A few days ago the United Kingdom decided to extend voting rights to 16-year-olds, the first time that voting in the UK has been changed since 1969 (when it was lowered from 21 to 18).
Monique Ryan, the teal Member for Kooyong in Melbourne, has proposed a similar bill to be put before the Australian Parliament. The tabloids in Australia have already put out their polls and droves of Australians have already said they wouldn’t support the change.
I’m going to go out and say yes, I agree with the idea of 16-year-olds being given the right to vote.
I might get flak from the right for this opinion, but Australian nationalists are in a position to think outside the box in terms of policy and how politics should be done in Australia.
Young Australians, especially boys between 16 and 18, are not going to devour hours of Sky News Australia content about anti-Semitism or defending “Australian values” if they can’t even state that immigration is contributing to Australia’s economic decline. They are not going to listen to Andrew Bolt having whiskey with a mate or watch Rita Panahi’s show “Lefties Losing It” any more than they would watch an ABC hit piece on the National Socialist Network or an episode of Q+A where a bunch of Gen X politicians drone on and on in a self-contained environment with approved questioning.
The point I want to emphasise is this:
They want to give voting rights to a demographic of Australian boys and girls who are going through school and enduring the most antiwhite curriculum, surrounded by news reports about how the very idea of masculinity is in question, all the while allowing hundreds of thousands of migrants to claim citizenship and voting rights and to deny the existence of violent attacks made against young Aussies.
They want to give voting rights to a generation that is being priced out of the housing market courtesy of decades of Liberal/Labor-endorsed migration.
They want to give voting rights to a population that can’t access social media courtesy of the eSafety Commissioner but somehow isn’t spared the plague of online pornography.
They want to give the vote to Aussie boys who get mocked for their masculinity by feminists who at the same time will deny to their graves the idea that young girls in Britain were the victims of Pakistani rape gangs.
Do they ever think of the consequences? Of course not.
Leftists believe that by giving 16 and 17 year-olds the vote, they would somehow spawn a legion of Greta Thunbergs every election. Never mind the fact that Thunberg has been called an anti-Semite for the simple reason of not supporting the war in Palestine. The average 16-year old Australian does not care about any threat of anti-Semitism if all they see are war crimes being tacitly being approved by Anthony Albanese, a man who was seen as preferable to Peter Dutton.
Of course, there’s one person or another who may bring up Bernard Salt’s adage of kids spending money on “smashed avo” on toast instead of saving for a home, as if a meme dedicated to millennial angst over housing is going to work with Zoomers who can’t afford the avo let alone a coffee or toast.
Here’s an example of the sort of rage a 16-year-old will feel.
In Adelaide on Australia Day, the median house price was $870,000. On that day’s issue of the Adelaide Advertiser, there was an article lamenting why young people spent $7 on a latte. $7 a day equates to 124,285 lattes and if you drink three lattes a day, you would need to drink for 41,429 days or 113.5 years to reach the $870,000 needed to buy a home in Adelaide. Combine this with Bernard Salt’s anti-millennial meme plus his open support for Indian migration to Australia and you have the recipe to create a demographic that would never vote for the status quo, consequences be dammed.
Any young person, upon seeing those numbers and hearing both Liberal and Labor not do anything to get prices down, would never vote for either party. Generation Z is actually trending away from mainstream politics, unlike millennials, who have managed to stay wedded to Labor and the Greens.
Young men on the right were more drawn to Gerard Rennick’s People First over One Nation during this year’s election, the question is, why?
I took note of Flynn Holman’s article in The Noticer, describing how Rennick gained grassroots support with his strongest backers being voters with tertiary education, suburbanites and younger families. Rennick’s online success, driven by Gen Z-populated sites like Tiktok, was drawing praise from highly motivated youth who saw an intellectual weight to the him that was sorely lacking in One Nation, which has been a drag on Australian nationalism since its inception.
Rennick’s plan of economic nationalism, voluntary superannuation, tightening immigration and denunciation of Zionist interference in Australia’s politics vocalised much of the issues that young right-wingers had with the Coalition. Peter Dutton could not show what stake young Australians, especially young men, would have in Australia, especially given that his fellow Liberal MP Jason Wood is married to the co-owner of a migration agency.
One Nation have completely misread the issue for a party that is allegedly “far-right” and “populist”.
As far back as 2017, Pauline Hanson argued the age of voting should be raised to 21, owing of course to a long-standing trend of ageing voters that make up One Nation’s demographics. Young men especially who attempt to join the party are met with a centralised system by which they have no say and a party which has its own laundry list of scandals by which nearly 30 elected candidates have either switched parties or have resigned outright.
With the revelation that the party has had Indian candidates and abstained from voting against the overreaching hate crimes bill is enough to drive away right-wing Zoomers from the party.
All my words here could be challenged with the response that 16-year-olds can’t drink, can’t determine their gender, can’t determine the time, etc. I would agree with that if it was only relegated to only the youth, but the ageing establishment figures who locked us up during the pandemic-that-must-not-be-named in order to save themselves are no more intelligent than the average 16-year-old.
The Justices on the High Court were not scrolling through brain-rot when they determined that the NZYQ cohort of illegal immigrants could enter the country, despite previous overseas convictions of rape, murder and abuse of children.
One Nation’s electorate paralysis doesn’t come from Zoomers being lazy, but by the party’s leadership that lazily assumes talking points from the early 2000s-Liberal Party.
What I want to state, categorically, is that the anger of young Australians can generate change faster than what the mainstream media would believe.
In the UK, even with the legalisation of abortion-up-to-birth and euthanasia, 20% of 18 to 24-year-olds would vote for Reform, while only 10% would vote for the Conservatives, according to a poll months after Keir Starmer’s victory in 2024.
Younger voters here in Australia are not going to the Coalition or Labor or even the Greens given the way the parties have acted in the last five or so years at least.
The youth are going to demand radical change in order for them to have a stake in Australia’s future. For those of us on the right in this country, that is where we must act.
A nationalist party that favours and supports White Australians, that has pro-family and pro-working class policies, that is economic interventionist, that has an Australia First foreign policy, that will confront foreign interference and ownership within Australia, that is radical enough to demand mass deportations, reforms to finance and an end to “hate speech” laws, should not quiver at the idea of young Australians being able to vote.
If the young men and women of Australia are being told that this country is not worth fighting for and that they should ashamed of being White, the least that they can do is send a message where it counts: at the ballot box.
In the words of the late British orator and nationalist, Jonathan Bowden:
The right will only defeat the left and the centre if it’s more creative, more energetic, more radical, more intelligent, more sassy, cooler. That’s the only way we’ll win. The trouble with right-wing people, on the whole, is they’re sort of pessimistic, slightly unimaginative. They’re deeply conservative people. They’re very decent people, but they’re conservative. You’ve got to be more radical than that.
The post The nationalist case for lowering the voting age first appeared on The Noticer.
The Noticer
