[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)
Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /spoox/ - Paranormal, horror and the occult.
New board: /AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.
[ Return / Go to bottom ]

File: 1642195408980.jpg (85.16 KB, 1024x879, zoomers vote.jpg)

 No.691449

Should we call for the voting age to be lowered?

The Bolsheviks called for the voting age to be lowered to 18 in the leadup to the Russian Revolution - at the time, most countries set the voting age at 21 or even 25. It took over half a century for countries outside the USSR to lower the voting age to 18 as a result of controversies over the military draft and the Vietnam war.

In light of this, should we call for the voting age to be lowered to 16 or lower? At age 16 society already deems you fit to work, drive, have sex, and plan to enlist or take out crippling college debt - why shouldn't they have a voice in the political decisions that effect their lives? Not to mention, with the level of anticapitalist sentiment among zoomers this can only help our cause.

 No.691454

>>691449
Voting changes nothing
Money and bullets do

 No.691464

Most teenshits are edgy rightoids so good luck with that.

 No.691472

>>691464
That's false, a large majority of zoomers are social democrats and a remarkable percentage call themselves communists. We had a thread debunking the "generation zyklon" meme recently: >>677625

 No.691485

>Should we allow literal children to vote?
No

 No.691488

>>691464
get off 4chan/fbi.gov retard

 No.691491

>>691485
Explain what makes them mentally unfit to vote then, if they are already expected to work or plan for an education that will leave them in crippling debt.

 No.691497

>>691491
Most people in general are unfit to vote, power should be concentrated

 No.691502

>>691491
>Explain what makes them mentally unfit to vote
I really can’t believe you’re asking me to explain why literal children shouldn’t vote

 No.691503

>>691491
>They are expected to work and plan an education that will leave them in crippling debt
The fact that they’re this easy to manipulate is just the first reason

 No.691513

>>691491
I didn't know anything about politics at 16. I was doing homework and playing videogames.

 No.691520


>>691513
good for you not everyone is an idiot however

 No.691522

>>691502
>>691503
>literal children
Leave the liberal handwringing at home. They're 16, not 6
>The fact that they’re this easy to manipulate is just the first reason
At age 18 voting is already the exclusive domain of the politically informed, at least where I live. I would even go as far to say that the average 18 year old is better informed than the average boomer. And yes, plotting your whole career trajectory at 16 is a massive decision that most of us thought in retrospect we were too immature to make, but we still did it and are feeling the consequences. That's why you should be able to vote for representatives promising to reduce student debt and other important issues.

 No.691525

>>691520
>doing normal children's things at 16 is being an idiot

 No.691528

>>691522
*the average 18 year older VOTER is better informed than the average boomer voter

 No.691529

>>691525
Who decides what's normal?

 No.691539

better if its capped it at 65

 No.691541

>>691522
> Leave the liberal handwringing at home. They're 16, not 6
Really not much of a difference
1. Both emotionally unstable
2. Neither have to take care of themselves
3. Neither really care about politics in any real way
Except the 6 year old would at least understand they know very little about the world while the 16 year old would be thoroughly convinced they already know everything and have achieved the pinnacle of wisdom

Probably hard for you to swallow, since I’m assuming 16 is around your own age
> At age 18 voting is already the exclusive domain of the politically informed, at least where I live. I would even go as far to say that the average 18 year old is better informed than the average boomer.
Lmao
No, an 18 year old is just more likely to conform to woke cultural issues
> And yes, plotting your whole career trajectory at 16 is a massive decision that most of us thought in retrospect we were too immature to make, but we still did it and are feeling the consequences.
And that’s why those stupid decisions should be allowed to decide the fate of an entire country

Ask yourself this, why SHOULD literal children vote? You already pointed out yourself that they are naive and easily manipulated, so you aren’t setting a very good precedent here
You can also add that they are largely unaffected by anything related to labor issues in a given country (outside of the Third World, that is), do not consider the future implications of their actions, don’t even have to think about shit like taxes, legit decide their beliefs based on internet memes about what’s “based” or “cringe”

Given how stupid the average westerner is, why should the vote be extended to adolescents?

 No.691547

nope
21 should be universal cutoff between child and adult

 No.691548

>>691529
your mom

 No.691559

>>691541
>1. Both emotionally unstable
Obviously the 16 year old is much stabler than the 6 year old. Furthermore, how can you argue that you instantly become "stable" at 18?
>2. Neither have to take care of themselves
Wrong, you either tear your hair out putting hours into schoolwork and extracurriculars in the pursuit of getting into a "prestigious" university or you are forced by poverty or parental pressure to work a minimum wage job. Either way you have to consider your place in society.
>3. Neither really care about politics in any real way
Wrong, this is exactly the time when most people form their political views and are particularly interested in it

>>691539
You can make a very similar argument to restrict the vote to old people (who always swing elections due to high turnout):
>Why should someone who doesn't work or participate in society be allowed to vote?
>Their minds are decaying from dementia, do we want people this out of touch to rule us?

 No.691566

>>691559
> Obviously the 16 year old is much stabler than the 6 year old. Furthermore, how can you argue that you instantly become "stable" at 18?
I’ve been 16 and I teach 6 year olds, honestly the jury’s still out on whether 16 year olds are actually more stable than 6 year olds
More like, “less likely to accidentally die/get harmed by someone while going outside alone”
> Wrong, you either tear your hair out putting hours into schoolwork and extracurriculars in the pursuit of getting into a "prestigious" university or you are forced by poverty or parental pressure to work a minimum wage job. Either way you have to consider your place in society.
None of those things are taking care of yourself, the latter is at least helping to take care of your household but that’s about it
> Wrong, this is exactly the time when most people form their political views and are particularly interested in it
I’m sorry, but are you 16 yourself, genuinely? I haven’t met a single person that didn’t have retarded politics or were just apolitical at 16, pretty much everyone I know didn’t care about politics in an articulated way until adulthood

I notice you also didn’t reply to everything else I mentioned other than those three listed problems

 No.691567

>>691548
No, that's wrong. Zero points.

 No.691576

>>691566
>None of those things are taking care of yourself, the latter is at least helping to take care of your household but that’s about it
If your definition of "taking care of yourself" is to do everything without any help from parents, then logically the voting age should be closer to 30 these days, and certainly higher than 18.
>I’m sorry, but are you 16 yourself, genuinely?
I'm in my mid 20s.
>I haven’t met a single person that didn’t have retarded politics or were just apolitical at 16, pretty much everyone I know didn’t care about politics in an articulated way until adulthood
By that standard, perhaps a majority of people don't care about politics in an articulated way until their 30s again. The point is that 16 year olds are already forced to participate in society and therefore should have a say in its common affairs.

 No.691612

>>691454
So we should lower the age you can buy guns and allow child labor! :)

 No.691853

File: 1642211529070.jpg (27.58 KB, 600x399, elderly voters.jpg)

>>691539
>>691576
Let's flip this question on its head: why do we allow boomers and other retirees to vote? They don't work or study / train for work, their mental fitness continually declines due to dementia, and they can't take care of themselves without help from their children or paid caretakers. Remember that the category of "young voters" encompasses everyone under age 40 and this group overwhelmingly favors social democrats or further left!

 No.691863

>>691449
Yes. If you can join the army at 16 you can vote.

 No.691866

>>691863
You can’t join the army at 16

 No.691881

>>691866
You can't enlist at 16, but you bet your ass recruiters will push you to make the decision well before you turn 17

 No.691882

>>691449
you could lower the voting age down to 0 and it wouldn't significantly affect the outcome of elections.

 No.692080

File: 1642225423572.jpg (73.24 KB, 750x828, 1642008689570.jpg)

>>691449
>Vooting
no

 No.692082

>>692080
Vote Vermin Supreme.

 No.692088

>>692080
Even if you think you should boycott elections held under the bourgeois political order (we shouldn't), we still have to decide what the voting age will be in a socialist republic.

 No.692101

Said this before here and I'll say it again. The answer to questions like these is clearly a test or exam of some kinda. We know not everyone mentally develops at the same rate so applying a magic number to debacles like this just plain doesn't make sense.

 No.692102

>>692088
You assume socialism would have liberal representative electoralism?

 No.692103

>>691449
If you participate in local organizing -> you get a vote to choose a delegate from the same org you are organizing in.

In bourgeoise liberal representative electoralism? Literally who cares. Make it 16, or make it 50.
>>692088
>we shouldn't
You're either a fed or someone who doesn't understand how shit works. You choose.

 No.692123

>>692102
Not "liberal" electoralism and all the "checks and balances" that implies, but representative electoralism, yes. I don't see how you could draw any other conclusion from Marx's Civil War in France and Lenin's State and Revolution (the Soviets were representative institutions).
>>692103
Again, I don't see how you can read Marx's polemics against Bakunin or Lenin's polemics against the "Left Communists" and think we shouldn't participate in bourgeois elections.

 No.692131

>>692123
https://youtu.be/yPBXCdskB4E
See from minute 7:19 to 8:48

 No.692182

>>692131
The question here is about whether or not to boycott bourgeois elections, not whether it's possible to achieve communism within the framework of the liberal constitutional order. The guy in your video is right that the liberal constitutional order is structurally rigged against communist reforms, but that it itself is not an argument to boycott bourgeois elections. Instead, the point of communists running for elected office is to expose exactly how the constitutional order is rigged against the working class and therefore why revolutionary change is needed. As Marx wrote in the Program of the French Workers' Party, universal suffrage must be transformed "from the instrument of deception that it has been until now into an instrument of emancipation".

 No.692186

I think it's more important to push for STAR voting. It's similar to ranked voting but easier to do. You rate candidates like you would a movie. Also important to place spending and donation limits on campaigns.

 No.692190

>>692182
So you mean try to get on the ballot to show that it doesn't work? …. i dont think that makes much sense.

 No.692201

>>692190
The vast majority of politically conscious workers still hold illusions in reformism - they sincerely believe that if Bernie Sanders becomes president, for example, he will be able to deliver radical change. Communists forget far too often that the whole point of revolution is to enact reforms that can't be achieved in the existing constitutional order. Therefore, instead of boycotting the elections and calling for a general strike that will usher in an undefined communist utopia, we need to enter the elections with a clear program of reform demands. The key difference from socdem reformism is that we never compromise on this program to appease the bourgeois parties - as your party gains mass support, it will become clear that the bourgeois constitutional regime is holding back the democratic will of the majority, and at that moment you have the mass support for a social revolution.

 No.692203

>>691449
No. We should raise the voting age and age of consent to 30.

 No.692204

>>692201
Good post and good way of putting it. Communist parties need to remain truly democratic in order to avoid selling out, at which point they are not functioning as a communist party.

 No.692245

>>692201
Your political program depends on where you live. What you suggest is not a good plan for us.
Where has this strategy you suggest worked in recent memory?


Unique IPs: 18
[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]
[ Return / Go to top /