Page 4 of 18
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:53 pm
by FlashDangerpants
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:42 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:35 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:22 pm
I would suggest that the actual point of democracy is to run a state. If it gets too unwieldy to do so, or becomes riven by factionalism, it has failed.
The role of government is run the state. That of democracy is to decide who does it. And is that all you have? The best you can manage for this point is that?
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:22 pm
Ok lets bring in some classic philosophy then, namely Plato. He believed that democracy was a degenerate form of government, and inevitably leads to dictatorship.
Something like that, anyway. I was only about 16 or 17 when I did Philosophy A level. Far too young to care very much.
I did philosophy A Level too. I went on to study philosophy at university though, so some 17 year olds are quite capable. You on the other hand didn't know why Plato wrote about the tripartite mind when you were 17, and still you don't, and so you won't understand why I dismiss all that appetitive bullshit as irrelevant. So in what way has age improved your capabilities?
I could very easily have gone to uni, but chose not to. I certainly wouldn't have done philosophy, though.
And this imaginary alternative you from a better educated dimension has what precisely to do with the topic under discussion?
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:42 pm
Democracy works on the principle of losers' consent. When that breaks down, as it did after the Brexit referendum, democracy loses all credibility. It is no surprise we are living through its apparent death throes.
What has that got to do with letting 17 year olds vote?
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:53 pm
by Iwannaplato
I don't think it's ridiculous to question the idea of 16 year olds voting. That said the research I found is cautiously optimistic about the idea
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/P ... 0democracy.
They looked at what actually happened in Austria since there 16 year olds can vote.
Critics of lowering the voting age to 16 have argued that such teenage citizens are not able or motivated to participate effectively in politics and that this both drives their turnout decisions and means that their electoral choices are of lower quality. We have tested whether these criticisms have an empirical basis using evidence from Austria, the one European country where the voting age has already been lowered for nation-wide elections.
Our findings prove the critics wrong. First, we do not find that citizens under 18 are particularly unable or unwilling to participate effectively in politics. Second, while turnout among this group is relatively low, we find no evidence that this is driven by a lacking ability or motivation to participate. Instead, 18- to 21-year-olds are if anything the more problematic group. Finally, we do not find that the vote choices of citizens under 18 reflect their preferences less well than those of older voters do. In sum, lowering the voting age does not appear to have a negative impact on input legitimacy and the quality of democratic decisions. This means that the potential positive consequences of this reform merit particular consideration and should also be empirically studied.
And another study going down to 14! -- here they tracked how the teenagers would have voted. It's interesting given the complexity of Germany's political system, at least compared to the US. It's also cautiously positive or neutral.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 7325001303
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:06 pm
by Immanuel Can
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:53 pm
I don't think it's ridiculous to question the idea of 16 year olds voting. That said the research I found is cautiously optimistic about the idea
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/P ... 0democracy.
They looked at what actually happened in Austria since there 16 year olds can vote.
Critics of lowering the voting age to 16 have argued that such teenage citizens are not able or motivated to participate effectively in politics...we do not find that citizens under 18 are particularly unable or unwilling to participate effectively in politics....we do not find that the vote choices of citizens under 18 reflect their preferences less well...
Watch the verbs.
All this study promises is that young people will "participate," and that their "participation" will "reflect their preferences." They will "be able" and be "motivated" to vote. In other words, if what you're saying is right, all it's showing is that 16 year-olds will show up at the polls -- not that it's a good thing.
Does any of this imply "competent," or "wise," or "far-sighted"? Does "reflecting their preferences" imply
altruistic or
unselfish, or
seeking the good of the country?
This study is a nothing-burger, if that's all it's promising to measure. Got a better study? Say, one that shows that the voting preferences of 16 year olds turn out to be wise, judicious and for the benefit of the rest of the country?
Shouldn't we want to know something about the KIND of decisions these children make, rather than just their willingness to participate and signal their preferences?
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:27 pm
by Maia
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:53 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:42 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:35 pm
The role of government is run the state. That of democracy is to decide who does it. And is that all you have? The best you can manage for this point is that?
I did philosophy A Level too. I went on to study philosophy at university though, so some 17 year olds are quite capable. You on the other hand didn't know why Plato wrote about the tripartite mind when you were 17, and still you don't, and so you won't understand why I dismiss all that appetitive bullshit as irrelevant. So in what way has age improved your capabilities?
I could very easily have gone to uni, but chose not to. I certainly wouldn't have done philosophy, though.
And this imaginary alternative you from a better educated dimension has what precisely to do with the topic under discussion?
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:42 pm
Democracy works on the principle of losers' consent. When that breaks down, as it did after the Brexit referendum, democracy loses all credibility. It is no surprise we are living through its apparent death throes.
What has that got to do with letting 17 year olds vote?
Better educated is very much a value judgement, I think.
Teenagers are notoriously susceptible to fads, to group-think. I know this, and if we're being honest, we all know this. Our democracy is already becoming factionalised into voting blocs.
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:38 pm
by FlashDangerpants
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:27 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:53 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:42 pm
I could very easily have gone to uni, but chose not to. I certainly wouldn't have done philosophy, though.
And this imaginary alternative you from a better educated dimension has what precisely to do with the topic under discussion?
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:42 pm
Democracy works on the principle of losers' consent. When that breaks down, as it did after the Brexit referendum, democracy loses all credibility. It is no surprise we are living through its apparent death throes.
What has that got to do with letting 17 year olds vote?
Better educated is very much a value judgement, I think.
Teenagers are notoriously susceptible to fads, to group-think. I know this, and if we're being honest, we all know this. Our democracy is already becoming factionalised into voting blocs.
And "fad" isn't a value judgment? You are quantifying nothing.
As I already wrote, wider representation is more democratic, more democratic seems to be what we want and consider better, so to choose less democracy - which is your current preference - requires something more substantial than anything you are currently presenting.
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:43 pm
by FlashDangerpants
I have no complaint with people questioning the idea, I just find it sad that some would prefer to deny youngsters the vote specifically because they might disagree with the votes thus cast on spurious grounds of "wisdom".
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:47 pm
by Maia
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:38 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:27 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 6:53 pm
And this imaginary alternative you from a better educated dimension has what precisely to do with the topic under discussion?
What has that got to do with letting 17 year olds vote?
Better educated is very much a value judgement, I think.
Teenagers are notoriously susceptible to fads, to group-think. I know this, and if we're being honest, we all know this. Our democracy is already becoming factionalised into voting blocs.
And "fad" isn't a value judgment? You are quantifying nothing.
As I already wrote, wider representation is more democratic, more democratic seems to be what we want and consider better, so to choose less democracy - which is your current preference - requires something more substantial than anything you are currently presenting.
It's not more democracy if the system is increasingly regarded as illegitimate, which it most certainly is. This will lead to a collapse, and then you'll end up with no democracy at all.
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:51 pm
by FlashDangerpants
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:47 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:38 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:27 pm
Better educated is very much a value judgement, I think.
Teenagers are notoriously susceptible to fads, to group-think. I know this, and if we're being honest, we all know this. Our democracy is already becoming factionalised into voting blocs.
And "fad" isn't a value judgment? You are quantifying nothing.
As I already wrote, wider representation is more democratic, more democratic seems to be what we want and consider better, so to choose less democracy - which is your current preference - requires something more substantial than anything you are currently presenting.
It's not more democracy if the system is increasingly regarded as illegitimate, which it most certainly is. This will lead to a collapse, and then you'll end up with no democracy at all.
I don't cater to silly far-right paranoid fantasies spoon-fed to idiots by ultra-nationalist American oligarchs. Democracy isn't so easily dislodged, and allowing votes for 16 year olds is not some final straw. Don't be so dramatic.
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:53 pm
by Maia
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:51 pm
Maia wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:47 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:38 pm
And "fad" isn't a value judgment? You are quantifying nothing.
As I already wrote, wider representation is more democratic, more democratic seems to be what we want and consider better, so to choose less democracy - which is your current preference - requires something more substantial than anything you are currently presenting.
It's not more democracy if the system is increasingly regarded as illegitimate, which it most certainly is. This will lead to a collapse, and then you'll end up with no democracy at all.
I don't cater to silly far-right paranoid fantasies spoon-fed to idiots by ultra-nationalist American oligarchs. Democracy isn't so easily dislodged, and allowing votes for 16 year olds is not some final straw. Don't be so dramatic.
I wonder why you haven't noticed what's going on.
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:09 pm
by Iwannaplato
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 7:43 pm
I have no complaint with people questioning the idea, I just find it sad that some would prefer to deny youngsters the vote specifically because they might disagree with the votes thus cast on spurious grounds of "wisdom".
I thought the original concern she had was that the motivation for changing the law was that the ones changing the law think it will benefit their party. In an ideal world, I suppose, one would ignore their motivations and just try to see if it is just or positive.
That said, you seemed pretty harsh. I haven't read the whole exchange so perhaps she was harsh on you.
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:19 pm
by FlashDangerpants
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:09 pm
That said, you seemed pretty harsh. I haven't read the whole exchange so perhaps she was harsh on you.
I would say just look at racist and antisemitic reply Grandwizard22 wrote on page 1 of this thread, look at Maia's yes-and response to that. I don't have the slightest respect for such people and neither do I fake it.
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:20 pm
by Immanuel Can
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:09 pm
That said, you seemed pretty harsh.
Do not marvel that Flash chooses to call the criterion of wisdom "spurious."
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:28 pm
by phyllo
That said, you seemed pretty harsh.
I agree.
The discussion would be more productive if some people made a greater effort to be polite and respectful.
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:31 pm
by phyllo
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:20 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:09 pm
That said, you seemed pretty harsh.
Do not marvel that Flash chooses to call the criterion of wisdom "spurious."
No, because there is no measure of "wisdom".
In these discussions, it really means voting for the same policies as 'me'.
The same goes for "far-sighted", "competent" and "seeking the good of the country", etc.
Re: UK to lower voting age to 16
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2026 8:35 pm
by Iwannaplato
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2026 12:55 pm
It frequently amazes me that with all our collective knowledge and wisdom of the past, very few Westerners realize nor understand the failures of Democracy are now occurring in the exact same course as before. "Voting age" is expanded, votes are expanded to the worst of the plebian,
Wait, you don't want the farmers and working class to vote. Why only the worst of the plebians? It's ok for the worst of the aristocracy? When did you become so classist and elitist?
to criminals, to those without roots, to foreigners, to those who would destroy society and/or have its worst interests in mind. Then, eventually, society and democracy collapse together into a heap.
Republics die and then are reborn. England is headed near its end, I fear. The Moslem population inevitably revolt at some point, causing civil strife or war there, and throughout Western Europe. Since Moslems cannot tolerate what is being done in their homeland, by the Zionist leaders of the West. The brutal stabbings of children continue, throughout Worst Britain, with no British men to protect them.
Republican societies are premised on severely restricted ability to vote, for obvious reasons:
Only those most invested and optimistic about society, should be able to vote.
You're clearly invested, but hardly optimistic. I'd love to see the legislation that weeds out those who are not invested, not optimistic.
So, you want a republic not a democracy. What country now or earlier in history fits the model you like?