They're old enough to join the
army, so why can't 16-year-olds vote? Because they're not interested? The
mention of politics is a surefire way to make teenagers fall asleep. Ask them
if they think Navin Ramgoolam is doing a good job and they'll probably just nod
and smile, completely uninterested. But ask them if they agree with being taxed
at 16, or if they think they should have more rights - to buy alcohol or have a
say in their parents level of intrusion in their lives, for example - and they
could go on for hours. But surely is not that about politics, legislation and
rights, too?
Have teenagers switched off from the world of politics
because they have no need to know about it, or because they're just oblivious
to the world, full-stop? It is true that teenagers don't know a lot about
politics, don't know who's left-wing or right, but this is more due to the fact
that under 18s are not officially exposed to the world of politics rather than
a head-in-the-sand attitude. And if they are, it would be mainly through the
private media!
What I cannot reckon is why
the need in our small island to learn about history for straight 6 ages as from
the age of 9 when it only involves the arrival of the Dutch, the French and
British Colonies?! Has Mauritius not went through the period of pre-independence
or post-independence? Okay-it is true that we learn about the last governor and
the new president and all, but do we have any kind of hint about the political
sphere? How many of us know that 40% of the Mauritians voted against
independence? How many of us even know that there were riots back at that time?
How many of us know the different roles that those faces we have printed on our
bank notes played? Who knows how the current opposition party was formed? How
many teenagers can go back in history to trace the number of coallitions that
have been formed time and again?
Not that teenagers of today
might be the least interested ( I'm interested though, and I'm a teenager! :$
Hi% to those interested as well! :D) but could it that by trying to re-write
the pages of history, by trying to whiten the stigmas and scars left by our
Mauritian ancestors so as to bring forth the perfect, stainless image
of a Rainbow Nation- the leaders of today, the adults of today are
depriving the upcoming generations of facts that they ought to know. Perhaps if
these were taught at school- Teenagers would have today felt more involved and
integrated in the political world.
(Some here would argue that things that could trigger social torments ought to be buried- but burying something never destroys it- it would erupt someday again! It will. You older people should have liberated it, should have carried the responsibility of your sick psyche and let it out in the open for the youth to come and hopefully blow in into smithereens with their newer, more pacific and humanitarian ideologies!- again, some youths just do not care and some still hold the steely mindsets of their grand-parents!)
And why should not they be? Is
there any strong valid reason as to why they should not be? Societies are
deemed responsible enough to produce children, to join the army and to make a
decision about our education that will affect us for the rest of our life, so
why are we not mature enough to make decisions about the country that we live
in? Matters of schools and education apply to young people more than anyone
else - it is our education, after all, that is affected by changes in funding
or policy. Is it fair that these decisions are made by balding 40-somethings
whose worst memories of school are taking the 11-plus? Do they know what it's
like to sit a GCSE? Do they know what it's like to have leaking corridors and
one computer between three students? I doubt it. So surely the people most
knowledgeable in this area are us, the teenagers?
On the other hand, a lot of
teenagers, given the vote at 16 probably wouldn't take part. "A lot of
16-year-olds aren't responsible enough and wouldn't take it seriously. But we
pay adult fares, so shouldn't we be adults all the way?"
So are we excluding teenagers
from the social sphere? Are we keeping them away from the world of politics up
till the time they are mature enough? Do we all think that teenagers really
cannot shoulder the responsibility of talking about politics or delving into it?
But sure the teenager is
mature enough to pay a full adult fare when watching a movie or voyaging by
plane!
_____________________________
"I am a Senior in
High School and I turn 18 this November. Even though I am almost an adult, I
know very little about politics and what each candidate stands for in the
election. I know I need to educate myself about what is going on in today's
world, but like Nikki Africano said in her discussion "Upcoming
Elections," I cannot make myself interested or motivated to learn more
about government, politics, and the issues at hand. I know I am not the only
ignorant teenager out there that has this problem. So why is it that kids my
age have a hard time finding inspiration to care? I have a few ideas why.
A social étiquette I have learned is that talking about politics is usually not a good topic for conversation. If often makes people heated, and is often rude to ask someone what party they identify with. Many people want to keep their view to themselves, hoping not to cause controversy with others, and out of insecurity that someone might attack their own views. This tip to not bring up politics has been stressed to me, so it never even crossed my mind to start thinking about politics until my school had me take Government as my social studies requirement.
As a teenager, I am really not thinking about how the economy is doing or about health care because I am not in charge of my own money or health insurance. So policies concerning these topics have never seemed important to me until lately when I realized, when I am an adult, I will have the chance to for vote for people who will try to do what I want to do with the economy or make everyone purchase healthcare. I will be in charge of how I run my own life, so theses policies will soon apply to me.
We often hear our parents or other adults in our life complain about politicians and the "system." When there are so many complaints like this, I would not naturally want to learn more about this topic that makes everyone so annoyed. I would not want to get involved. So far, politics has only been portrayed as a cluttered and frustrating thing instead of a method that gets things done in our country.
Many teenager's parents are fairly confident on their political views, and kids tend to lean whichever way their parents do as they are great influences on their kid's lives and how they view the world. So when a kid knows how their parents feel, and will often get a one sided answer to a question about politics, a kid might not see how someone else could argue what their parents have told them. A parent can convince their child of thinking about an issue one way, so the kid might not see the need to argue about in the first place, therefore not feeling motivated to hear care about a matter when it is settled in their minds.
Ultimately, I think it is not someone my age's fault for not knowing much or caring to know much about politics. I believe we have grown up in an environment where issues have not been applicable or appealing to us until the past year or two. It is not an excuse, however, to not educate myself. I just do not blame myself for not feeling motivated quite yet."
A social étiquette I have learned is that talking about politics is usually not a good topic for conversation. If often makes people heated, and is often rude to ask someone what party they identify with. Many people want to keep their view to themselves, hoping not to cause controversy with others, and out of insecurity that someone might attack their own views. This tip to not bring up politics has been stressed to me, so it never even crossed my mind to start thinking about politics until my school had me take Government as my social studies requirement.
As a teenager, I am really not thinking about how the economy is doing or about health care because I am not in charge of my own money or health insurance. So policies concerning these topics have never seemed important to me until lately when I realized, when I am an adult, I will have the chance to for vote for people who will try to do what I want to do with the economy or make everyone purchase healthcare. I will be in charge of how I run my own life, so theses policies will soon apply to me.
We often hear our parents or other adults in our life complain about politicians and the "system." When there are so many complaints like this, I would not naturally want to learn more about this topic that makes everyone so annoyed. I would not want to get involved. So far, politics has only been portrayed as a cluttered and frustrating thing instead of a method that gets things done in our country.
Many teenager's parents are fairly confident on their political views, and kids tend to lean whichever way their parents do as they are great influences on their kid's lives and how they view the world. So when a kid knows how their parents feel, and will often get a one sided answer to a question about politics, a kid might not see how someone else could argue what their parents have told them. A parent can convince their child of thinking about an issue one way, so the kid might not see the need to argue about in the first place, therefore not feeling motivated to hear care about a matter when it is settled in their minds.
Ultimately, I think it is not someone my age's fault for not knowing much or caring to know much about politics. I believe we have grown up in an environment where issues have not been applicable or appealing to us until the past year or two. It is not an excuse, however, to not educate myself. I just do not blame myself for not feeling motivated quite yet."
"It was on
politics, though, that the pupils displayed their lack of knowledge. Only 16
per cent identified the Conservative leader, Michael Howard, from a photograph,
and 10 per cent were able to identify the Liberal Democrats' Charles Kennedy.
However, 95 per centidentified Tony Blair as Prime Minister.
They were asked about the make-up of the Parliament - and to say which party
was in government, which was the second-largest party and which had come third.
"Remarkably only one in four know this," said the report.
The introduction of compulsory lessons in citizenship also appeared to have passed them by - 13 per cent did not know what they were.
In their verdict on the results, the pollsters said: "If the object of 'citizenship' classes is to instil some kind of civic understanding or responsibility about being British or at least being resident in Britain, pupils appear to have missed the point."
Only one in four could identify Labour as the party of government, a survey of 14- to 16-year-olds for Ofsted, the education standards watchdog, revealed. And 4 per cent thought the Conservatives were in power, while 2 per cent thought the Liberal Democrats were the government of the day. Two-thirds admitted they had no idea.
The introduction of compulsory lessons in citizenship also appeared to have passed them by - 13 per cent did not know what they were.
In their verdict on the results, the pollsters said: "If the object of 'citizenship' classes is to instil some kind of civic understanding or responsibility about being British or at least being resident in Britain, pupils appear to have missed the point."
Only one in four could identify Labour as the party of government, a survey of 14- to 16-year-olds for Ofsted, the education standards watchdog, revealed. And 4 per cent thought the Conservatives were in power, while 2 per cent thought the Liberal Democrats were the government of the day. Two-thirds admitted they had no idea.