We political teenagers are not a ‘myth’ – so let us vote in the EU referendum
|
Version 0 of 1. With the EU referendum likely to be the hot topic of conversation among politicians over the next two years, there is no doubt that one of the most fiercely debated aspects of it will be the electorate, and, in particular, whether 16- and 17-year-olds should be allowed to vote, which the bill, published today, rules out. Related: I’ll always be a Milifan. Ed was the best prime minister we never had | Abby Tomlinson Earlier this week, Conservative MP John Redwood claimed that politically active teenagers are “another myth put about by pro-Europeans”. The main problem here is not the lack of interest among teenagers, but rather that when teenagers do show an interest in politics, people like Redwood dispel such interest as a “myth”, instead of encouraging and praising their interest. To claim that politically active teens are a “myth” is completely beyond reason, patronising and also extremely damaging. For me, there are two types of people who say that teens aren’t politically active. Type one are the actual teenagers saying “I am not interested in politics!” and type two are the people who hear teenagers say this and in turn say “Look! Teenagers are not interested in politics,” as if it applies to all of us. When we say that we are interested in politics, people like John Redwood often ignore this or respond by saying “No you’re not.” With this sentiment they are suggesting that it is commonplace and normal for young people not to be interested in politics, that the teenagers who do care are the odd ones out – and a lot of teenagers don’t want to be the odd one out. You can imagine how frustrating this is for teenagers like myself who make a point of being politically engaged, only to find that our interest is seen as a figment of someone’s imagination. Such ignorance could almost lead to politically active teens to ask themselves, “Is there any point in me having an interest at all?” There is also an aspect of circular reasoning to Redwood’s comments. Many politicians have consistently shown that they do not care about teenagers’ opinions, and then condemn them for not having an opinion, using this as a reason why they should continue not to have an opinion. If left to certain individuals, this damaging cycle could continue forever. If teenagers don’t have a vote, having a political opinion can be seen as useless to them, and because they don’t have an opinion, this is used to explain why they shouldn’t be given the vote. Furthermore, the fault is not with teenagers alone. Yes, to some extent, teenagers should be responsible for actively engaging themselves in politics, but politicians and adults in general need to do more too. Parents, teachers and politicians have a duty to let teenagers know why it’s important to pay attention to politics, instead of complaining that they don’t care about it. This cycle needs to end, and giving teenagers a vote in the EU referendum would be a start. If there is any example that shows how ridiculous Redwood’s claims are, it is the Scottish referendum, when 16 and 17-year-olds were allowed to have a say. It is estimated that 75% of those eligible turned out to vote, compared with 54% of 18- to 24-year-olds. Where’s the myth in that? The reason 16- and 17-year-olds need a vote in the EU referendum is that it’s their future that is being decided on, and denying them a say in this is simply unacceptable. Of course there will always be those who say “If not 16, what about 15, or 14, or 13?” and although this may seem valid, there has to be a cut-off point. But by 16, young people are forced to make many important decisions about their own future, so why shouldn’t the future of their country be one of them? |