Reposted from the Cardus After Hours blog (RIP).

Yesterday morning the National Post ran a small article outlining a U of Ottawa talk by Robert Fowler wherein he decries the disengagement of young voters. In short, if you don’t vote, you can’t complain. The Vancouver Sun ran a slightly longer article and that also reflected Fowler’s tone of chastisement.

I have little interest in defending self-indulgent disregard, particularly when it is paired with complaining. But I wonder if the “you should just vote” chastisement that Fowler levels at young voters is out of touch rather than insightful. I couldn’t locate a full version of Fowler’s remarks so he may have been more nuanced than the Post and Sun let on. I hope so. The more substantive issues that need to be explored are the notion of how current systems, structures and institutions are perceived by these young potentials. They appear to engage in all kinds of other things with great vigour so they are clearly not comatose.

Instead, political process is getting some direct feedback on how well it serves the demands and concerns of the day-to-day life of the young. If you’ve ever tried speaking to a group of children, you know very well that they won’t sit and politely tolerate your inane recollections. If they aren’t interested, they will talk, walk around, fidget, and tell you in all kinds of ways that your story is lame. The inattention of the young when election time comes may be a warning flag but yelling at them for that inattention won’t likely lead to a change of attitude (you know, the honey and vinegar thing). What we must be careful of is attributing low voter turnout with disdain for all current forms of civic engagement and, in particular, with potential forms of civic engagement.

While it can be very worrisome, irritating and seemingly disrespectful to our often antiquated processes, let’s not forget that a very large number of so-called adult citizens are also predisposed to avoid the polling booth.

I remember being in an all-candidates youth forum in Airdrie when I ran in the last municipal election. We all heard about how the dozen or so youth that showed up perceived the election process. They just thought that lots of what happened wasn’t accessible, didn’t connect with how they lived and even with how they exchanged ideas amongst themselves.

During the city-wide debate, I tried to record the proceedings for YouTube and had the president of the Chamber berate me for doing so. I said I was recording the whole debate for YouTube so people who weren’t able to be at that particular time and place owing to work and other commitments, could see what various candidates said. In the end, the only candidate I was permitted to record was myself. Not much of a balanced presentation and a huge miss on being in touch with where voters and communications are at (voter turnout was around 12% as I recall . . . all voters, not just youth)

Smart campaigners are getting much better at marketing candidates in the emerging communications landscape (witness Obama and Nenshi) but I’m not sure how much these new practices are working themselves into the fabric of everyday citizen participation (witness the nearly instant fall-off of the Obama social media machine post-election). Does the shape and structure of current political process invite and naturally accommodate the participation of contemporary citizens?

Do you think the solution to voter apathy among the young is to chide them for their inattention? Does it work for older voters?