I recently read a book on voting patterns across the world. NOT, might I say, because I wanted to, but because I was helping a student to write an essay.
Voting used to be considered a civic duty. Not voting was considerma?ed weak. These days, young voters ( 18-35) no longer believe in "Civic Duty"; voting, for them, is a choice, or a right ( which may, or may not be exercised). Oldies ( and Wildies) still think it is a duty.
In the sixties and seventies, TV/Media was dominated by a few - in the case of the UK, BBC and ITV. There were news broadcasts every day, and specific politically-oriented programmes ( Panorama?) on a regular basis, which informed people of what was going on. There was nothing else to watch.Once Internet, cable TV and Netflix got a hold, you could watch anything you wanted. 24 hours of sport, 24 hours of travel channel, 24 hours of history, or play 24 hours of Candy Crush. There was a choice.Given that choice, would a young voter watch a boring MP rabbiting on about social services, or play Candy Crush?
However, the plot thickens. Political campaigns are very expensive, so candidates concentrate on those people who are interested in what they have to offer. The younger generation doesn´t really care, so the focus is on the oldies. Policies which benefit the younger generation are placed at the bottom of the pile. Catch-22: the original meaning "any pilot requesting mental evaluation for insanity—hoping to be found not sane enough to fly and thereby escape dangerous missions—demonstrates his own sanity in creating the request and thus cannot be declared insane".
And just for the record: those countries which have obligatory voting have far more spoiled votes ( and votes for minor candidates, like the Monster Raving Loony Party) than those countries which provide a choice.
" Bite off more than you can chew, then chew like Hell!"