Cambridge Professor says Lower Voting Age to Six

Zorya · 07-12-2018 10:23AM #1

David Runciman, the head of Politics at Cambridge University, says the present voting age is creating a democratic crisis.

He said: “I would lower the voting age to six, not 16. And I’m serious about that. I would want people who vote to be able to read, so I would exclude reception [age-children].

“What’s the worst that could happen? At least it would be exciting, it would make elections more fun. It is never going to happen in a million years but as a way of capturing just how structurally unbalanced our democracies have become, seriously, why not? Why not six-year-olds?

Runciman added: “Old people are currently the coalition that have a huge inbuilt advantage in representative democratic politics.

“Young people are massively outnumbered because the voting age is 18, whereas there isn’t a cutoff point at the other end. You don’t lose the vote when you get to be 75. You can carry on voting until the day you die and there is no test. You could be frankly demented and still get to vote, which is as it should be. So young people are the losers here.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/06/give-six-year-olds-the-vote-says-cambridge-university-academic

Oh David, you sly fox. Age of consent next, eh? What six year old shouldn't be allowed to booze and make out? At least it would be exciting.

While you're at it, Professor, why not eliminate the difference between adults and children altogether, so that the idea of the family, parental guidance and discipline becomes wholly anathema to society? Children can take drugs, hormones, lop off their breasts and genitals, have access to euthanasia, and call up Daddy State on a hotline when they don't get their way in the house.

07-12-2018 10:26AM

Zorya wrote: »

David Runciman, the head of Politics at Cambridge University, says the present voting age is creating a democratic crisis.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/06/give-six-year-olds-the-vote-says-cambridge-university-academic

Oh David, you sly fox. Age of consent next, eh? What six year old shouldn't be allowed to booze and make out? At least it would be exciting.

While you're at it, Professor, why not eliminate the difference between adults and children altogether, so that the idea of the family, parental guidance and discipline becomes wholly anathema to society? Children can take drugs, hormones, lop off their breasts and genitals, have access to euthanasia, and call up Daddy State on a hotline when they don't get their way in the house.

in what way do you equate these behaviours to voting

professore · 07-12-2018 10:34AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

in what way do you equate these behaviours to voting

Voting is the ultimate privilege of a full citizen. Therefore if you are old enough to vote you are old enough to do anything else a full citizen can do.

Zorya · 07-12-2018 10:39AM

Deleted User wrote: »

in what way do you equate these behaviours to voting

It's the suggestion that children are mature enough to vote. My projections may appear somewhat extreme but they are not outside the bounds of possibility. His recommendation is beyond stupid. Simple as.

Children are already considered to be mature enough in Belgium to choose euthanasia. They are increasingly be allowed to choose elective medical procedures against the wishes of parents in some countries. Lowering the age of consent regarding sex with children is not so utterly unimaginable given that the longest serving female MP in the UK Harriet Harman, was highly connected in the NCCL who were closely affiliated at one stage with P.I.E.

and so on.

Zorya · 07-12-2018 10:40AM

professore wrote: »

Voting is the ultimate privilege of a full citizen. Therefore if you are old enough to vote you are old enough to do anything else a full citizen can do.

Thanks. That explains it better than my attempt!

mikhail · 07-12-2018 11:13AM

professore wrote: »

Voting is the ultimate privilege of a full citizen. Therefore if you are old enough to vote you are old enough to do anything else a full citizen can do.

Are you explaining his stupid argument, or is it your own?

biko · 07-12-2018 11:19AM

The reason he wants it lowered is that old people are more conservative, whereas young people tend to be more left/progressive/rebellious.

You cannot give a child voting rights, it's not considered an adult by the authorities.
There is no "age-bias", it's a made-up word to make this issue seem serious when it's not.

This is simply a reaction to the right-wing winds sweeping Europe, nothing else.

There is no democratic crisis, but the left are desperate and will try to redefine what democracy is - to suit themselves.

conorhal · 07-12-2018 12:21PM

Has Taoiseach Tinky-Winky or Tanaiste Dora The Explorer weighed in on this proposal yet?

07-12-2018 12:23PM

The **** did I just read?

D3V!L · 07-12-2018 12:24PM

Seems the Brits are making some great strides in their new independent Kingdom !!! Fair play to them and God Speed :rolleyes:

Stark · 07-12-2018 12:26PM

Looks the Guardian trying to get in on the clickbait economy.

07-12-2018 12:33PM

It seems that the permanently outraged are outraged at the other permanently outraged.

AllGunsBlazing · 07-12-2018 12:33PM

Stark wrote: »

Looks the Guardian trying to get in on the clickbait economy.

They've been ahead of that curve for some time. The only reason left to heed any newspaper is if they have a decent sports section. Which the Guardian still does tbf.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b · 07-12-2018 12:35PM

I look forward to the referendums. Should Santa should come every day of the year? Should algebra be banned? Should the summer holidays be extended to six months of the year?

Fianna Fail are no doubt preparing for the next budget giveaway -- free Hatchimals, Fingerlings, and trampolines for every family.

07-12-2018 12:38PM

The idea of voting at 16 is a stupid one, as most people who regularly deal with teenagers know. They just don't have the life experience to assess the different arguments properly, obviously six year olds is just ridiculous.

markodaly · 07-12-2018 12:41PM

Lower the voting age to 6, can we also lower the labour laws so that we can legally employ a 6-year-old?

"Get up the chimney and sweep it"

I guess not. Its stuff like this that makes much of the public hate 'expert' opinion. Its just unfortunate that so-called expert opinion are so full of $hite.

Arghus · 07-12-2018 12:43PM

He has a point.

TheValeyard · 07-12-2018 12:46PM

That is the most stupid suggestion I have heard all week. I hereby rename him Professor of Pudding Heads & Asshats

Gimme A Pound · 07-12-2018 12:50PM

Arghus wrote: »

He has a point.

What point does he have, Arg?

07-12-2018 12:54PM

Surely we'd be better off encouraging people aged 18+ to actually go out and vote, rather than having kids electing governments on promises of less VAT on chocolate milk.

RandomName2 · 07-12-2018 01:00PM

I've thought about this for a while.

In one sense (libertarian viewpoint) I've been of the opinion that if someone is literally able to go out and vote then they should be able to. We don't have any IQ, social status, or moral checks on whether someone should be able to vote. An old person suffering from dementia has as much right as anyone else to vote. It's the democratic thing. So a 'relatively' arbitrary age restriction seems slightly undemocratic.

On a practical level we all know that young children, if allowed vote, would simply be pawns of their parents, essentially giving the parents multiple votes. This pretty much defeats the purpose.

But the whole point about democracy, as we have it, is that we elect representatives, who are supposed to be representative of the people within their constituency. Having a body of citizens who are constituents, but not having a voice, is not 100% desirable.

On the other hand there is some argument that being able to vote should be an earned privilege. Reaching a certain educational status could be this means of earning a say in the way your country is governed. By law, minors have to stay in education until a certain age, so they earn this privilege by default.

I'm actually not particularly swayed by the '16 year olds have no idea what they're doing rofl' argument. You could say this about lots of demographics . Octogenarian shouldn't be allowed vote, they have no idea what they're doing.. people in their 20s haven't lived yet, they shouldn't be allowed vote.. and so on.

The only other argument that is convincing is that you shouldn't have a say on who creates laws if you are not fully subject to the law. That does make a lot of sense.

I think the OP did a less than stellar job in introducing this subject.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b · 07-12-2018 01:01PM

Cake of Tremendous Power wrote: »

Surely we'd be better off encouraging people aged 18+ to actually go out and vote, rather than having kids electing governments on promises of less VAT on chocolate milk.

Around 25% of people aged 18 to 25 are not even registered to vote.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 07-12-2018 01:09PM

Zorya wrote: »

David Runciman, the head of Politics at Cambridge University, says the present voting age is creating a democratic crisis.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/06/give-six-year-olds-the-vote-says-cambridge-university-academic

Oh David, you sly fox. Age of consent next, eh? What six year old shouldn't be allowed to booze and make out? At least it would be exciting.

While you're at it, Professor, why not eliminate the difference between adults and children altogether, so that the idea of the family, parental guidance and discipline becomes wholly anathema to society? Children can take drugs, hormones, lop off their breasts and genitals, have access to euthanasia, and call up Daddy State on a hotline when they don't get their way in the house.

Didn't actually read the story, did you?

Zorya · 07-12-2018 01:20PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Didn't actually read the story, did you?

I did.

Perhaps not in as stellar a fashion as your pal might like, but sufficiently to recognise it as a proposal the professor dragged out of his academic arse.

Badly Drunk Boy · 07-12-2018 01:24PM

RandomName2 wrote: »

On a practical level we all know that young children, if allowed vote, would simply be pawns of their parents, essentially giving the parents multiple votes. This pretty much defeats the purpose.

Indeed! Have more kids, up your voting power (potentially)! I remember when I was a kid in primary school, we'd know (roughly) how our parents voted. "Ha, ha! Your Da is a Blueshirt!".

My parents were never members of any party but I knew my father always favoured Fianna Fáil while my mother veered towards Labour.

RandomName2 wrote: »

The only other argument that is convincing is that you shouldn't have a say on who creates laws if you are not fully subject to the law. That does make a lot of sense.

Does that mean only murders can have a say on laws relating to killing people? :pac:

xi5yvm0owc1s2b · 07-12-2018 01:24PM

RandomName2 wrote: »

The only other argument that is convincing is that you shouldn't have a say on who creates laws if you are not fully subject to the law. That does make a lot of sense.

It gets complicated. An American residing in Dublin can't vote in Irish elections, despite being subject to Irish law, but can vote in US elections by absentee ballot, despite not living there.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 07-12-2018 01:27PM

A 6 year old child will vote like their parents.

07-12-2018 01:31PM

I guess he has phrased his argument badly for this age of outrage merchants, but there is a point in there, a 6 year old cannot vote but a 90 year old with the mind of a 6 year old can?

Zorya · 07-12-2018 01:36PM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

A 6 year old child will vote like their parents.

They might not. At least not by 9 or 10. Children from very young ages now are becoming much more digitally conditioned than we imagine, they have access to mobile devices from infancy almost. I think this is part of the reason behind certain depressions and disorders increasing so fast in the young. Peer and media influence is pervasive in children's lives much earlier than we might imagine. They are the perfect demographic to be considered malleable by political forces.

Grayson · 07-12-2018 01:37PM

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

The idea of voting at 16 is a stupid one, as most people who regularly deal with teenagers know. They just don't have the life experience to assess the different arguments properly, obviously six year olds is just ridiculous.

but the moment they turn 18 it magically changes?
The skills you're describing are missing from many people at a huge range of ages. If you're willing to keep it from 16 year olds because you believe many miss those skills, why shouldn't you remove it from others because they miss those skills? Have a text or a series of criteria that people need to meet before voting. That way age is not a barrier if you can prove you're able to vote. Likewise age doesn't guarantee that someone who's lacking these skills gets to vote anyway?

I'm sure you see the benefits of that and why it's completely wrong. We can't exclude someone. The point of voting is that everyone gets the right. It's not based on an individuals life experience.

I'm in favour of lowering it to 16. 16 years are capable of making a rational decision. They can read a manifesto as well as an 18 year old and come to the their own conclusions.

07-12-2018 01:47PM

16 is a perfectly acceptable age to vote. I was politically active at 16 but had no vote, it was frustrating.

As for 6 years olds, if this were the case we'd probably see Prime Minister Lord Buckethead in power in the UK and Brexit would probably never have happened.

Cambridge Professor says Lower Voting Age to Six

Comments