Babies and toddlers don’t know shit, plus parents have an extreme amount of coercion over their children until they’re teenagers.
Like I said we don’t make this a prequisite for adults. There are plenty of disabled or old people fully dependent on others.
Also allowing children to vote will result in more political propaganda targeted at children.
That is an interesting point definitely worth debating. Propaganda would definitely be an issue, but this is the case not just in children, but adults alike. On the other hand with children becoming a voting block it might shift the focus slightly on topics benefiting them.
They deserve to enjoy childhood without worrying about the clusterfuck.
True, although I think children pick up a lot regardless. And importantly obliviousness of issues doesn’t change how it affects them. Climate change and unfair pension systems for example will affect them regardless, this way they’d at least have a voice.
I think “teenager” is probably as low as you want to go for the foreseeable future.
I can for sure see how opinions can differ on the topic and I’d totally be ok with compromises and accepting some degree of hypocrisy. But nonetheless it’s imo worth looking at the issue from the extreme.
As far as compromises go I think another way to go about it would be to have staggered voting with lower limits in more local votes. I could see how it might be more acceptable there for some.
Edit: also regarding babies and toddlers i’d think that they would need to express a desire to vote in some form, which would probably make it so you don’t have literal 1 year olds voting (unless they are like an extreme genius, at which point they might aswell and it would only be a single vote of millions). Maybe one compromise would be to require some more active component below a certain age threshold, like having to vote in person for the first time or at least having to register somewhere (which if not done prior would happen automatically at a certain age).
Propaganda would definitely be an issue, but this is the case not just in children, but adults alike. On the other hand with children becoming a voting block it might shift the focus slightly on topics benefiting them.
you can’t ignore the fact that even more propaganda would directly target them, taking advantage of very effective data mining based profiling. they should be able to experience more of life before advertisers starts to dictate their agenda, otherwise they’ll easily think that advertisers are speaking the truth.
Climate change and unfair pension systems for example will affect them regardless, this way they’d at least have a voice.
they have a voice. It’s not like people can only vote if they are in their last decade. turning 18, just 2 years, anyone can vote, and I would say even 30 and 40 years olds are largely affected by these issues.
you can’t ignore the fact that even more propaganda would directly target them, taking advantage of very effective data mining based profiling. they should be able to experience more of life before advertisers starts to dictate their agenda, otherwise they’ll easily think that advertisers are speaking the truth.
Yes, this is indeed an argument that shouldn’t just be ignored. And honestly this should simply never be the case, regardless of age.
I’d break it up into two parts. Official election material and just general advertisements/media. The first one typically is already quite regulated and arguably for the benefit of all should already follow standards that are not harmful to children. The second one seems like the problematic one. However I’d argue that even children are already to some degree getting confronted with what’s going on in the world. Anecdotally i can say that even at elementary school age children seem to be (to varying degrees) at least rudimentally aware of many things. To give a recent example like when Israel bombed Iran.
We have things like cigarettes and alcohol where we impose age limits, but those are directly harmful things. Hard to argue that voting in a democracy is harmful. Sometimes there might be anti democratic parties (like the afd here in germany for example), but in those cases you’d think about banning those, not taking away the ability to vote. Maybe you or someone else could give me an example of something positive being banned based on age because the state/society can’t provide protection from something secondary.
I would also add that advertisement to a young voting base wouldn’t exclusively need to be a bad thing. Take free school lunches for example. If as a politician you run a campaign on that for example you are banking on gaining favor from a voter base that only indirectly is affected by it. The people directly benefiting from it can’t vote for you.
they have a voice. It’s not like people can only vote if they are in their last decade. turning 18, just 2 years, anyone can vote, and I would say even 30 and 40 years olds are largely affected by these issues.
They have a voice, but no vote, which is what matters for the politicians in charge. Also “just 2 years” falls flat since my argument is not about the lowering to 16, but abolishing it in general. So for the sake of argument for example an 8 year old, which would make it a full decade. In practice even longer, since elections aren’t every year and you aren’t guaranteed to have one in the year you turn 18.
And you are right that even 30 and 40 year olds are affected by these issues, but i don’t see how that would be an argument against it. If anything i’d see it as an argument that children should also have a say. We also don’t have an upper limit after which you aren’t allowed to vote anymore. And for obvious reasons it would e.g. be impossible to have a rule that says x years before you die you aren’t allowed to vote anymore, since you won’t suffer all the consequences.
Yes, this is indeed an argument that shouldn’t just be ignored. And honestly this should simply never be the case, regardless of age.
when will we ban personalized advertising?
or any kinds of advertising that is more than just showing that your product/service is there.
but unfortunately, with deceptive videos all over the internet, that wouldn’t help at all.
However I’d argue that even children are already to some degree getting confronted with what’s going on in the world.
that’s right, but I think because of a lack of substantial amount of experiences (before being exposed to media), they have much less of a chance at figuring out what’s real and what isn’t.
heck I only started using facebook near the end of elementary school. and then when I got to be voting age, I had almost no clue about the running political parties, how truthful they are and what is their past. I just slightly missed being able to vote the time before that, and I know that I would have voted for a liar with a corrupt past, because of facebook ads of their party I assume. “oh look, they are apologizing and they regret it! they look so honest!”
nowadays? they just post a tiktok video that they’ll give money to all below 20 if they are elected, and they get a bunch of votes. and the election office will do nothing. or they promise to lower the graduation requirements. or to make it unlawul to ban smartphone usage at school lessons. or anything that sounds good to them but everybody else knows is a bad idea.
they could have even cooperated with another party to make sure this one doesn’t get elected, but takes votes away from another one.
all because they promised something on tiktok, or really any platform that auto plays videos when scrolling by.
deceptive social (and traditional) media is exactly why we can’t allow this. and if you allow them to vote, you just made it so that now we can’t even keep them away legally from that social media, because if you do that they won’t vote for you anymore, and the next party will just undo your laws.
And you are right that even 30 and 40 year olds are affected by these issues, but i don’t see how that would be an argument against it.
I think those adults had decades of life experiences that could have helped them recognize that they are being deceived and used. childrens won’t have any of that. They’ll have no chance of recognizing that, unless someone they trust tells them and they want to believe it.
it would also be interesting to read a study that compares the effects of video effects, animations and vibrant nice colors in videos on different age groups.
I’m reading your post and it reads just the same as what applies to many adults.
I know that I would have voted for a liar with a corrupt past, because of facebook ads of their party I assume. “oh look, they are apologizing and they regret it! they look so honest!”
I can’t even get started how many politicians have a corrupt past here in Germany and got plenty of votes.
nowadays? they just post a tiktok video that they’ll give money to all below 20 if they are elected
Here in Germany parties actively ran on the promise of raising and fixing the pension levels in an already unsustainable system. Alongside other gifts to certain voter bases. The one left out (I assume partially because they are not able to vote): The youth.
I also think you vastly overestimate the amount of influence underage voters would yield. Especially in our demographic structures and based on the fact that a significantly lower share of them would actually make use of it. They certainly wouldn’t have the power to introduce sweeping changes against the better judgement of other voting blocks. But you are right that they might influence smaller changes.
To take one of your examples i could see that for something like the smartphone ban. But would that be so bad? It might be a good thing, but i don’t think this is conclusively proven. In return it is probably something being pushed by a large majority that might not even use a smartphone on a daily basis or at the least is very far removed from the current level of technology. And it also wouldn’t all need to be negative. Take for example the stop killing games petition that is quite popular on this site. That one might suddenly gain some more supporters, which are actually affected by it.
However i’d also see a need for more studies. And i probably wouldn’t just make a major shift like that instantaneously, but rather in a gradual way and maybe lead with changes to smaller more local elections first. Which might give opportunities for such studies.
Here in Germany parties actively ran on the promise of raising and fixing the pension levels in an already unsustainable system. Alongside other gifts to certain voter bases. The one left out (I assume partially because they are not able to vote): The youth.
so they were lying, except to the youth, because to them they didn’t have a message. that’s a positive thing to me.
But you are right that they might influence smaller changes.
part of my worries is this, but rather how will this affect all of them, when sociopathic people will start targeting them with even more brainwashing/reeducation content.
To take one of your examples i could see that for something like the smartphone ban. But would that be so bad?
what do you mean? the banning the school-level banning of it? the problem is not smartphones themselves, but what they can do.
playing games and scrolling social media on lessons. taking pictures of your peers against their will, like when they get humiliated. using the infra blaster to fuck with classroom equipment. all of these were happening in my class, just a few years ago. unless your solution is mandating school-issued spyware on every phone, which I don’t support, the only solution is to ban them in one way or another. possibly only on lessons. and then somehow solve the problem of stolen phones, when someone knowingly took away a different phone at the end of lesson.
Like I said we don’t make this a prequisite for adults. There are plenty of disabled or old people fully dependent on others.
That is an interesting point definitely worth debating. Propaganda would definitely be an issue, but this is the case not just in children, but adults alike. On the other hand with children becoming a voting block it might shift the focus slightly on topics benefiting them.
True, although I think children pick up a lot regardless. And importantly obliviousness of issues doesn’t change how it affects them. Climate change and unfair pension systems for example will affect them regardless, this way they’d at least have a voice.
I can for sure see how opinions can differ on the topic and I’d totally be ok with compromises and accepting some degree of hypocrisy. But nonetheless it’s imo worth looking at the issue from the extreme.
As far as compromises go I think another way to go about it would be to have staggered voting with lower limits in more local votes. I could see how it might be more acceptable there for some.
Edit: also regarding babies and toddlers i’d think that they would need to express a desire to vote in some form, which would probably make it so you don’t have literal 1 year olds voting (unless they are like an extreme genius, at which point they might aswell and it would only be a single vote of millions). Maybe one compromise would be to require some more active component below a certain age threshold, like having to vote in person for the first time or at least having to register somewhere (which if not done prior would happen automatically at a certain age).
you can’t ignore the fact that even more propaganda would directly target them, taking advantage of very effective data mining based profiling. they should be able to experience more of life before advertisers starts to dictate their agenda, otherwise they’ll easily think that advertisers are speaking the truth.
they have a voice. It’s not like people can only vote if they are in their last decade. turning 18, just 2 years, anyone can vote, and I would say even 30 and 40 years olds are largely affected by these issues.
Yes, this is indeed an argument that shouldn’t just be ignored. And honestly this should simply never be the case, regardless of age.
I’d break it up into two parts. Official election material and just general advertisements/media. The first one typically is already quite regulated and arguably for the benefit of all should already follow standards that are not harmful to children. The second one seems like the problematic one. However I’d argue that even children are already to some degree getting confronted with what’s going on in the world. Anecdotally i can say that even at elementary school age children seem to be (to varying degrees) at least rudimentally aware of many things. To give a recent example like when Israel bombed Iran.
We have things like cigarettes and alcohol where we impose age limits, but those are directly harmful things. Hard to argue that voting in a democracy is harmful. Sometimes there might be anti democratic parties (like the afd here in germany for example), but in those cases you’d think about banning those, not taking away the ability to vote. Maybe you or someone else could give me an example of something positive being banned based on age because the state/society can’t provide protection from something secondary.
I would also add that advertisement to a young voting base wouldn’t exclusively need to be a bad thing. Take free school lunches for example. If as a politician you run a campaign on that for example you are banking on gaining favor from a voter base that only indirectly is affected by it. The people directly benefiting from it can’t vote for you.
They have a voice, but no vote, which is what matters for the politicians in charge. Also “just 2 years” falls flat since my argument is not about the lowering to 16, but abolishing it in general. So for the sake of argument for example an 8 year old, which would make it a full decade. In practice even longer, since elections aren’t every year and you aren’t guaranteed to have one in the year you turn 18.
And you are right that even 30 and 40 year olds are affected by these issues, but i don’t see how that would be an argument against it. If anything i’d see it as an argument that children should also have a say. We also don’t have an upper limit after which you aren’t allowed to vote anymore. And for obvious reasons it would e.g. be impossible to have a rule that says x years before you die you aren’t allowed to vote anymore, since you won’t suffer all the consequences.
when will we ban personalized advertising?
or any kinds of advertising that is more than just showing that your product/service is there.
but unfortunately, with deceptive videos all over the internet, that wouldn’t help at all.
that’s right, but I think because of a lack of substantial amount of experiences (before being exposed to media), they have much less of a chance at figuring out what’s real and what isn’t.
heck I only started using facebook near the end of elementary school. and then when I got to be voting age, I had almost no clue about the running political parties, how truthful they are and what is their past. I just slightly missed being able to vote the time before that, and I know that I would have voted for a liar with a corrupt past, because of facebook ads of their party I assume. “oh look, they are apologizing and they regret it! they look so honest!”
nowadays? they just post a tiktok video that they’ll give money to all below 20 if they are elected, and they get a bunch of votes. and the election office will do nothing. or they promise to lower the graduation requirements. or to make it unlawul to ban smartphone usage at school lessons. or anything that sounds good to them but everybody else knows is a bad idea.
they could have even cooperated with another party to make sure this one doesn’t get elected, but takes votes away from another one.
all because they promised something on tiktok, or really any platform that auto plays videos when scrolling by.
deceptive social (and traditional) media is exactly why we can’t allow this. and if you allow them to vote, you just made it so that now we can’t even keep them away legally from that social media, because if you do that they won’t vote for you anymore, and the next party will just undo your laws.
I think those adults had decades of life experiences that could have helped them recognize that they are being deceived and used. childrens won’t have any of that. They’ll have no chance of recognizing that, unless someone they trust tells them and they want to believe it.
it would also be interesting to read a study that compares the effects of video effects, animations and vibrant nice colors in videos on different age groups.
I’m reading your post and it reads just the same as what applies to many adults.
I can’t even get started how many politicians have a corrupt past here in Germany and got plenty of votes.
Here in Germany parties actively ran on the promise of raising and fixing the pension levels in an already unsustainable system. Alongside other gifts to certain voter bases. The one left out (I assume partially because they are not able to vote): The youth.
I also think you vastly overestimate the amount of influence underage voters would yield. Especially in our demographic structures and based on the fact that a significantly lower share of them would actually make use of it. They certainly wouldn’t have the power to introduce sweeping changes against the better judgement of other voting blocks. But you are right that they might influence smaller changes.
To take one of your examples i could see that for something like the smartphone ban. But would that be so bad? It might be a good thing, but i don’t think this is conclusively proven. In return it is probably something being pushed by a large majority that might not even use a smartphone on a daily basis or at the least is very far removed from the current level of technology. And it also wouldn’t all need to be negative. Take for example the stop killing games petition that is quite popular on this site. That one might suddenly gain some more supporters, which are actually affected by it.
However i’d also see a need for more studies. And i probably wouldn’t just make a major shift like that instantaneously, but rather in a gradual way and maybe lead with changes to smaller more local elections first. Which might give opportunities for such studies.
so they were lying, except to the youth, because to them they didn’t have a message. that’s a positive thing to me.
part of my worries is this, but rather how will this affect all of them, when sociopathic people will start targeting them with even more brainwashing/reeducation content.
what do you mean? the banning the school-level banning of it? the problem is not smartphones themselves, but what they can do.
playing games and scrolling social media on lessons. taking pictures of your peers against their will, like when they get humiliated. using the infra blaster to fuck with classroom equipment. all of these were happening in my class, just a few years ago. unless your solution is mandating school-issued spyware on every phone, which I don’t support, the only solution is to ban them in one way or another. possibly only on lessons. and then somehow solve the problem of stolen phones, when someone knowingly took away a different phone at the end of lesson.