Ian Warden | Age no measure of worldly wisdom

Immediate media-commentariat discussion of the dear old progressive idea quickly lapsed into the wearying cliché that no, one has to be wise before one can vote and that no one of just 16 and 17 summers can possibly be wise.

Wisdom, this argument goeth, is a commodity that grows in a person at about the pace that he or she acquires grey hairs and a distinguished boringoldfartdom.

Miserabilist federal Labor and the miserabilist coalition parties have a long history of opposing the lowering of the voting age for this mean-spirited and muddleheaded age-equals-wisdom reason. Initiatives like Stephen Bates' (he is an idealistic youngster of 30) are always strangled by parliament's fogeys.

My own long-held conviction that the voting age should be lowered has intensified as I have aged. Now, with carbon dating techniques showing me to be 77, I find myself in favour of enabling voting even sooner than 16.

One of the two pillars holding up my conviction is that my own considerable experience (77 years of it) of these things has shewn me that there is no correlation between chronological age and wisdom.

The all-discerning William Shakespeare saw and understood this in his bones and makes the point again and again. He does it most famously in his King Lear where the old king brings catastrophe down on himself and his kingdom with his mature-age stupidity.

"Thou shouldst not have been old till thou hadst been wise" Lear's wise middle-aged jester chides old Lear as his, old Lear's, self-inflicted horrors multiply.

My old age is not quite as fraught as Lear's but Shakespeare's point is well made and I own up readily to being in some things at least as bewildered and plain wrong now, in my 70s, as I was in my bewildered and puberty-tossed teens.

READ MORE: IAN WARDEN

Yes, my mind is vastly more encyclopaedically fact-packed now than it was at 16. Hard Quiz me on esoteric almost anything and marvel at how I shine! But how one votes is not done from a basis of accumulated facts. It is a matter of political socialisations, of sweet ideological irrationalities and errant biorhythms.

One's passionate voting against the loathsome Scott Morrison government at the last federal election had little or nothing to do with the intellect. It was more a child-like desire for beauty, truth, wonder and magic, a matter of delight in the fairytale prospect of the election of a reforming Labor government.

No wonder that on polling day even men and women in their 70s skipped to their local polling places in the ways that little children excitedly frolic to and fro when at play.

The second perhaps more grown-up pillar of my desire to see the voting age lowered is the one that young Stephen Bates is invoking and that Australian philosopher Peter Singer has just written about so persuasively.

"Climate change, access to health care, housing affordability, racial justice - these are issues which young people are passionate about because they are the ones who stand to lose the most from government inaction," Bates has just told parliament.

"Lowering the voting age to 16 gives young people the opportunity to have a real say over the politics and policies that will impact them for the rest of their lives."

"Ask yourself who will suffer the most if we fail to prevent catastrophic climate change," Peter Singer challenges in his new essay, In Defence Of The Art-Targeting Climate Activists.

"The answer is the young and those yet to be born - yet both categories are unrepresented in our political systems ..."

So it's time, Singer urges, to "lower the voting age to 16 or even lower", and, "following the example of countries that have quotas to ensure a voice for indigenous people ... [to elect] representatives who serve as trustees for future generations".

Sensitive grandparents (and this columnist is the grandfather of two cherubs) already find themselves behaving-voting not for their own selfish interests but in ways we hope may help our grandchildren to live well on this fragile and ill-treated planet (for there is no planet B for our species to turn to).

It would be better still if we empowered these children themselves, now, with the vote and with their essential share of parliaments that are presently far too fogey-cluttered.

We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say. Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on The Canberra Times website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. See our moderation policy here.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: