Should Kids Under 18 be Allowed to Vote? A Short Conversation with My Son \ stacker news ~Politics_And

pull down to refresh

Should Kids Under 18 be Allowed to Vote? A Short Conversation with My Son

1312 sats \ 19 comments \ @kepford 12 Aug Politics_And_Law

My wife and I were talking about some dumb thing an adult did recently. My son who is now over 18 walked in and I thought, I wonder what he thinks about kids being given the ability to vote in elections. Its the case in some "democracies" now.

For some time I have tried to not preach and rant and rave about politics. I do talk about it but I limit it. With that said, the family knows where I stand politically but all of my family is pretty open when they disagree with me.

So I asked him. Now that you are 18 and are working, making an income what do you think about this. Should kids under 18 be allowed to vote. His answer made me smile.

He said, no. I don't think anyone should be allowed to vote. Or maybe they should have to pass a test or something. Most people aren't qualified to vote. Its too easy to manipulate them.

I wasn't expecting this answer. Honestly I wasn't sure what he'd say. I guess I've made an impression on him. Who knew :)

view all related items

134 sats \ 1 reply \ @freetx 12 Aug

For some time I have tried to not preach and rant and rave about politics. I do talk about it but I limit it.

Agreed.

I tend to see that kids are far more influenced by the values you live rather than what you say. Kids are basically sponges and simultaneously rebels.

They will often rebel against things you say, but absorb and agree with values you live.

tldr: Don't tell, show.

29 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 12 Aug

Yes

114 sats \ 7 replies \ @SimpleStacker 12 Aug

Monarchy beats democracy when the monarch is moral and wise. Democracy beats monarchy when the monarch is immoral or foolish

41 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford OP 12 Aug

That's a good TLDR;

I don't disagree.

41 sats \ 0 replies \ @BeeRye 12 Aug

That is well said. A question I philosophically ponder...which one has the better chance to self-correct to a 'better' form of itself or the other...and which has the more violent / crappy transition (if ever).

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @Bell_curve 23h

Oligarchy beats both

11 sats \ 2 replies \ @Arceris 23h

With a baton.

lol j/k kinda...

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 23h

iirc, Oligarchy in Civ 6 gives +5 strength to your melee units.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 18h

Milei units lol

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 23h

I mean... its not really a system like the other two. And it is arguably present in both.

82 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 12 Aug

Anyone under 25 or over 65's vote should count for half.

51 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 12 Aug

Other ideas that to me would solve some problems. The might create others but I think you can make a case for them.

Only property owners (land) get a vote
Those employed by the government do not get a vote or their vote is less weighted. No more government employees voting for their jobs to be preserved or more privileged.
State senators are not be popularly elected but rather appointed by the state they represent. Note, the people are not the state. That's a lie. I'm referring to state governments.
No one receiving government assistance be that a business or individual can vote. So that would include farm subsides, welfare, and social security beneficiaries.

This list would get me canceled if I were a politician or some sort of talking head on TV. I don't think these changes would fix things but the reasons for and against them tell you much about how the system really works and why many of the problems exist. Why politicians do the things they do. Why they make the promises they make and lie the way they lie.

It also shows why there is so much resentment between different classes of people. It shows the hypocrisy in both parties when it comes to government redistribution. The government picking winners and losers.

I also like the idea of any politician voting for war (they don't do this anymore but they should) would be required to enlist in the war or someone from their family in their stead.

I actually do not have a problem with voting per se. I have a problem with the scope of what people are voting on. For example I have no problem with a business partnership deciding something by voting. All the owners have a stake and this works fine. I have no issue with voting in any voluntary association. The state is far from voluntary and far to broad in its scope of power and control.

We need governance but it should be focused and narrow. If we weren't all conditioned to accept the way things are as correct it would be much easier for people to see this on their own.

67 sats \ 1 reply \ @DannyM 12 Aug

No one should have a vote because there shouldn't be a vote to be had

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 12 Aug

My rights are not up for debate let alone a vote.

~ Michael Malice

The root issue really isn't about voting but rather violence and monopoly of the state. Voting is just the disguise

77 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby 12 Aug

I kind of enjoyed Paul Sztorc's lengthy essay on Democracy (#1070270), where I think the upshot was: people should vote, but the only options should be Yes or No. Yes: keep the people in office, we like what they are doing. No: throw the bums out, and give us something different.

Your son sounds like he is well on his way to being a person worth knowing.

113 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 12 Aug

Both of my sons are amazing people in their own ways. I thank God for them every day.

I don't really have a super strong opinion on what "should be done". I mean, that's kinda the point. I'm not humble but I guess I'm too humble to think I know how societies should organize if what has been tried already doesn't work.

I really like Hoppe's book "Democracy, the god that failed" and his vision seems plausible. I don't know that it is perfect but free market's and choice coupled with a shared cultural moral bond makes sense to me. That gets very difficult at a national level and I really think that's the real problem. Democracy doesn't scale and it can't really work well on its own. But then, none of these systems work on their own.

They all work better when you have a shared idea of right/wrong and higher trust societies.

58 sats \ 0 replies \ @BeeRye 12 Aug

whoa, cool answer must feel so good :) Sounds like he's got a good footing at 18.

13 sats \ 1 reply \ @kruw 12 Aug

No one should be allowed to vote.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 12 Aug

I think they should be allowed... but no one should think it matters.

Edit: I don't think anyone else has the right to use the state and their vote for it to do things to others. Its just an abstraction of violence when the state does things vs. a person.

If people lose faith in the state, the system, or whatever this thing is called. It has failed. We are on that path. This MAGA thing is a temporary delusion. Like any false god, belief is required. Voting IMO is a key sign of belief.

I always liked the idea of "none of the above" as an option with voting. That sends a signal.