Moghrey Mie Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Apparently the UK government is looking at giving the vote to 16 year olds. Has it made any difference over here? Are the young politically aware since they got the vote at 16? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minxie Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 A lot of people over 16 don't bother voting. I think that if 16 year olds are interesting in politics then they will vote and if they are not they won't. For those that are interested then I think that their votes are a good thing. At 16 they can work and pay taxes so why not vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 A lot of people over 16 don't bother voting. I think that if 16 year olds are interesting in politics then they will vote and if they are not they won't. For those that are interested then I think that their votes are a good thing. At 16 they can work and pay taxes so why not vote. Why not vote? Because voting gives the illusion of being be able to have some control and meaningful input into how one is ruled. However, given that such input into government is limited to voting the electorate are rendered spectators at how government functions. In my opinion, this is largely one of the reasons for so called apathy, which isn't a disinterest in politics as such, but rather an 'unconscious' rejection of the system. Any efforts aimed at educating people on the need to vote is deluding the public into what they believe they can achieve. Therefore, in my opinion it matters little whether 16 years can vote or not but it is a minute improvement to at least give free thinking teenagers this ability if they are subject to the same laws and control by the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Why not go for the Australian system of compulsory voting as part of your duty as a citizen? And combine it with PR as happens in Australia too. That way politicians cannot rely on the indifference factor. I suspect that UK politicians are scared to death of the idea of having a system like that - it could actually change the political landscape. My 'science fiction' thought is that with telecommunications being so advanced these days could future generations reach a stage where people are able to participate in many more decisions from their homes - via internet, TV voting or similar. The present 'representative' system was designed in an era when transport was by horse (if you were lucky) so it made sense to elect someone to act on behalf of the community. But it has become less and less representative and more and more party political whilst the technology to represent oneself has become more and more advanced and universal. If, for example, our medical system had progressed at the same rate as our political system we would still have barber surgeons operating without anaesthetic and with unsterilised equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 LDV - I think better to vote than not - at least in the sense of turning up to deliberately spoil the ballot paper (which is counted). If say 30% of people turning out to vote did this, it would have more impact than their not going out to vote at all. As for becoming more 'politically aware', how 'politically aware' are most people in IoM? There is low political engagement, partly I'd think the result of the political system being unresponsive. There is little or no in depth political commentary / current affairs, very poor local media (meaning even if they do a great job, this is still on a shoestring). I also wonder if 'citizenship' ought to be taught in schools. i.e. learning about laws, rights, what to do, and so on. Perhaps being given 'problems' or items from news stories (Clarkson footpath, someone dumping dogshit, Champ, the Pier, drug laws, defamation and HRA, Brand and Ross), and getting kids to work out arguments and views on these, and have to give both sides of the issue. Most people have little interest in things they don't understand and have no skills in unless it very directly effects them or they have some good reason to. Perhaps developing some of these skills and understanding is just what schools should be doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 Why not go for the Australian system of compulsory voting as part of your duty as a citizen? And combine it with PR as happens in Australia too. That way politicians cannot rely on the indifference factor. I suspect that UK politicians are scared to death of the idea of having a system like that - it could actually change the political landscape. The problem with a compulsory system is that it forces people to interact with the state in yet another way but more importantly gives the impression that voting is important and necessary. I find the liberal democratic system to be a very bad system, if I completely disagree with it why should I be forced to vote people into it? Compulsory voting does not get around where the real problems lie, people are indifferent for certain reasons and good reasons. It would not change the political landscape in my opinion, though it may be misinterpreting what you mean by landscape. At most it could affect who is voted into power but that is all. LDV - I think better to vote than not - at least in the sense of turning up to deliberately spoil the ballot paper (which is counted). If say 30% of people turning out to vote did this, it would have more impact than their not going out to vote at all. Well spoiling your ballot paper is a slight improvement than actually voting for a candidate. At least it gives the people who whinge about their government and politicians the credibility to do so rather than those who do vote and then complain. If you vote you shouldn't complain. But spoiling the ballot paper really conveys your dissatisfaction with the CANDIDATES, and not the system itself as by spoiling your ballot paper you are to an extent giving recognition of the validity of the system. As for becoming more 'politically aware', how 'politically aware' are most people in IoM? There is low political engagement, partly I'd think the result of the political system being unresponsive. There is little or no in depth political commentary / current affairs, very poor local media (meaning even if they do a great job, this is still on a shoestring). I know from my schooling that I had absolutely no teaching about politics other than that relating to history, and that related more to foreign policy. I also wonder if 'citizenship' ought to be taught in schools. i.e. learning about laws, rights, what to do, and so on. Citizenship should DEFINITELY not be taught. It can only be a way of reinforcing acceptance of the status quo. However, I would have absolutely no objections to teaching that educated young people about politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 But spoiling the ballot paper really conveys your dissatisfaction with the CANDIDATES, and not the system itself as by spoiling your ballot paper you are to an extent giving recognition of the validity of the system. You could always try scribbling across the paper 'system stinks'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.