DOI: 10.5553/RP/048647002011053004001
Res Publica |
|
Article | Negen argumenten voor en tegen het verlagen van de kiesgerechtigde leeftijd |
Keywords | voting age, political debate, enfranchisement |
Authors | Henk van der Kolk en Kees Aarts |
DOI | 10.5553/RP/048647002011053004001 |
Show PDF Abstract Author's information Statistics Citation |
This article has been viewed times. |
This article been downloaded 0 times. |
Suggested citation
Henk van der Kolk and Kees Aarts, "Negen argumenten voor en tegen het verlagen van de kiesgerechtigde leeftijd", Res Publica, 4, (2011):385-406
Henk van der Kolk and Kees Aarts, "Negen argumenten voor en tegen het verlagen van de kiesgerechtigde leeftijd", Res Publica, 4, (2011):385-406
Using literature, documents and parliamentary debates in Britain, Germany, The Netherlands, Austria, and Switzerland, nine arguments for and against lowering the voting age to sixteen are distinguished and critically assessed. The assessment is based on criteria such as logical consistency and empirical validity. It is argued that most arguments can hardly be defended with these criteria. However, this does not mean that the case for lowering the voting age is weak. This would only be the case if a voting age of eighteen is considered as valuable in its own right. |
Dit artikel wordt geciteerd in
Contents