You're viewing a single thread.
Context for non-Brits?
wtfffff. even for my American butt, that sounds crazy. a government forcing its citizens to conduct a year of national service strikes me like some medieval or fascist level stuff.
I mean, you guys made it into a literal lottery.
But besides that, the proposal is even worse than just conscription. His plan is that there'll be about 30,000 placements in the armed forces, which will of course be paid. Everyone else will have to do 25 days of unpaid "volunteering". Of the volunteering is mandatory and your parents will be fined if you don't do it.
Effectively it's slave labour for the poor and pay so you don't need to do it for the rich.
Luckily it's extremely likely he's not going to get to try to bring it in. They're about 20 points behind in the polls and on some they've actually been falling further behind since calling the election.
I mean, you guys made it into a literal lottery.
Exactly! Those people were drafted and sent to fight an unpopular war in a country that most of them didn't even know existed until then. The rich were able to dodge it by paying off the right people and others had to leave as political refugees. I think that a lot of Americans learned to fear mandatory government service due that policy.
Effectively it's slave labour for the poor and pay so you don't need to do it for the rich.
The story of human society continues as normal.
I think we have a different view in Europe on it - Germany had a model of national military service until 2011 (with the option of civil service), the Nordic model includes military service etc. So it isn't completely unimaginable - we just have a different view on the topic.
Oh wow, soooo interesting! For me, it's the government forcibly taking control of a year of your life. I'm not saying that my perspective is correct. It's just that that's how I see it. I voluntarily served 4 years in the American military, so I'm not opposed to government service. I guess maybe my American mistrust of government is what's making me apprehensive of the policy. It's like I fear that the federal government will misuse it while also taking a major formative year of its citizens' lives. Moreover, even if the government tries its best to make ethical decisions, I don't think government is capable of making those decisions. It's too bloated and compromised by the selfish goals of politicians and elites. Thinking it through for this comment, I would be more comfortable with the government providing incentives for 18 year olds to contribute public service by providing extra benefits such as college tuition, home loan guaranty, preferential hiring for government jobs, so it might be the mandatory part that is the main factor driving my concern. Btw,...woahhh, I'm having a moment since I never expected to be so American with my politics because I generally swing quite left, even for those outside of the USA.
What's the perspective you guys have on it? How do you see it? Is it something like, "This is a good policy because citizens should contribute to their country and government is an appropriate avenue to decide how to do so and enforce this?" I would love to hear how you guys generally see it because this seems like an interesting clash of cultures. I look forward to your response 😀
The American system still gets their army. Just a different way to coerce them. It's the same thing
Or college tuitions is free to begin with. You still get paid a wage, fed and housed in the army.
Yes, exactly - it is the idea of "well, you can gain life experience and serve for the state". However, it is (rightfully IMO) criticized as just a cheap way of gaining labor forces. I think that German culture is generally more connected with respecting authorities, rules etc., so this attitude of " you need to return something to the community who raised you up" is still prevalent.
Since 2011 the service was not enforced anymore (but not abolished - in German it's called "ausgesetzt"), but now there is a debate again to reintroduce it in light of the war. I personally am highly skeptical of it, for the exact reasons you outlined. A year ago I have went through the process of refusing to serve in the military in a defense case. We have something here called Kriegsdienstverweigerung: you can refuse to be drafted and serve under arms if it is incompatible with your conscience. I am glad to have went through the process, but I wouldn't have done so if I were younger; in fact, I probably would've been absolutely okay with serving in the military. So instead of training people to shoot, I advocate for providing opportunities for people to learn medicine and science and stuff and leave war to professional soldiers, who aren't 18- or 19 year old enscripted boys. It is also widely known that lots of guys cheated their way out of serving (e.g. drinking a lot the evening prior, so they make a bad impression on the recruiting officer), so the system was weird anyways. So I think the current debate is between "Russia and China are a threat, we need to get ready to fight, let's pump up our military production" and "War is no option, our infrastructure is in a state of disrepair, we need to invest into schools and hospitals instead of arms, and drafting teenagers can't be the solution of the problem".
The cold war is restarting. British troops are among the best in the world, but they're poorly equipped and there aren't enough of them to sustain more than 2 days of fighting against an army the size of Russia's. National service partly solves the manpower issue.
To be honest I actually don't think it sounds all that bad. If it were forced military service I'd think it was terrible. But it sounds like you can just do community service instead of the military training. And it's just one weekend a month for twelve months. Given how much we're disconnected from our communities these days I think making sure kids engage with their communities in this way could actually be really beneficial.
That's just thinking about this one policy in a Vaccuum though. I know nothing about British politics so I have no clue what other awful and heinous shit this party may or may not be into.
25 days of slavery is 25 days too much in my opinion.
Also if we're arguing that it's too bring communities together why is it only 18 year olds? Wouldn't mixing with a wide variety of ages from 18 to 118 be better? Also why is the stick to make people do it a fine (so that the rich will just pay if their kids don't want to do it)?
Wouldn't mixing with a wide variety of ages from 18 to 118 be better?
You will work in the NHS or the firefighters and so on, so you will certainly engage with community members of all ages and from all wakes of life. For a year of mandatory service that everybody is meant to complete, 18 is arguably the best time to do it.
slavery
When you walk on a public road past a hospital do you think to yourself "they stole my money to build this"? You have rights and duties as a citizen. Your service benefits the community as a whole.
Also why is the stick to make people do it a fine (so that the rich will just pay if their kids don't want to do it)?
I fully agree with you on this point
You will work in the NHS or the firefighters and so on, so you will certainly engage with community members of all ages and from all wakes of life. For a year of mandatory service that everybody is meant to complete, 18 is arguably the best time to do it.
But anyone who's not 18 will be denied that "opportunity".
When you walk on a public road past a hospital do you think to yourself "they stole my money to build this"? You have rights and duties as a citizen. Your service benefits the community as a whole.
Exactly, I already give over a portion of my labour time via taxes to help society. Forcing people to do 25 days extra unpaid work is either slavery or a huge one off tax on 18 year olds.
There's also no exceptions. So you've already got a job that requires you to do weekends? Touch shit. So you've got staff shortages. Already work for the fire service or police etc. Touch shit. You've got to go pick litter up for 25 days.
I agree with you. Military conscription is shit, but mandatory community service for young people on the cusp of adulthood could be very beneficial for a society. Particularly if it involves regular interactions with older members of the community (something Western countries lack due to households typically being limited to immediate family). Young people in developed Western nations are more disillusioned, detached and depressed than ever while some older people are really struggling to keep up with the pace at which life and technology is changing. Getting both groups together in their local communities could potentially build some important life skills and confidence for younger people while helping older people to feel included and relevant. I'm not saying a Tory government would be able to implement this effectively, but I can get onboard with the general idea.
Well let's have a look at the Tory track record of implementing things effectively. How about Boris's oven ready deal? Seems he didn't have one. Was he lying? Or did he have one that he thought the EU would accept until they laughed him out of the room? How's the Rwanda plan going? How much has it cost so far? How many flights have left? Hmm.
Username checks out
I mean I don't hate the principal, but I'm a filthy commie hippy socialist type
Sounds like a great way to further undercut public services while turning young people against the Torries. Make this shit retroactively apply to everyone serving in government and I'd have no problem with it. Fuck legislation that by design will never touch them.