Is it considered good? I don’t think many people at 16 really care about politics. But I am absolutely sure that there are many imbeciles at 16 who would vote even for a goat “just for giggles”.
Your vote should be weighed with an inverse relationship to age. That is: the older you are the less your vote should count. Older people who are closer to death have an incentive to vote for short-term gain over long-term improvements. This is how we got into the climate crisis, the world is being ruled by reheated corpses who don’t give a crap about the future.
turnout of 16- to 17-year-olds in the Vienna elections was estimated to be 64.2% and thus significantly and substantially higher than the turnout of 18–20-year-olds, which was 56.3%. In Krems turnout of 16- and 17-year-olds was 56.3% and substantially higher than turnout of older first-time voters (46.3%)
In Germany you can also vote in most elections at 16. And you can also vote for the European Parliament with 16. I think that is good, since the people who are currently young will be most affected by many of the decisions taken now. It also recognizes that the young people are also important and encourages political participation from a young age. And nobody is forced to vote, so people who are disinterested in politics will just note vote.
It might be just my subjective perspective, but to me it feels like 16 year olds are much easier to radicalise, or be fed half truths. They are in the age when you feel like you want to change the world, but you might also still believe in fairy tales and/or simplified scenarios. I hope I’m either wrong or this change won’t go through, but I’m getting “propaganda audience” vibes.
I think there is some truth to that. There is definitely a difference in the way young and old people vote(d). When looking at the last election for the European Parliament you can see that young people voted way less for the established parties and way more for small parties source (German). But that is not necessary connected to propaganda. Old people just have their “default party” they vote for since 50 years and young people mostly want change. At I think this principle will never change.
This was part of the reasoning for lowering the age. They can already join the military, pay taxes, provide care for family members etc. They should have a voice in politics.
I don’t believe they can be sent to actually fight until 18 though.
Is it considered good? I don’t think many people at 16 really care about politics. But I am absolutely sure that there are many imbeciles at 16 who would vote even for a goat “just for giggles”.
Not only is it good, I don’t think it’s enough.
Your vote should be weighed with an inverse relationship to age. That is: the older you are the less your vote should count. Older people who are closer to death have an incentive to vote for short-term gain over long-term improvements. This is how we got into the climate crisis, the world is being ruled by reheated corpses who don’t give a crap about the future.
Dunno. Those older people don’t seem to be doing such a great job either. See the current us and, yes, Brexit, if it’s more relevant.
Are People More Inclined to Vote at 16 than at 18? Evidence for the First-Time Voting Boost Among 16- to 25-Year-Olds in Austria
In Germany you can also vote in most elections at 16. And you can also vote for the European Parliament with 16. I think that is good, since the people who are currently young will be most affected by many of the decisions taken now. It also recognizes that the young people are also important and encourages political participation from a young age. And nobody is forced to vote, so people who are disinterested in politics will just note vote.
It might be just my subjective perspective, but to me it feels like 16 year olds are much easier to radicalise, or be fed half truths. They are in the age when you feel like you want to change the world, but you might also still believe in fairy tales and/or simplified scenarios. I hope I’m either wrong or this change won’t go through, but I’m getting “propaganda audience” vibes.
I think there is some truth to that. There is definitely a difference in the way young and old people vote(d). When looking at the last election for the European Parliament you can see that young people voted way less for the established parties and way more for small parties source (German). But that is not necessary connected to propaganda. Old people just have their “default party” they vote for since 50 years and young people mostly want change. At I think this principle will never change.
I know nothing of UK Law, but this smells of justification for a future draft at 16y law.
This was part of the reasoning for lowering the age. They can already join the military, pay taxes, provide care for family members etc. They should have a voice in politics.
I don’t believe they can be sent to actually fight until 18 though.
Well shit, now I can’t claim I know nothing of UK Law .
You can already join the British army at 16.
People under 25 already rarely vote. It’s not going to change as much as people might want I bet