in mind.
I think 18 is about right.
|
You could say the same about much of the electorate to be honest Kirk, unfortunately once you start screening people on their political knowledge before they vote it isn't democratic anymore.
Many people underestimate 16 and 17 year olds, particularly those who are in further education
and studying a social or political science. They are engaged with the world around them and know more than many people who are actually eligible to vote. I should know because I wasn't really interested in politics until I became one of them!
Those who have no interest in or are apathetic towards politics would just not vote much how those over 18 don't, but crucially those who are would. You only have to look at the Scottish Independence referendum to see how successful it was in engaging young people in politics - that is a good thing, political apathy (particularly among the young) is a terrible thing and the more they feel like they have a voice, the more involved they will become.
Above all else though is one phrase that springs to mind that trumps all of the other arguments - 'no taxation without representation'. That should be the only argument anyone needs to justify lowering the voting age.