Age 16, why can’t it be sweet 16 for
democracy too? There is growing debate across the world on the idea of lowering
the voting age to 16. Some call it a disruptive move while others opine it
would usher in a vibrant democracy.
The world is changing. In New
Jersey, you can buy alcohol at 21 and cigarettes at 19, join the army at 17,
have sex at 16 and be tried in courts as an adult at 14. Belgium youngsters can
get sozzled legally at 16, reports The Economist.
Only when you have turned 18 can you
vote. Why? It seems perplexing. Expanding education, improved IQ levels,
increasing awareness due to exposure to media and intense interaction on social
media are making this generation smarter. Thus, the demand for lowering the
voting age gains credence.
However, critics contend that at 16
and 17, one is too immature to vote. Voting is compulsory in some
countries. There is even a similar demand in India too. Instead of such
authoritarian solutions to increase the voter participation, it is much better
to lower the age as many more would vote to make the democracy more
representative.
There are already such experiments
with lowering age. For instance, in Scotland, even those at 16 were also
allowed to vote in the referendum for independence held in 2014. Interestingly,
around 75 per cent of them participated in the plebiscite compared to 54 per
cent of 18 to 24 years old indicating greater enthusiasm among new voters.
Similarly, Austria permitted 16-year-olds to vote in all elections in
2007.
The experience in Austria was also
similar to that of Scotland. Thus, even this limited international experience
with lowering the voting age is encouraging.
In fact, young men and women learn
about how the democracy and its institutions like government function, right in
their school days. Voting can be a practical expression of this theoretical
exposure. Shunning gerontocracy can further deepen democracy.
India enjoys demographic dividend.
This demographic dividend should enrich democracy too as millennials vote.
In fact, millennials are better educated than the earlier generations. They may be less vulnerable to the empty political rhetoric dished out by cynical politicians.
In fact, millennials are better educated than the earlier generations. They may be less vulnerable to the empty political rhetoric dished out by cynical politicians.
They are more enterprising and less
conformist. They nurture an attitude to question than to reconcile. Such
activism makes the democratic process more robust.
However, critics feel that
millennials perceive voting not as a duty or passion. They are more trivial and
less responsible. They can even be indecisive and more impressionistic.
But, such outlandish fears are
nothing new. Similar concerns were voiced when voting age was last lowered
three decades ago. The voting age in India was changed from 21 to 18 in
1988 through the Sixty-first Amendment to the Constitution. India of 2017 is
completely different from India of 1988.
Underestimation
of young people's capabilities is a disservice to democracy. Young people are
less likely than adults to align themselves with political parties thus
encouraging independent political behaviour. The present-day youths are
well-versed with technologies and comparatively better informed. It’s at least
time to debate and experiment.
No comments:
Post a Comment