Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

2.1 Voting Preparedness and Political Socialization in youth

Youth are mostly prepared for active involvement in democratic processes through political socialization. Early political
socialization affects long-term political behavior, according to studies. Civic education in schools is essential for influencing
young people's political views and cultivating a feeling of civic duty, claim Torney-Purta et al. (2017). Young people who receive
organized civic education are more likely to comprehend political procedures and be better equipped to participate in elections
when they are eligible. According to Galston (2019), peers and family play a crucial role in passing along political values and
knowledge, further reinforcing this socialization. Young people are more likely to have political interests that translate when
they grow up in a supportive atmosphere at home and in their social connections.

In recent years, there has been a growing awareness of the role that media, particularly social media, play in political
socialization. Digital platforms are a double-edged sword when it comes to youth political engagement, according to Youniss et
al. (2019). Social media gives people a way to share information and have political conversations, but it may also exacerbate
political polarization and make people make less informed decisions. However, young people who actively participate in online
political content have higher levels of political consciousness and voting desire. For marginalized children who might not have
access to more conventional kinds of political education, including civics classes or family-based conversations, this digital
participation is especially important.

A number of psychological and social factors affect voting preparedness, or the readiness to cast a ballot. According to
research by Blais and Young (2020), although a large number of young people indicate that they would like to vote, they
frequently lack the information and drive to do so. Young people's willingness to vote is mostly determined by factors including
their comprehension of the electoral process, sense of political efficacy, and personal motivation for voting. Rosenstone and
Hansen (2018) also point out a number of obstacles to youth involvement, such as practical problems like polling station
accessibility and voter registration, as well as a general feeling of detachment from politics. They suggest measures that
facilitate voting, such automated voter registration and more internet voting, to get around these obstacles.

2.2 Political apathy and participation obstacles

government, and the belief that taking part in politics is pointless A major topic of political science research has
been political apathy, which is characterized as a lack of interest, zeal, or participation in political processes. According to Norris
(2017), political apathy has increased, especially among younger populations, as a result of generational shifts in political
engagement and a general reduction in trust in political institutions. A more fragmented and superficial grasp of political issues
has resulted in disappointment, despite the Internet's promise to raise political awareness, according to the study. This
phenomenon, where people feel alienated by the complexity of political processes and politicians' failure to address their
issues, is not limited to younger people; it affects people of all ages. According to Norris's research, a more general feeling of
indifferenceis linked to both personal and institutional elements, such as economic disparity, mistrust of the

There are many different types of barriers to political involvement, from institutional and structural
impediments to social and psychological issues. For many people, especially those in marginalized communities,
practical issues including voter registration, time constraints, and inaccessible voting places are major roadblocks
(Rosenstone and Hansen, 2018). These obstacles frequently keep people from taking part in elections, which
exacerbates political disengagement and feeds apathy. The report also points out that a lack of money and support
frequently prevents people from participating in politics, and that people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds
are disproportionately impacted by these barriers. This implies that despite people's motivation to vote or
participate in political processes, institutional obstacles frequently keep them from carrying out their plans.

Additionally, Galston (2019) talks about the psychological aspects of political apathy, especially in young
people. He contends that one of the most important factors influencing people's decision to get involved in politics
is their feeling of political efficacy, or the conviction that their actions may have an impact. According to the study,
young people are more prone to withdraw from the political system when they believe that their votes or activities
have no bearing. Negative political socialization experiences, such as being exposed to cynical political speech or
media that portray politics as corrupt and ineffectual, exacerbate apathy even more. A vicious cycle of indifference
and non-participation is produced by these elements as well as the waning of conventional political mobilization
techniques. Galston highlights the significance of reviving political participation by cultivating a morehopeful
outlook on becoming involved in politics and tackling the larger social problems that contribute to disillusionment

2.3 Unconvetional Political Participation

F orms of political activity that do not come under the category of traditional activities, such voting or
contacting elected officials, are referred to as unconventional political participation. These consist of online
activism, boycotts, civil disobedience, protests, and demonstrations. These types of participation are becoming
more and more important, particularly in democracies where people are losing faith in conventional political
systems (Finkel and Schrock, 2021). The authors contend that unorthodox involvement gives underrepresented
groups a platform to express their grievances and oppose established political structures. Even though these acts
are frequently viewed as unconventional or disruptive, they are crucial tools for social and political change,
especially when official channels are unable to sufficiently address certain challenges.

Recent scholarship has focused heavily on how social media and digital technologies can enable
nontraditional forms of political engagement. According to studies by Boulianne (2019) and Tufekci (2017), social
media sites like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter have expanded the reach of non-institutional political activities
by making it easier for people to organize, disseminate information, and rally around issues than in the past.
Particularly on social media, alternative narratives can be quickly mobilized and disseminated without going via
potentially censored or biased traditional media channels. In controversial political contexts, Tufekci's work on
"Twitter Revolutions" shows how the internet can be a game-changer, enabling collective action in ways that were
previously impossible, especially under authoritarian governments or during movements like Arab spring.

Scholars like McCright and Dunlap (2018) warn against oversimplifying the impacts of unconventional
political participation, as its effects are not always beneficial. They contend that although internet activism
and protests can raise awareness, they don't necessarily result in tangible political change. They stress the
need for deliberate action that can impact policy rather than just increasing awareness, and their study on
climate change activism shows how popular mobilization may encounter institutional resistance. In a similar
vein, Kerner et al. (2020) contend that unusual involvement, especially when it entails drastic measures that
turn off possible supporters, might occasionally worsen political polarization. Unconventional political
engagement can therefore challenge established power structures and give marginalized voices a forum, but
its efficacy is dependent on the larger political and social settings.

2.4 Lowering the voting age

 As more studies look into the possible advantages of reducing the voting age, the argument for
doing so has gained momentum in recent years. According to studies, lowering the voting age may encourage
younger people to get more involved in politics, especially as they grow more conscious of social issues.
Young people frequently hold strong beliefs on issues that directly affect their future, such education reform
and climate change, according to a 2019 study by Karp and Banducci. This study supports the idea that giving
teens the right to vote would enable them to influence the decisions that affect their lives and, in turn,
promote a more politically engaged society. The study also emphasizes how early engagement in democratic
processes could foster enduring voting behaviors, which could result in increased total number of voters.

Adolescents' cognitive and social development is the subject of another body of study, which indicates
that young people may make well-informed election decisions. After reviewing a number of psychological
and educational studies, Finkel and Stoll (2017) came to the conclusion that 16 and 17-year-olds are mature
enough and have the cognitive capacity to participate in the voting process in a responsible manner. These
results cast doubt on the conventional wisdom that younger voters lack the maturity to make wise choices.
Additionally, the study notes that people's political maturity varies greatly, thus arbitrary age-based
restrictions may not necessarily reflect their true willingness to cast a ballot. Additionally, the International
Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA, 2020) found that nations with lower voting Countries
with high age thresholds, like Austria and Brazil, report that younger citizens vote responsibly and with
knowledge.

Lowering the voting age may also assist solve the problem of youth political disengagement, according
to studies. A 2021 European Commission research claims that young people are becoming less involved in
politics and frequently point to a lack of representation as the main cause of their disenchantment. By giving
them a sense of direct participation in the political process, granting voting rights to younger citizens may
lessen this alienation. Lowering the voting age can also boost political involvement among younger citizens
and bolster democratic institutions, according to evidence from countries like Scotland, where the voting age
for local elections has been lowered to 16 (Scottish Government, 2020). Early election participation can
inspire young people and foster a sense of control over political outcomes, according to the research.to
remain involved for the rest of their life.