ROB WHITE

PARADOXES OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION: POLITICAL ACTIVISM AND YOUTH

DISENCHANTMENT

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this chapter is to explore the paradoxes of participation for young people in relation to their engagement in politics and the political process in Australia. To do so, the chapter discusses a series of issues pertaining to youth activism and political involvement (including lack thereof), with a view to exposing the apparent contradictions in societal perception and response to young people's behaviour. The chapter builds upon ideas presented elsewhere dealing with issues of youth agency and youth activism (White, 2005). Topics to be discussed include the variable nature of youth political engagement; activism that occurs outside of approved political forums; youth participation inside approved forums; and the relationship of young people to the vote. A core thematic concern of the chapter is that of 'knowing one's mind'. Time and again, the issues of making up their mind, not knowing their mind, or being competent enough to make up their mind, surface in discussion of youth in politics. Knowing who they are as autonomous, self-interested human beings, and having the capacity to be decision-makers in their own right. are, it appears, essential to how young people are seen within the political sphere.

Overlaying the specific dimensions of youth engagement in political life (discussed below) is the key paradox of youth - namely, the precarious employment and increasing contingency of social life (a structural phenomenon), in juxtaposition to the individualised energy and optimism of young people as they construct their identities and personal pathways (Wyn & White, 20(0). Recent years have witnessed an intense process of individuation associated with social fragmentation and atomisation accompanying neo-liberal economic and social policies. This process has, by its very nature, not hinged upon col1ective action or a sense of shared experiences of structurally similar social conditions. Rather, it has translated into very specific forms of individual agency, forms that are ideologically and materially privileged in the institutional domains of school, work and household.

For example, Cohen (J997, 305) observes that the notion of 'self possession' allows each individual to negotiate the social structural in ways that are personally therapeutic but collectively negligible: 'Instead of being helped to confront their shared predicaments within a wider framework of knowledge and action, they are offered a purely personal tactic of disavowal'. In other words, the emphasis is on

L. J. Saha, M. Print, K. Edwards (eds.), Youth and Political Participation, 65-78. 2007 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

ROB WHITE

ways to manage personal achievement and disappointment via techniques of neutralisation at the individual level. Whatever happens, whether it be going on a date or searching for a job, becomes a matter of self management. Coping skills become central to negotiating the ups and downs of different facets of one's economic and social life.

The development of such attitudes and ways of being can, in turn, be linked to social processes related to skill training (with the emphasis on traits such as self-control and regulation of one's public behaviour), and education (with the emphasis on meritocratic competition and individualised success, and failure). Y Dung people are forced to compete with their peers for grades, for places in higher education, for slots in paid work. They are likewise meant to internalise the importance of 'doing it on their own', through the public emphasis on being suitably 'employable' (rather than policies directed at unemployment) and on the idea of making the 'right' institutional choices in order to get ahead in life. The individualised understanding of and engagement with social institutions is reinforced by these selfsame institutions.

Given the overwhelming emphasis on individual effort, merit and personal responsibility for failure, it is understandable that many young people see their future as basically in their own hands - not as related to wider social structural phenomena (see Wyn & White, 2000). The key message is 'taking responsibility' and the emphasis is on personal discipline and self-control. Agency is constructed in terms of 'rational choice' involving incentives and disincentives, and each person is thought to be fully responsible and accountable for their own actions. The weight of responsibility on individuals - as a general social process - is further reinforced through a public devaluing of collective action taken by young people. Hence, the paradoxes of youth participation have their reinforcement in the wider social context within which young people are positioned.

POLITICAL PARTICIPATION AND SOCIAL CONTEXT

Young people in Australia engage in civic life in many different ways. Many of the groups and institutions with which they are associated might not be seen as 'political'. Some are explicitly so. There is a great variety of ways in which young people can participate in the social life of their communities (Yromen, 2003). Just as 'youth' as a social category is diverse, so too are the politics of youth. Acknowledging this is to acknowledge difference, rather than universality, in youth experience, while simultaneously recognising that there are social processes and social contradictions that pertain mainly if not exclusively to youth per se.

How and why young people become actively involved in this or that group or activity is shaped by the specific social context into which they are born. Young people are already/always members of families, households, neighbourhoods and communities. Their ideas, knowledge and experiences are grounded in social relationships that cut across generations, in ways that somehow incorporate and reflect back each generation's own unique historical coming of age. It is the interdependencies of life that shape who we are, who we associate with, who we

66

PARADOXES OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION

rely upon, who we like and dislike, and the cultural underpinnings of our daily routines, behaviours and attitudes. Biography is located in intergenerational history.

It is for this reason that activism, as such, tends to be seen as a 'middle class thing', the non-violent rebelliousness of 'youth' writ large. By comparison, traditional working class neighbourhoods and poorer suburbs are rarely seen as

.hotbeds of political activism, although they are certainly focal points for other types of social engagement, such as youth cultures that include street dancers and graffitists, and teenage activities that include sports as well as drug use and drinking. Solidarity in this context is something that is moulded at the neighbourhood and community level. Supporting your mates and defending your own, mean dealing with everyday issues through existing social networks of family and friends. Work, money, babies, cars, entertainment. It is a politics of everyday life that counts (see McDonald, 1999; White & Wyn, 2004). Activism in these circumstances is as likely to be directed at authority figures, such as the police, and to involve confrontation in public spaces, over the control and 'ownership' of these spaces, as it is to involve more conventional types of activism. Group defence of communal spaces and activities may mean, literally, taking over the streets, an assertion of that we live here and this is our place. The dozens of 'violent' youths of Macquarie Fields who reacted against the forces of law and order in 2004 were angry about their circumstances, their place in the world - literally and figuratively. But this was a 'riot', not politics. Or so we are told.

For many young people, the politics of everyday life is shaped by direct experiences of racism, of discrimination, of homophobic violence. When such experiences are shared with others, there is greater likelihood of collective action that is focused, organised around concepts such as human rights and anti-discrimination, and linked across generations and across neighbourhoods. The personal problem is re-presented as institutionally bound, and thus subject to concerted resistance and conscious reform. Disadvantage may be a great leveller. But, repression and oppression can be generators of active dissent and propel people into action when otherwise they may not have acted so. Anti-Arab and anti-Muslim discrimination, for example, is having a major impact on young people around the country. The 'Arab Other' is now the pre-eminent 'folk devil' of our time (Poynting et aI., 2004). Arab and Muslim youth feel that they are particularly at risk of harassment. This has led to feelings of frustration, alienation and loss of confidence in themselves and trust in authority (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, 2004). It has also been associated with a politicisation of identity, where, for example, to be Lebanese, publicly and proudly, becomes a profound political statement. It is the working class, migrant suburbs of western Sydney within which a new identity assertion is emerging.

Young people who are exposed to information and ideas about the wider world beyond their suburb, town or region are also more likely to take an interest in global events and wider social trends (Wierenga, 1999). These events and trends may be reflected in what happens at the local level (as with music, videos, job opportunities) but they are best understood and dealt with in light of a broader

67

ROB WHITE

vision of societal structures. Education is an important component of the activist armoury. It is also a stimulus to activism in the first place. No wonder that many private school students join with their middle class peers in government schools on issues of social justice and breaches of human rights. Those who 'see', are those most likely to 'act'. Children of privilege are seemingly more likely to use that privilege as a stepping stone to righting the world of its wrongs. A material base free from want provides the 'surplus', the point from which young middle class people can campaign in support of their Third World cousins, their animal companions, their old growth forests and their remote wilderness areas. Commitment to causes is a lot easier when food, shelter, entertainment and school are rendered relativel'y unproblematic. Thus, material wealth begets the anti-materialist. And the movements toward social change are thereby enhanced.

A young person's immediate social context thus very much influences how and why they may engage in activism. What they do, and with whom they do it, is guided by the intersections of age, gender, ethnicity and class. Where you grow up, the cultural universe you occupy, the position and status of your family and parents in the wider Australian social mosaic, all of these structure opportunity, socialisation, and the formation of ideas _and of social networks. Activism is both local, and national, community-centred and global in orientation. It depends upon where you live.

Young people join movements, groups and demonstrations for a wide range of reasons, motivations, periods of engagement and levels of intensity. Analysis of youth activism in Australia would reveal that young people are linked into social movements and specific events in quite variable ways. Some young people throw themselves into activist work, and lifestyle, fully. So called 'ferals' are prominent defenders of Australian forests, living and protesting in remote bush areas as well as bringing their cause to city streets. The young socialists of Resistance often put all of their time and energy into political activity, and their dance and song is permeated by politics.

However, for many other youth, activism is less about a vision of social transformation than contingent upon where they are at that precise moment in their lives. High school anti-racist marches included groups of friendS, young people who did not like what was happening to their peers in the classroom, in the media, in the formal political arena. Their 'politics' was a politics of friendship, built in the here and now, and founded upon immediate circumstance (e.g., school-based relationships). For many others, agency is less about a world vision, than about specific issues or events. Rallies, protests, marches and demonstrations can also be fun. They certainly get the adrenaline running, and they can be exciting places to be - as long as the issue is straightforward, 'just' and specific.

The point is that activism reflects varying levels of commitment, different sorts of agency. For some young people, it is something to 'dip into' once in a while, along with their friends. For others, it is a serious, and seriously taken, commitment. Many young people can't be bothered to participate at all. They have other things on their mind. Or, they face resistance from their peers, and parents, when expressing a wish to become more active. For others still, activism is thrust

68

PARADOXES OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION

upon them by tragic incidents and by the intrusions of outside forces into their homes and neighbourhoods.

Forms of specifically 'political' engagement, however, tend to reflect the rise of the new social movements over the traditional political party, the emergence of the swinging voter over family-based loyalties, and the search by individuals for what best suits them in an increasingly sophisticated technological world. Structural barriers and shared experiences may still generate collective action, but individuation means that this, too, is transformed in nature. The emphasis is thus on loose affiliation rather than doctrinaire adherence, choice in style and form of political engagement (especially in regards to use of the internet) rather than regimented and systemic rules of order, and personal preference rather than 'hand-me-down' political vision. The exception to this is the appeal of ultimate authority, an appeal associated with the terrorist but having its roots in extreme social dislocation, alienation and invasion. Ethnic targeting of the gang member may well beget that which we now most fear (regardless of new legislation designed to protect us from the social impacts of institutionalised disadvantage and racism).

PARADOXES OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION

One of the major stumbling blocks to youth activism has to do with problems being constructed in ways that displace attention from the collective nature of their origins. The translation of social problems into individual ones is a process that tends to blame people for their own plight. Unemployment is due to lack of skills, education or making the attempt to get a job. Detaining asylum seekers is necessary because they tried to enter Australia illegally. Indigenous people are poor because they get too many hand-outs. The present, and the future, is justified in terms of people taking responsibility for their own welfare. The message is clear - care about yourself, because nobody else is going to. The social processes of individuation are precisely intended to de-legitimate and undermine a collective sensibility (White & Wyn, 2004).

This is compounded by a general lack of political education in Australian society. Schools do little to encourage knowledge about, or participation in, conventional politics. When the National Children's and Youth Law Centre attempted to introduce 'Rights' kits into schools in New South Wales there was fierce resistance from school authorities, from head office to principals to teachers. This type of politics, it appears, was a bit too realistic. And yet examples of good practice and good models of youth participation and governance do exist, and would certainly provide a strong grounding in the doing of politics (see for example, O'Toole, 1993). In the event, however, most young people (and older people) are disillusioned with the mainstream political parties and parliamentary systems anyway. Governments fail to deliver the goods; politicians lie and gain even bigger electoral wins; war is justified on the basis of phantom evidence. Nobody listens because all they do is talk.

Young people do become active, they do participate in the political world around them. But, this too, is problematic for it places young people at the fulcrum

69

ROB WHITE

of a series of paradoxes, directly related to the nature of their activism. The paradoxes revolve around whether or not, and how, they exercise their will.

ACTIVISM AS EITHER/OR

Young people are constantly accused of being apathetic. The Generation X hype of a few years ago was intended. amongst other things, to reinforce the idea that young people only care about themselves. Alternatively, participation and activism is seen to be reserved only for the truly committed, the truly active, the truly agitated. Activism is thus presented as an either/or proposition: totally apathetic, totally active. Analysis of how young people actually live their lives, however, tells us that young people can be both, at the same time. It depends upon the day, their relationships, their resources, their interests. There are few people who lie at either end of the activism continuum.

Activism is presented as one-dimensional in other ways as well. Some forms of activism are seen as legitimate, others are not. Some forms of activity are seen as activism, some are not. Is the production of Zines, by and for young' women, an activist activity? Is watching the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras with friends an activist activity? Is it only direct participation in street demonstrations that counts, or are there other ways and means to being and becoming an activist? Activism is usually associated with that which is transgressive, that which challenges and wishes to transcend existing ways of doing things. But what if I attend the illegal rave party in the public park, not because of progressive politics and its agenda of democratisation of public spaces - but because it is fun? Where do the lines between activism and adrenaline cross, and why is this important to ask in the tirst place?

Political participation is also not simply about local politics and local issues. For example, one reason we need a complex understanding of politics relates to interpreting the experiences and knowledge of ethnic minority young people. Especially in a time of war and racial vilification, on a global scale, what is 'politics' for many Arabic and Muslim young people resonates differently than for other groups of young people. It also impacts upon them in immediate and profoundly disturbing ways. Electoral processes that tend to privilege the middie class and the 'white' and the professional (witness the number of lawyers in parliament) are meaningless to those whose life experiences are far removed from the nice-ities of suburban living and the banalities of ordinary political debate. The politics of hate is a lived reality for some, and aggressive and antagonistic politicisation of 'ethnic' issues within mainstream institutions hardly quells the anger or solves the problem.

Racism and religion, hate crime and communal pride, and the explosive mix of marginalisation and exclusion lend themselves to extreme forms of political expression both 'for' and 'against' specific communities and issues. Politics, here, is first and foremost about social identity. Who we are, and where we are, become central to social being and one's territorial sense of place. Protection of each becomes vital to the politics of everyday relationships, networks and institutions.

70

PARADOXES OF YOUTH PAR TlCIPA TION

Simultaneously, globalisation itself casts doubt on the nation-state as a key signifier of belonging insofar as it allows the possibility of a supranational identity (Lebanese, Italian, Salvadoran). So too, racism and national and religious chauvinism can be linked to the formation of transnational identity that links the minority in one place, across space and time, to their brothers and sisters around the globe (the Latino, the Arab, the Jew). Different identities also lend themselves to diverse and, at times, ambiguous politics as young people negotiate their political and cultural connections at home and with their homeland. Meanwhile, is defending Palestine, or Israel, or Kurdistan a matter for and of Australian politics? Is becoming Lebanese, having never been in Lebanon, a political act? (see Noble et aI., 1999).

ACTIVISM OUTSIDE OF APPROVED FORUMS

The complaint of youth apathy is frequently contradicted in the actions of the young. In Australia, high school kids have organised and participated in great numbers in events such as anti-racism marches, anti-war marches and reconciliation marches (related to indigenous people and the colonialism legacy). Youth have been prominent in demonstrations against capitalist business, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. They have been active on refugee issues, bringing their passion to defend asylum seekers against enforced detention. They are central players in the fight over environments and protection of animals from cruelty and extinction. Certain types of events tend to be particularly well attended by young people.

High school marches against racism - these were organised by and for young people in 1998 in protest against the policies and propaganda of the One Nation Party (a right-wing, racist, populist party) and its fellow travellers in the mainstream political parties.

Mass demonstrations against capitalism - this was especially the case in Melbourne, September II, 2000, when thousands of people converged around Crown Casino, site of the World Economic Forum, to protest against the WTO, the World Bank, the IMF and other institutions and institutional supporters of capitalism.

Persistent agitation against environmental degradation - this has largely featured as anti-logging protests, often in remote parts of the bush, but also including mass demonstrations in cities, and particularly targeting the practice of clearfelling of old growth forests.

Not surprisingly, the active presence of young people at such events, as activists, has, in turn, been accompanied by conservative critiques (see Healy, 1999). The crux of the critiques is this: activism outside conventional political channels (such as youth parliaments, political parties and the ballot box) is disapproved. Moreover, if young people do engage in these alternative types of activism, then they 'don't really know their own mind'. That is, they have been duped by adult activists, by members of far left socialist organisations, by the idealistic Greenies.

71

ROB WHITE

Activism that even remotely smacks of the collective form of agency described above is poo-pooed as not really the activism of youth. Youth agency is thus denied, whenever collective agency is exercised.

All of this raises the issue of youth and representation. If youth are engaged in self-representation, via the mechanism of the street march, then questions are asked about whether or not this really is a bona fide form of self-expression. Similar lypes of concerns are raised when youth participate in bodies in which their role is to represent others or to portray the 'youth' viewpoint. The forum may be institutionalised, but are the youth really 'doing it for themselves"?

ACTIVISM INSIDE OF APPROVED FORUMS

Ironically, youth activism inside of so called 'approved' forums is also often dismissed as not being 'real' activism. Young people, it seems, are damned if they do, and damned if they don't. In this instance, the criticism often originates from outside commentators - usually youth studies academics who identify with some sections of the Left. And the criticism has much the same substance as the previous criticism. That is, young people who enter into local government youth groups, or school councils or youth parliaments are seen to be under the guidance (read control) of adults, and to be forced to always follow protocols appropriate to the organisation in question. Following rules, and receiving some kind of training, are equated with the young people 'not knowing their own mind' and simply slotting into someone else's agenda.

The reality, however, is a bit more complicated than this. First, it is complicated because activism is always learned behaviour. One does not become a fully fledged activist over-night. It requires learning from those around you - the language, the techniques, the chants, the organisational structures, the key ideas, who your friends are, who the enemy is. Whether it be in a new social movement, or your local council, there is a period of adjustment and training as one moves further into the activist sphere.

Secondly, socialisation into activism and participatory practices does not mean that we leave our brains behind. Young people have demonstrated, in practice, that they use public forums of all kinds to express what they feel and think. In some cases, it may well be that young people are heavily intluenced by others around them, but this is not unusual for any person. On the other hand, structured or organised youth forums can allow for types of youth participation that actually do have bite, that will indeed impact upon policy-making and wider political decisions (Glenorchy City Council, 2003). Acknowledging the limitations of conventional and more institutionalised avenues of youth participation ought not to be the same as saying that such opportunities will not have any effect. For example, it is precisely because of the involvement of young people in local government forums that the wider political climate in an area can be changed. This is especially so in regards to 'law and order' environments, in which youth, when provided with'a chance to voice their opposition to moral panics and anti-youth legislation, have occasionally been able to implement youth-triendly policies and practices.

72

PARADOXES OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION

It is important to be sceptical, yes; but the cynicism of the armchair critic misses the potential and potency of organised channels of youth participation. Observation of federal and state youth forums shows that very often governments and political parties do selectively choose participants, and that the agenda and processes (such as roundtables and consultations) preclude the possibility of unfettered participation and the setting of alternative goals and values. It is well known that managing young people's participation and channelling it into mainstream outlets is attractive politically for governments faced with potentially diffIcult social issues and active social movements. Nevertheless, local government is often constituted as quite a different kind of arena. Here, young people do have more scope to shape policy and to engage in civic participation that, in many cases, mirrors the concerns of the new social movements. Activism that takes conventional form is still activism if it challenges the broader rules and values of the game. Even at state and federal levels, the very act of participation itself can have unintended consequences if it means that young people learn how to assert themselves and appreciate social issues in ways unforseen by forum organisers.

VOTING AND THE AGE OF RESPONSIBILITY

Taking a formal part in the political process is often equated with exercising the vote. Here, too, the experiences of young people and the social context within which official politics is played out in Australia will have particular consequences. Whether to support the lowering of the voting age, to enrol to vote, or to exercise the vote - these are matters shaped by the dynamics of the cultural field of youth and the institutional parameters that mark out the limits and possibilities of youth agency.

Young people are deemed to be old enough to 'think for themselves' when they are 18 years old. However, at what age are they held socially responsible for their actions? This varies. And, we might add, so it should. The reason for this is that the relationship between children and citizenship always hinges on the point of 'being' and 'becoming'. The debate ought not to be simply about lowering (or conversely, raising) the voting age - but rather how best to protect young people's rights now (their immediate being) and their developmental potentials (their future becoming). Any discussion of the voting age must consider how 'youth' has been socially constructed according to age demarcations, as well as acknowledge that such demarcations are not inherently repressive, limiting or demeaning of children and youth.

There are certainly complexities here that do need to be teased out. Even a cursory examination of relevant issues hints at the need to be circumspect in regard to calls to change existing voting age requirements. It is notable, for example, that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child provides an important statement on the developmental needs, requirements and rights of children and young people. Arguably, citizenship rights in the context of developmental processes do demand a very different approach than otherwise may be the case. The agenda is about developing capacities, not simply that of exclusion and

73

ROB WHITE

restriction. For the CROC, 18 is indeed the year of becoming a non-child, a year when key developmental processes have had a chance to come to fruition.

The point is that childhood and adolescence are bounded by consideration of the idea that young people have varying stages of development and varying levels of understanding. This is not the same as assuming that youth development is a static and deterministic process (for critique of this, see Wyn & White, 1997), Nevertheless, the vulnerability and developmental aspects of youth are legally protected through a range of criminal and civil legal measures designed to take into account their overall level of maturity (see Schetzer, 2000; Western Australia Oftice of Youth Affairs 2000). These measures involve elements of prescription and compulsion (as with the imposition of compulsory schooling), and elements of proscription and prohibition (as with the banning of alcohol sales to people under a certain age). For example, most authorities hold that criminal responsibility should not be fixed at too Iowan age bearing in mind the facts of emotional and intellectual maturity. In the Australian context, this generally means 10 years of age as the minimum age of criminal responsibility, with the doctrine of doli incapax also applying to young people up to the age of 14 (a rebuttable presumption that children who have turned 10 and not yet reached the age of 14 are incapable of knowing that their criminal conduct was wrong).

The law thus shapes the eligibility and responsibility of children and young people around distinct age markers. Variations will occur between jurisdictions (for example, in relation to the upper age limits of juvenile justice) but generally speaking there are similar key transition ages in most places. In some cases there may be variation in what a child or young person mayor may not do, depending upon permission being granted by the parent/guardian, a court, or relevant government deparlment.

In general, the crucial principle in dealing with children and youth today is that of the 'best interests of the child'. This principle was established by the United Nations via the Convention of the Rights of the Child, as one of the foundation principles underpinning all of the rights and freedoms of children. Article 3.1 of CROC states that: 'in all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, Courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration' .

Allied with this concept are other principles, such as (Cunneen & White, 2002, 276-277):

74

The provision of conditions under which children can develop their full human potential, with human dignity, and the requirement that treatment be appropriate to the age of the child

The capacity for children to participate and to express their views (if the child is capable of forming a view), including the right of the child to freedom of expression, thought, conscience, and religion

The recognition that children require special protection because of their special vulnerability and stage of maturation

PARADOXES OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION

The recognition that in most circumstances the best interests of the child will be served by remaining with their family and their family being involved in their development

The emphasis is on participation, and developmental opportunities, in an environment conducive to health and wellbeing generally.

Such considerations are also reflected in debates over the ideal voting age for young people. Basically there are two issues that surround young people and the vote. The first relates to the age at which voting might occur. The second relates to the exercise of the vote if it is legally recognised as a right. The paradox involving young people in this instance revolves around the actual knowledge they have of the political process, and how this in turn is reflected in their disengagement from politicians, but not necessarily from politics as such (Russell, 2004).

Lowering the voting age can be rationalised on the basis that young people in their early to mid teenage years have the capacity to make independent political judgements on matters of public interest. In part, this is substantiated in the ways in which the law structures their participatory rights at ages 14 and 16. For example, the doctrine of doli incapax applies to young people up to the age of 14, after which it is assumed that they will be capable of exercising basic competencies and to make important moral and social judgements. It has been pointed out, as well, that 'Children are able at age 16 to leave school, leave home, enter into a sexual relationship and undertake many other activities that involve a degree of maturity and independent judgement' (National Children's and Youth Law Centre and Defence for Children International, Australia, 2005). From the point of view of the CROC, the important thing is that children and young people be enfranchised at an age at which they show capacity to reason and a reasonable level of maturity. For many advocates, this translates into support for a voting age of 16. The area of criminal law provides useful insights into how 'competency' is socially constructed and why. In the legal sphere there are explicit common law and statutory rationales for setting age boundaries. These are not just arbitrary impositions; they reflect considerable discussion and debate over the needs and rights and responsibilities of children and young people. However, a change in one sphere, such as voting rights, may well influence and shape potential change in another sphere, namely the administration of juvenile justice. If gaining the vote connotes a certain level of maturity and competence, then why should 16 year olds not be treated as 'adults' in regards to criminal justice matters? According to the CROC, this would not be a good thing, insofar as the continuing age-related developmental needs of young adults ought to foreclose such a possibility. However, politically, it would certainly open up a Pandora's box, especially insofar as periodically there are populist pressures to deal with serious and repeat young offenders in adult courts and within adult punishment systems. Extending voting rights could thus put at jeopardy other rights of the child (young person) presently protected via specific juvenile justice institutions and procedures.

But even if voting rights were extended to lower age groups, the question remains as to what young people might do with them. Evidence from Australia and

75

ROB WHITE

Britain demonstrates that many young people are disenchanted with mainstream politics and many do not wish to engage with the electoral system even if they have a legal right to do so (Russell, 2004; Print et aJ., 2004). And so we return to the central paradox of youth with which we began. Namely this, that young people have been socialised and experience the social world in individualised terms, and this may mean a retreat from institutions over which they have no apparent power or say. It is this sense of individual powerlessness, one that is constantly reinforced by critical media commentary on any form of engagement or disengagement in politics by young people, which fosters the 'outsider' status of young people as political participants, Gaining the vote is no guarantee that one can gain a voice, or be the agent of change via mainstream political mechanisms.

Moreover, gaining the vote is certainly no guarantee that specifically youth issues will be adequately addressed. For instance, the under-25s who already do vote, are still discriminated against in areas such as government allowances (related perhaps to the size of this voting cohort, and to their relative financial and social status). Young people are not stupid, nor are they unified ideologically and socially. They are more than aware that the mainstream political apparatus basically rellecls the machine polilics of the dominant parties, that such politics cannot be somehow removed from the influence of media barons and commercial interests, and that 'real' politics basically takes place well beyond the ballot box. It is for these reasons that young people, along with their older counterparts, share in the disillusionment with 'party politics' that is evident throughout the Western democracies. Yet, at the same time, young people are often very aware of the central issues in society, issues such as health, safety, equality (see Russell, 2004), and given the chance will act upon these in appropriate forums. Disillusionment with voting does not automatically mean alienation from politics in general.

CONCLUSION

Youth political participation in Australia is complex, contradictory, ambiguous and complicated. There are many ways in which young people can be active, and many criticisms of them regardless of how, or even whether, they do so (see accompanying table). This chapter has attempted to chart out the central paradoxes of youth political participation and the ways in which 'taking responsibility' has been construed, re-presented and experienced in diverse social forums. A central theme in many of the debates, commentaries and portrayals of youth in politics is the notion of 'knowing their own mind'. In practice, of course, this manifests itself in many different ways.

76

PARADOXES OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION

Table 1. Dimensions of Youth Political Engagement

Activism as Either/Or [apathy/activism, passive/active, social identity,

not being able to make up their mind]

Activism Outside of Approved Forums [disapproval, being duped,

not knowing their own mind]

Activism Inside of Approved Forums [someone else's agenda. sociaJisation,

not knowing their own mind]

Voting and the Age of Responsibility [beinglbecoming. distinct age markers,

being competent enough to make up their mind]

Young people in this country engage in 'politics' for myriad different reasons, with differing motivations, levels of political consciousness and degrees of commitment. The hallmarks of 21" century activism appear to be: a global focus and social networking; a strong anti-materialist ethic and orientation; little reliance upon traditional institutional supports and resources (such as the trade unions); and even less reliance on and respect for centralised leadership structures. People are active in ways that they can relate to and are comfortable with.

Most activism, as such, is associated with progressive causes and social justice agendas in the Australian context. Some young people, a small handful, engage in the politics of fear, and dabble with the far-right politics of the neo-nazi. Many thousands more, however, subscribe to environmental movements and support human rights organisations. And, in the middle, are the vast number of young people who 'do their own thing' - until life and circumstance force them to 'become active'.

From a wider sociological perspective, the manner in which youth engage in the political process can be interpreted in the context of structural pressures and limits that shape the terms upon which they negotiate their political engagement. Processes of individuation that are now more and more embedded in the institutions of late capitalist societies foster a sense of self largely constructed outside of consciousness and activity involving the collective. Notions of solidarity and shared predicament diminish in the face of constant assurance that the DIY era is precisely about a personal relationship to success (and failure), that identity and prosperity are basically 'up to you'. Not surprisingly, politics, too, will often be experienced as a site of individual choices, including the choice not to be involved.

77

ROB WHITE

Nevertheless, collective experience cannot be completely submerged by neo-liberal rhetoric and the institutional processes within which selective filtering and hierarchiaiising takes place. Just as altruism lives and grows in the face of natural disaster, so too politics can flourish in sites and avenues that are outside the boundaries of the dull, the boring, the manipulated, and the career building. A shared disenchantment with the mainstream can thus well feed a shared understanding of and penchant for the alternative. If 'politics' is to be taken seriously by young people, then young people have to be taken seriously by political leaders at all levels of government. Being taken seriously also meanS taking seriously the diverse forms in which young people make their voices heard.

REFERENCES Cohen. P. (1997). RethillkillK the Youth Question. London: Macmillan. Glenorchy City Council (2003). Face the Challenge, Take the Risk. Enjoy the Ride: A Local

Government Guide to Youth Participation. Hobart: Tasmania Department of Education. Tasmania Office of Youth Affairs, Glenorchy City.

Healy, S. (1999) 'Generation X? Young People and Politics'. In R. White (Ed.) Australian Youth Subcultures: 011 the Margins lind III the Mainstream. Hobart: Australian Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.

Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (2004). ISJllae - Listen: NatjO/wl COllsU11(/tiollS (III eliminatillK prejudice against Arab (lnd Muslim AUJtra1ilIlS. Sydney: HREOC.

McDonald, K. (1999). Struggle.s fbI' Subjectivity: Identity, Action and Youtll Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

National Children's and Youth Law Centre and Defence for Children International, Australia (2005). The NOIl-Govemmellt Report OIL the /mplementatioll (~{ the United Nations COllvelllioll 0/1 the Riglas (!{the Child iii Australia. Sydney: NCYLC & DCI (Australia).

Noble, G., Poynting, S. & Tabar, P. (1999). 'Lebanese Youth and Social Identity'. In R. White (Ed.) Australhl11 Youth Subcultures: On the margins and ill the mainstream. Hobart: Australian Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.

O'Toole, S. (1993). Rights Education ill Schools, Research Rep011 No.2. Sydney: National Children's and Youth Law Centre.

Poynting, S., Noble. G., Tabar, P. & Collins, J. (2004). Bill Laden ill the Suburbs: Crill/inC/lising the Arab Other. Sydney: Sydney Institute of Criminology.

Print, M., Saba, L. & Edwards, K. (2004). Youtl! Electoftll Study. Report 1: Enrolment WId Voting. Available at http://www.aec.gov.aulcontentlwhatlpublications/youth electoral study Ol.pdf.

Russell, A. (2004). 'The truth about youth? Media portrayals of young people and politics in Britaii1', Joufllal (~{Public Affah:~, 4(4): 347-355.

Schetzer, L. (2000). A Review of the Law on the Age (~{ Criminal RespollSibility (l Children~ Sydney: National Children's and Youth Law Centre, University of New South Wales.

Vromen. A. (2003). "People Try to Put Us Down .. .': Participatory Citizenship of 'Generation X". Australian Journal (!{PoliriclIl Science, 38(1): 79-99.

Western Australia Office of Youth Affairs (2000). Youth FadS WA: Youllg People lind Legal Issues. Perth: Office of Youth Affairs.

White, R. (2005). Australia, Youth Activism in. In L. Sherrod (Ed.) Youth Activism: All /lItemariOllal Encyclopedia, Volume I: A-J. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.

White, R. & Wyn. J. (1998). 'Youth Agency and Social Contex!'. Joumal of Sociology, 34(3): 314-327. White, R. & Wyn, J. (2004). Youth and Society: Exploring the Social Dynamics (if Youth Experiellcfi..

Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Wierenga, A. (1999). 'Imagined Trajectories: Local Culture and Social Identity'. In R. White (Ed.)

Au.Hmliali Youth Subcultures: 011 the Margins and bl the Mainstrea/ll. Hobart: Australian Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.

Wyn, J. & White. R. (1997). Rethillkillj{ YOl/th. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Wyn, J. & White, R. (2000). 'Negotiating Social Change: The Paradox of Youth', Youth & Society,

32(2): I 65183.

78