Controversial Views on Youth Voting Discussed on Podcast

Ross Douthat of the New York Times recently interviewed Samuel Moyn, a law and history professor at Yale, on his podcast, Interesting Times. A specific segment from this conversation caught fire online. In it, Moyn proposed that minors should have some form of representation in elections because the outcomes will impact their futures. Since they cannot vote themselves, Moyn suggested that another voting class should represent their interests.

But it was what followed that truly raised eyebrows.

When Douthat inquired about parents voting on behalf of their children, Moyn pushed back strongly against the concept.

His argument? Parents may not have the best insight into what is actually in their children’s best interests.

“There’s often a disconnect between parents’ interests and those of their kids, and I think those who know what’s best for the children are usually the children themselves,” Moyn stated. He further elaborated by saying, “Parents often mistakenly equate the family’s interests with those of the child. Our mission, both as parents and as a society, should be to ensure that children are not held captive by their parents’ views,” he added.

In a subsequent episode of “Live Free,” Blaze TV host Josh Howerton not only shared his interpretations of Moyn’s statements but also expressed concern over the widespread acceptance of such beliefs in today’s culture.

Howerton described Moyn’s assertion that parents cannot adequately determine what’s best for their children as indicative of a significantly influential and pervasive ideology. He stressed that Moyn isn’t a mere fringe thinker; rather, he is among the most educated legal minds in the nation.

Howerton criticized Moyn’s idea of allowing young people to vote independently from their parents as a “satanic inversion” of the teachings found in Malachi 4:6. He explained, “Malachi 4:6 states the Spirit of God turns the hearts of children to their fathers and fathers to their children. Conversely, what is harmful turns this dynamic upside down.”

He identified three major societal influences that contribute to this troubling ideology. He elaborated on how each of these influences can negatively shape a child’s perception of their parents.

Critical theory, for instance, encourages children to label their parents as racist oppressors, which implies that children need to oppose their parents for the sake of justice. Queer Theory suggests that children may view their parents’ views on various social issues as bigoted, leading them to rebel to “be themselves.” Lastly, a hypertherapeutic culture frames the family as the source of all problems, pushing children to detach from their parents for personal happiness.

These currents, Howerton argued, are formulated to cultivate a counterproductive loyalty in children, turning them away from their fathers. He believes Moyn’s proposition is merely a “fourth way” of achieving similar aims.