The youths of today, myself included, are largely disenchanted with the current political system. Politics by its very nature is rife with elitism and nepotism. However it is the shroud created by an often confusing and jargon-laced rhetoric that drives young voters away.

Politics and politicians are synonymous with eye rolls and cruel words. This is usually accompanied with the prefix ‘They’re nothing but a shower of-’.

A quick glance abroad shows that disassociation is far from being an exclusively Irish problem.

Across the Irish Sea, Britain’s political system, upon which our own is largely based, has just pledged countless millions to bomb a country half way around the world for an indefinite period.

The Prime Minister, Mayor of London and Chancellor of the Exchequer are all alumni of infamous Bullingdon Club which highlights the elitism typical of western politics. An antiquated way of behaving sees British politicians bow and refer to one another in bizarre third person terms before bellowing wildly over each other.

Meanwhile across the Atlantic Sea, the potential for ‘Bush v. Clinton II’ remains a possibility as if it were some kind of heavyweight rematch televised for pay-per-view. It serves as the perfect advertisement for the prevalence of nepotism in Western politics.

The only danger of the rematch being called off lies with the very real threat that Donald Trump will be the Republican candidate.

Maybe we aren’t so bad after all.

However, it is this view of the political sphere that has created a chasm between those who vote and those in power. The desire to vote is often lost in that chasm.

I can remember having conversations with exasperated relatives a few years ago. “Why wouldn’t you vote? Do you realise how hard some countries have to fight to get a vote?”

The significance of the right to vote wasn’t lost on me, but I had always felt that my vote was wasted by virtue of my own ignorance.

The confusing rhetoric that often shrouds politics saw me largely disillusioned during my under-grad years. I didn’t vote because frankly, I couldn’t. As a student, very few policies jumped out at me as something to vote for, even those amending fees.

I say policies because that is how the new generation is voting. Family based bias and blind loyalty to certain parties is fading as the digital generation finds itself with a wealth of information at its fingertips.

Scandal, corruption and investigatory committees play out on the 24/7 feed that is social media. The digital generation is watching and we don’t need our parents to tell us how to vote.

Of course, I could have informed myself and used my vote. However, such is the lifestyle of the carefree undergrad that doing so would have impinged hugely on my intake of alcohol and daytime television.

That isn’t to say that students and my generation are against standing up and being counted.

On May 22^nd this year, there was a turnout of 60.52% for the Same-sex Marriage Referendum. Young voters turned up in their thousands and the so-called "generation emigration" flocked back home to add their voice to what became an overwhelming roar of 'YES'.

Their presence brought the turnout of voters into the top five of all referendums since the Constitution was enacted in 1937.

What was the difference? Why were people in their 20s registering to vote having been eligible for years?

An obvious answer would be to say that the Marriage Referendum was a historic moment in Irish history that would fundamentally affect the lives of countless Irish citizens. Many claimed that the onus was on the ‘forward-thinking youths’ to respond in the absence of an indifferent older vote.

However, a more likely answer is that mass disinterest dissuaded the same people in previous referendums and elections - a disinterest borne out of disenchantment.

The rhetoric was clear, the consequences of differentiation obvious. Political jargon was largely dropped and while most matters are far more complex and cannot be diluted to a YES/NO every time, the simplicity of the act was paramount.

The ability to comprehend and act accordingly was almost universal. It is that universal comprehension that should be present when anything is discussed within a government built upon democracy.

Keeping the demographic of 18-22 year olds largely uninterested could be construed as a way of maintaining status-quo, however I think it’s quite possibly less sinister than that.

Rather, this antiquated political language has been nurtured by those who are reluctant to move with the times. There is a fine line between honouring tradition and losing touch with the present.

Language evolves naturally – even to the point where The Oxford Dictionary’s Word of the Year for 2015 isn’t even a word, but an emoji. I’m not saying that politics needs to start ‘hash tagging’ policies or dumbing down the language. What I am saying is that Irish politics needs to reflect democracy and speak to the people as we speak to each other.