Thursday 11 October 2012

VOTES AT 16 ? WHY NOT FROM BIRTH ?

The nonsense about giving children the vote has reared its ugly head again and there seems to be some signifiant chance that this actually become a reality. Apparently, Alex Salmond is close to gaining agreement that the referendum on Scottish independence will be opened to 16 year olds, without the matter being discussed in Parliament; any such move would, inevitably, lead to almost irresistible pressure for a general change. That it would be a ridiculous extension of the franchise seems to pass many politicians by, in such desperate a search for support as they are.
 
While those who are born into rich and influential families and attend the countries 'posh' schools may well be educated to understand the ways of the political world, it is my experience that the vast majority of today's 16 year olds are still children, in every sense of the word. Their general behaviour is infantile and their interest in the wider world largely non-existent. They are governed by fshion and seem inseparably linked to their 'i-Phones' and other such devoices. They spend their days in endless and pointless exchanges of text messages and Facebook posts; they are undisciplined and disruptive. Worst of all, many have a level of education far below that of their parents and grandparents.
 
When children left school at 14 and had to find work, they were forced to enter into the adult world and grew up very quickly. Today's generation of children remains at school or in college or university until they are aged at least 18 and often until 21 and older. They have no experience of the realities of the adult world, being protected at every stage from any interference from those who would seek to teach them any manners or discipline. Today's school leavers may be more physically mature than those of earlier decades but they are psychologically far inferior, with this inferiority extending for many well into their 20s. 
 
The oft-expressed argument that this or that group has not had a chance to 'have their say' on this or that issue doesn't hold water. Our world is always governed according to rules laid down by an earlier generation and this argument, at its extreme, would lead us to give the vote to ever younger children until such time as all new-borns are also on the register. Every generation, in its turn, has the opportunity to change whatever laws it wishes, or introduce new ones, but only once they have achieved a proper degree of understanding of the world around them. To give them the power without the knowledge to use it would be irresponsible to say the least.
 
The teenagers of my experience have little or no interest in politics and even less understanding. It has been stated that few in the 18 to 24 age group vote now, so what would be the point of extending the franchise to those aged 16 and 17 ? Presumably those who favour this are driven by an expectation that a majority of those who do vote would be on their side, so it is unsurprising that it is the socialist wing which is most enthusiastic; young people are generally thought to be more left wing in their views. However, any increased support for the left would surely be diluted by the reduction in the overall turnout, which would fall as a result of the general apathy of teenagers. The legitimacy of governments and councils would be further eroded, something by which serious politicians would be worried and of which the population at large should be terrified.
 
We can only hope that sanity eventually prevails

No comments:

Post a Comment