Why Youth in Politics are essential to a functioning Democracy

London (YPI) -- The argument over whether or not youth should be involved in politics is certainly one wherein opinions are not shyly expressed. Whichever side is taken, however, it is certainly universally accepted that an attempt to restrict the current and upcoming generations from being involved in politics would be in vain.

 

As Jay Chan, A young Thatcherite Tory stated, if a hypothetical ban were to be placed on youth in politics he “will leave” the country. The youth continue to bring idealism and new ideas, which are inevitably bound to shape the upcoming decades. Mr Chan perceived that whilst “it is true, young people in politics tend to be more idealistic and inexperienced or even immature, as the fruit ripe[ns] and the ideas become more developed these ideas will be mature and practical.” 

 

The undeniable truth of the matter is that whether the youth are to bring negative or positive concomitants from their political involvement - they shall force their involvement, regardless. In fact, it is quite credibly argued that democracy would be weakened without the idealism and fearless activism present solely in the younger population.

 

                                                     Jay Chan argues that “young people are decisive in politics as it is mostly young people who                                                         canvass, mostly young people who work in grassroots politics and mostly young people who                                                         have time and passion for politics; it is young people who decide the politics and direction of                                                         the nation in 20 years.” 

​

                                                     We are certainly in no shortage of case studies to prove the tremendous change to western                                                           society that youth have brought about. Many often point to the “hippie” culture of the 1960s to                                                       illustrate an image of young activism being extremist and short-lived. And if true - in each one                                                       of these episodes of idealist extremism, great ideas for future reform are born. But Chan                                                                 rejects this idea, declaring: “No, we are not [Part of a Counter-Culture]. We are extensions of                                                         previous generations of politicians. We stand on the shoulders of all the legacy of older generations. I see Thatcher as my role model and I build lots of my ideologies upon hers.”

 

With the younger generations of the current day, believing determinatively to be continuing the greatness of previous politicians, whilst filtering out their negatives - young people are therefore necessary to perfecting the flaws of the previous generation. 

 

One may argue that without the “fresh sift” of youth (filtering out the negative products of before), the previous flaws are never made right and our political evolution is stationary - thus stripping it of the capability to adapt to the needs of its constituents. And society would become rigid.

 

“Political literacy” could be defined as a level of understanding of politics, which is more present in those who are involved in politics for a longer time. If a so-called “political illiteracy," which is abundantly present in youth, is not cultivated through involving youth in politics then when it has come time for the political baton to be passed down - the inexperience would never have been put right. And without a politically literate society, seeking a healthy democracy would be of the utmost futility.