Sixteen is too young to vote

and allowing young people of that age to vote is wrong.

I know there will be many people who disagree with me. The UK Prime Minister is one. Keir Starmer claims "if you are old enough to work and pay taxes then you are old enough to vote" and that "you should be able to have a say in your future".

Sorry, no. You are too young, much too young. You simply do not have enough experience of the adult world. 

I was one of those idealistic teenagers who thought I could change the world. I am now "old" and I have not changed the world. I have not changed the world even though some people might believe I did achieve something. 

In the library this last week one of the librarians said to me, "I took a book up to the other library last week, the "Famous People's Favourite Books".  He gave me a smile as he said it. I groaned.

The book has a "dedication" to me in the front - for the more than eight thousand letters I wrote to people around the world asking them to support what became "International Literacy Year". 

"Utter madness D..." I told him. He smiled again and we talked for a moment about "purpose" and "process". 

ILY took a decade out of my life. It did not change the world. It may have changed the world for some people but, if anything, the whole thing did me more harm than good. Yes, I was "the person who wrote all those letters" but I was still not considered to be "employable". If anything I was even less employable than before. The Prime Minister of the day made that very clear. He used "experience" as an excuse - but there was much more to it than that.

I thought about this as I read Starmer's comments. What would he have said in the same position as our Prime Minister. Would he have said I "lacked experience" and used it as the excuse not to employ me in the position? If he had done that would he still be able to justify giving young people with almost no experience of the adult world the vote? They are not old enough to do some "adult" things like drink alcohol and buy a lottery ticket. They cannot be sent to fight for their country. There are moves here to stop under sixteens from accessing social media. The legislation is supposed to come into force at the end of the year. The "adults" in the world want to prevent that but they still think that something magical happens on a person's sixteenth birthday and that makes them experienced enough to vote?

I had to be twenty-one before I could vote. In fact I was twenty-five before I voted for the first time because I was not in the country until then. When I finally did vote I was old enough to at least read more than the flyers left in the letter box. I actually knew my local representatives at both state and federal level. I doubt many sixteen year old voters would know their representatives. Too many of them will, like many adults, vote on the basis of the slick advertisements on television. They will not be "informed" votes. It is one of the many problems with compulsory attendance at the ballot box as is the case in this country.

I never thought I would find myself agreeing with anything Nigel Farage said or did but I do find myself in sympathy with the idea that sixteen year old students will be influenced by their teachers. Many of their teachers will perhaps be "left wing". It may well help entrench governments of that persuasion but, like anything else, politics needs balance and politicians need to be accountable to more than the electorate they represent. Research in this country suggests that many people vote for the same party all their lives. If they start to do that without any life experience at age sixteen then it may be that there will come a time when there is no real "opposition" - and most of us know "communism" does not work.