I see that Jacinda Ardern is intent on lowering the voting age to sixteen in New Zealand. It’s a developing trend. Let’s face it, nobody remotely believes that the voting age will be restored to twenty-one from where it should never have been lowered. All the impetus, from the left and from the greenies, is to lower the voting age to sixteen; and, be of no doubt, on the way to fourteen. I read in disbelief that David Runciman, professor of politics at Cambridge University, thinks there is a strong case for dropping the age to as low as six. I assume that’s a spoof. But who can tell. Give me any ridiculous idea and I’ll find you the academic who supports it.
Apparently the human brain is not fully developed until the age of about twenty-five; and in the case of some academics one hundred and twenty-five. I imagine the brain of someone aged sixteen years has a way to go. Eighteen too, for that matter. There is no mystery as why the left side of politics favours lowering the voting age. Children are more likely to support utopian ideas which have no practical application. However, labour parties (parties which have evolved from the traditional left) should watch out. Green parties can out-utopian labour parties any old day.
I would say that lowering the voting age means more youthful pipedreams ahead but then some elite oldies are already off and running. Regressed to a callow stage. Pulled the rug from under the youngsters’ feet, so to speak. Apropos, the mirage of bucket loads of green hydrogen emerging from our north to all parts of the world propagated by Andrew Forest et al; the emergence of Queensland as a global renewal-energy powerhouse according to Annastacia Palaszczuk and her cronies; and yesterday, in the Weekend Australian, I read about aging economist Ross Garnaut expressing his belief that Australia is ideally placed in the world to export steel made from iron ore and green hydrogen. I could obviously go on. Pipedreams aplenty to pick from without relying on lowering the voting age.