The 18-24 years are interested in the facts of society, but their massive abstention during the elections reflecting their misunderstanding and their rejection of the functioning of political decision-making, explains, in an interview to the “World”, the sociologist Olivier Galland.
Comment collected by
Director of research emeritus at the CNRS, the sociologist Olivier Galland has devoted many work to youth and his commitment – or to his disengagement – political. A few days in the second round of the presidential election, while the calls to “breathe” the national gathering multiply in the teacher and academic world, the sociologist looks at the reasons for abstention among 18-24 years. And on what the phenomenon says about the report of the young generation to democratic life.
The title of your last book, “20 years old, the beautiful age?” (Nathan, 160 pages, 14.90 euros), finds a particular echo during this between-two-tricks that does not see the youth mobilize en masse. The abstention rate, on April 10, among 18-24 years old exceeded 40%. Is it a surprise?
It’s not, no. Several surveys have focused on measuring this phenomenon rising in recent years. INSEE, which periodically focuses on participation in elections, has shown that systematic abstention – that concerning the two rounds of presidential and legislative polls – increased among young people for twenty years. In 2017, the 18-24 year olds were already 20% in this category; It’s more than in older age classes.
More recently, I piloted an investigation into the evolution of political commitment over three generations – 18-24 years old, their parents, “boomers” [the generation of post-war natives] . The results are in the same direction: more than one-third (34%) of a panel of 8,000 young people arrange behind the affirmation that “voting is not useless because the leaders do not take into account the will of the people “.
The conditions of the campaign – the war in Ukraine, the CVIV-19 – can they explain this disengagement?
I do not believe. No doubt the presidential campaign has been partly retracted by the context. It is also known that COVID-19 has had a significant psychological impact on some of the youth, including students. But the younger generation also faced her, for this election, an extremely varied palette of candidates to make their choice. This choice, however, a part does not exercise it.
How do you explain it?
It is, for me, a sign of a spectacular remoteness of young people – a significant number of them – from the political system. This does not mean that they are not interested in society issues. On the contrary: the environment, racism, violence against women, inequalities count in their eyes at least as much as for previous generations. But their concerns do not translate – or very little – politically.
You have 59.31% of this article to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.