63

About two years ago now, I was sitting on a bench in Central Park writing my initial thoughts on what I didn't know then but would come to know as Youth Rights.

I don't think I'll ever remember why she did, but about halfway through the day Greta Thunberg came to mind, and I looked up the voting age in Sweden. And my blood boiled in a way I've never experienced in my entire life.

16 years old and one of the most famous and recognizable political activists in the world. 16 years old giving a confident, impassioned, admonishing speech to the fucking UN. 16 years old with no legal right to a voice in her country. No voice to vote for the policies she believed in or the people who might enact them.

My writing, already vitriolic to a fault, managed to become even moreso but with the topic abruptly switched to voting. For the first time in my life, I considered where I'd place the voting age if I could do so unilaterally. Not long into considering it I had a thought that I wrote down immediately, a question I've asked well over 100 times at this point with no substantial answer:

When is it reasonable to say to a person, 'If you're not at least this old, then I don't give a fuck what you think'?

And from the moment I had that thought, I have been unable to place the voting age.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 52 points 1 month ago

Same as the age you can work and pay taxes.

[-] hellabryanstyle@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 month ago

14 is typically the minimum age to have a job (in the US at least).

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 40 points 1 month ago

Then that's the age we should be able to vote.

And if people don't like it, maybe we outlaw child labor. 🤷‍♀️

[-] over_clox@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

I was offered a job at a computer repair shop at age 14. Dude had to retract his offer when I told him my age, he assumed I was 17 or older.

Mississippi.

[-] hellabryanstyle@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 month ago

According to this it would have been legal to hire you. There's a lot of restrictions when it comes to number of hours and time of day that minors are allowed to work though which is probably what they didn't want to deal with.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Vanth@reddthat.com 11 points 1 month ago

It's 12 in the US for agricultural jobs. That's when I started corn detassling and tree trimming and filed my first taxes.

Don't forget acting too. There are babies and toddlers acting and working for pay.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 month ago

Man, it's a tough one.

In theory, nobody should be disenfranchised by age at all. But at what age would they be able to vote, as in understand what to do, how to do it, and do so without adult supervision?

Until they reach that point, it's essentially their parents or guardians getting an extra vote.

And then you have to look at other things we limit minors on by virtue of not being able to make informed decisions. So, would we go with driving age, since that's when we trust them with a ton of death machine? Drinking age? Age of consent for sex (which isn't always 18)?

If we change it away from 18 to lower, showing that they have the full rights of any citizen, why don't they get those other rights with enfranchisement? Why is someone able to vote like someone that has the ability to make an informed choice, but they can't drink? Hell, that's already a problem since 18 year olds can be sent to fight and die in the military, but can't have a beer legally.

I would be fine with 16 being the age of majority for everything if the individual wanted it. You wanna step into adult life, with all the rights and responsibilities, I don't have an objection to that at 16. I had too many patients that were married and working before 18 to pretend that it isn't realistic for someone that age to step into adulthood. I don't think it's the best choice, but I wouldn't fight it if the world decided that way.

I could definitely made an informed decision for voting at 16. I had access to alcohol, and was able to make the decision to not use it, same with tobacco. I had access to sex, and made the decision to make it safe sex. I was a decent driver, and didn't have even a fender bender until I was 19, and I wasn't the one that caused it then. All of the stuff that we limit to "adults", I know I would have been fully capable of making informed and conscientious decision about any of them.

But I also knew other teenagers that were absolute morons that couldn't be trusted not to jerk off in the school bathroom. I knew 16 yos that wrecked cars and put other people's lives at risk in the process. So I'm okay with the age of majority being 18 too; some of those morons would just flip a coin for their vote, and the mock votes we'd have in school were laughable across the board.

Not everyone can make an informed and conscientious decision at 30, much less 18.

So I don't really think it needs to change, but I agree with you that it sucks that it's so arbitrary.

[-] hellabryanstyle@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago

We seem pretty well-aligned. Personally I think 16 is the absolute latest a person ought to have the liberty to do anything that we age restrict. I was talking to someone from Scotland recently where the Age of Majority is 16 and he said that it's not uncommon there for 16yos to graduate their school system, marry their person, and start a family.

So to me that is at least some amount of evidence that if we simply perceived 16yos as adults, they would behave more like adults.

[-] pupbiru@aussie.zone 4 points 1 month ago

why don't they get those other rights with enfranchisement?

ton of death machine?

because that endangers others too

Drinking age?

because alcohol negatively effects development

Age of consent for sex

because teenagers have sex anyway; making it illegal would only be harmful

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 22 points 1 month ago

The minimum age anyone can do any of these things:

  • Pay taxes
  • Hold a job
  • Get married
  • Sign a contract
  • Join the military

I think that's currently something like 12 in the US, which is a huge problem.

[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 19 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

16

if you can get taxed as a worker at 16 you get to vote.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

I think it should be 16 or so. If you can wreck my car, you should be able to vote.

[-] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 month ago

I think it should be whatever the age is to be able to work a job.

You pay taxes at 14 years old because your asshole of a governor got paid by the meat packing industry? You get to vote.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

More so than age, I think we should all get a holiday to vote, that holiday's length should be calculated by population size to accomdate congestion. Then, somehow make voting fun and exciting, the actual experience of filling out a ballot, so these fucking people actually come out to vote. So many fucking people dont even vote. As soon as you are considered an adult you should be able to vote, whatever age that may be to society at large.

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

And, we should establish something where kids get to vote on something. Anything that directly affects them, maybe some locale thing, and have it be enacted for a period of time. We need people, all people, to physically experience the laws they vote for. Engrain that in them so they dont forget these consequences are real and it matters.

[-] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 9 points 1 month ago

Where I grew up, the schools all the way down to elementary school would hold votes to decide some school policies. Things like dress codes and rules governing hallway use, minor stuff, but stuff students care about and that affected us on a daily basis, and whatever won the vote became policy for that semester. We had lines and ballots and everything... The schools were the local voting places, so they had the official voting booths and everything from real elections. Was a great introduction to the process. We'd even get students canvassing in favor of certain policies beforehand if there was something particularly controversial on the ballot.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] EnderMB@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

IMO, it should be 16. It should be the earliest age that you can work in a traditional job, or begin service in one's armed forces. Many right-wing people hate this idea because young people are very left-leaning, but it is unfair to expect someone to contribute to a society that bans them from having a say in its outcome.

[-] Zier@fedia.io 13 points 1 month ago

"18. " This is the age you should be able to: vote drink be liable as adult for everything join the military smoke (please don't)

One age to do everything. 18 is 'Adult', that means no age restriction beyond that. At least until you get to retirement age.

[-] sweng@programming.dev 9 points 1 month ago

What is that based on, though? Why a single age for everything, when it might make sense to have it more "targeted". For example, wouldn't it make sense to allow voting in local elections, where things are usually simpler and cause and effect clearer, at a younger age?

Similarly, why tie drinking regulations, which are based on physiology, to voting age, which has nothing to do with it? You may say it's because if the person is mature enough to vote they can decide themselves, but there is a huge amount of things I'm not allowed to buy or consume even if I'm allowed to vote, so that argument doesn't hold (unless you advocate 100% liberalization of everything).

Having just a single age limit just makes it all seem very arbitrary, which it shouldn't be.

[-] Zier@fedia.io 8 points 1 month ago

My point is, at a specified age, you are considered an Adult. If you are old enough to die in a war and vote for candidates, you are old enough to drink, own a gun and whatever else. I personally think that 19 or 20 would be a better age for adulthood.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[-] lady_maria@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

It's really frustrating how little value so many adults assign to the thoughts and feelings of kids. I felt the effects of that a lot while growing up.

Idk. If it were up to me, I think I'd make the voting age maybe 14 or 15. It's not that an 8-year-old's feelings don't matter (to me, at least), but you need to allow them enough time and brain development to be able to start to learn about and understand these kinds of things.

There should also be accompanying education surrounding different political ideologies, history, policies, propaganda tactics, ect., but I'm sure that'd be very unpopular with a lot of parents.

[-] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 11 points 1 month ago

There should be a maximum voting age.

[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

If you're going to be eighteen during the person you vote for's term you should be able to vote.

[-] hellabryanstyle@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago

I've had this exact same thought in response to the logic that the voting age was lowered to 18 during Vietnam so that 18yos could vote for a president who might draft them. But that logic extends to 14yos who may end up being drafted at 18 during the president's term.

[-] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

That's an interesting take but with our term lengths that means a 15y can vote for president and senator but can't vote for a house rep.

load more comments (1 replies)

I’m conflicted on this. I used to think kids at 16 would be a good counterpart to old people, being more revolutionary in nature and so on. Maybe they don’t have a good sense of how things work in life yet but it would help balance out the people who are so stuck in the old ways that it ends up being fair.

But the reality I see is that they are very easily manipulated by unregulated media like TikTok and would vote for the same extreme right wing party as old people. Surveys here in Germany are a bit disturbing…

Can’t we instead take away voting rights from old people? Also kinda wrong.

How about a voting license that needs to be renewed every 30 years? You have to pass a test that checks if you are capable of thinking objectively or something like that.

[-] lunarul@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

How about a voting license that needs to be renewed every 30 years? You have to pass a test that checks if you are capable of thinking objectively or something like that.

Any type of criteria that is not absolute (like age), can and will be used to exclude certain groups of people from voting.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] pugsnroses77@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 month ago

Lots of these voter tests were implemented during the Jim Crow era (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test). Reimplementation would be disastrous for many groups of people.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] arken@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

But the reality I see is that they are very easily manipulated by unregulated media like TikTok

As opposed to adults?

[-] Vanth@reddthat.com 6 points 1 month ago

RFK Jr. is now in charge of the department that handles voter licensing requirements and sets the criteria for "capable of thinking objectively". Yikes, and he's not even the worst person for the job I could conjure up in 5 seconds of thought.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago
[-] Vanth@reddthat.com 7 points 1 month ago

If I could wave a wand and fix something about voting in the US, it would be to improve access for already qualified voters.

Kids would vote similarly to their parents in general, so lowering the age means people from groups/locations that have good access would have more votes (not a bad thing) but groups/locations with poor access would still have poor access, possibly even worse access because of the increase in voters. So yeah, fix access first or it only exacerbates what I consider to be a larger issue in need of addressing.

Assuming good access to voting though, 18 makes sense to me as the time a person is an adult and legally responsible for themselves. I would be open to arguments for younger, it's just not something I ever felt passionate about, even when I was under 18 years old.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Mothra@mander.xyz 7 points 1 month ago

Some people here saying the same age you work and pay taxes and I absolutely agree, but with the caveat that it shouldn't be compulsory before age 25.

And I pick 25 as it's the average age iirc the brain is considered to be fully matured.

I personally had no clue of what I was doing and regret my first few rounds voting. I was aware at the time that I lacked the information and the big picture view of the political situation to make an informed decision though, and wished I could avoid voting entirely but in my country it was compulsory.

[-] RBWells@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

I think between 16 and 20 is acceptable, but I have one kid who turns 18 a week after the election. So will be almost 22 before they can vote in a presidential election. 19 or 20 before a local or state race.

So I think 16 makes more sense, because the national races being only every 4 years disenfranchises too many young people, everyone who is 15, 16, or 17 at this election won't actually get to vote at 18.

[-] Michal@programming.dev 5 points 1 month ago

Are you a citizen, bound by law, or pay taxes? Then you have a say in who makes them.

[-] collapse_already@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago

People over 80 don't have as much of a stake in the future. Maybe they should lose the vote?

[-] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago

Aside from practical reasons like being able to read and write, I think the age to vote should be as low as possible.

People are concerned that parents will coerce their kids, but that would happen across the board. It would come out in the wash.

The most important thing is that folks are civically engaged as young as possible. They are invested in the outcome and exercise their rights early.

I would say a good starting point would be third grade. Right when you begin learning social studies.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Vaggumon@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

16 is the latest I'd say. Even younger is fair. If we ask them to go to school where they can get murdered just because we fail to enact reasonable gun laws, then they should get to vote for the people who don't care if they die or not.

[-] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Any age after passing a basic high school civics test with retesting intervals, age isn't the thing you're selecting for it's the cognitive ability to understand what the government is and how it operates that would be necessary to choose who leads and represents citizens in that organization. We use ages as an approximation instead of doing the work of testing but it may be a poor shortcut.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

I could see some kind of arrangement where the age would be something reasonable like 16-18, but then there is a test you can write (basic civics questions eg. who are the candidates, what does the legislative branch do, etc.) and if you pass that test, kind of like a learner's permit for driving, you can vote even if you're under that age, down to a hard cutoff of like 13.

[-] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

From an Australian perspective, my proposal is:

  • Eligible to vote at 16.
  • Compulsory voting at 18.
  • A citizen’s vote has a weight of 100% until 20, then drops 5% at each birthday that ends with a 0.

The reason for the diminishing weight of a vote is to correlate with the diminished exposure political decisions will have on the citizen.

[-] AndyMFK@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 month ago

Strong agree with your first 2 points, stronger disagree with your last point. Do you seriously think a 40 year old doesn't deserve a vote?

[-] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

Using the formula as written, anyone aged 40-49 would have a vote weighted at 85%. You’d have to make it to 210 years old to reach 0%.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] weker01@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

At least 500 years old. Everybody else is just too damn infantile and stupid.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
63 points (86.2% liked)

Asklemmy

43855 readers
1657 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS