National Service

[Deleted]

I have a friend online who is in the army and we had a random discussion today about how you used to serve for a couple of years when you turned 18.
This was later changed, though he seems to think that it's something that should have stayed. He thinks that a lot of people especially young people could learn a thing or two about life and get some discipline.

While i partially agree with him i don't feel like people should be forced to do a job they aren't really interessted in.
What do you think?

"Sorry if force serving isn't the correct term"
I'm talking about the army in case it wasn't clear somehow

[Kalis]

It's usually called 'National Service'.

It isn't so much a job, as a part of your education - generally the pay, if any, is minimal.

[Gemini Sunrise]

I have a friend online who is in the army and we had a random discussion today about how you used to serve for a couple of years when you turned 18.
This was later changed though he seems to think that it's something that should have stayed. He thinks that a lot of people especially young people could learn a thing or two about life and get some discipline.

While i partially agree with him i don't feel like people should be forced to do a job they aren't really interessted in.
What do you think?

"Sorry if force serving isn't the correct term"
I'm talking about the army in case it wasn't clear somehow

Forced conscription would probably be closer to what you want, and I'm not even sure if it's the right term.

It honestly depends. If the forced conscripters are working at home (responding to disasters, etc), I'd have no problem with it. Obviously, if they are serving overseas in conflicts, I'd raise a few eyebrows at that.

[theredviola]

As long as no one's child was exempt (I'm looking at you political children), 2 years of service wouldn't be an incredibly bad idea. It would delay higher education, but at higher ed's utter uselessness in today's world, it might make for a nice mix up.

[Deleted]

Forced conscription would probably be closer to what you want, and I'm not even sure if it's the right term.

It honestly depends. If the forced conscripters are working at home (responding to disasters, etc), I'd have no problem with it.

you dont need to say forced if you put conscription there..unless there are weird countries that conscript weak soldiers.

[Deleted]

It's usually called 'National Service'.

It isn't so much a job, as a part of your education - generally the pay, if any, is minimal.

Alright thanks, I'll edit my post

[Gemini Sunrise]

you dont need to say forced if you put conscription there..unless there are weird countries that conscript weak soldiers.

I didn't say I was sure about it, did I?

[Deleted]

mixed feelings, i can see the benefits of it for sure, especially over here with all the chavs and wasters hanging about contributing fuck all to society.

on the other hand tho i like having the freedom to choose my own life, its always seemed a little wierd to me that even democratic countries where freedom of will stands above all else has no say when they have national service in place

[Deleted]

mixed feelings, i can see the benefits of it for sure, especially over here with all the chavs and wasters hanging about contributing fuck all to society.

on the other hand tho i like having the freedom to choose my own life, its always seemed a little wierd to me that even democratic countries where freedom of will stands above all else has no say when they have national service in place

I pretty much agree with this, It would have probably done some people good.

[Deleted]

Stupid idea. The driving force behind National Service is that it would "sort out the kids of today". While this may be applicable to a certain section of society, it is using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. The vast majority of people I went to school with and who I now count as friends would have seen absolutely no benefit in the theft of two years of their lives. Just because a minority of people turn to drugs and crime does not mean we need to put them all in the army.

[Eliot123]

Heck no. I have no interests in military whatsoever, and people should not be forced to do something they dislike (especially like wasting as much as 2 years on it).

[Deleted]

where I live forced conscription is still around and its basically a violation of human rights, but if the state says it's ok, it's ok apparently. I think its nothing but modern slavery, as the wage is laughable at best.

[Deathpath]

Only if the country is in dire need and needs the man power but in a time of peace and no desperation then no.

[Deleted]

where I live forced conscription is still around and its basically a violation of human rights, but if the state says it's ok, it's ok apparently. I think its nothing but modern slavery, as the wage is laughable at best.

You said basically all I had to say on the subject. Conscription should be illegal (technically it already is, but whatever).

[anveena]

I only think it should be used if the government cannot get enough volunteers for the military.

[Catta]

I dont really care. We have the draft here but most are voluntary so only a small number is drafted. Finland on the other hand drafts every boy.

[Kalis]

I dont really care. We have the draft here but most are voluntary so only a small number is drafted. Finland on the other hand drafts every boy.

Just the males in Finland, or females as well? I think one of the reasons that it was abolished in France was due to fear of sex discrimination cases.

[Sy]

if you're talking about military service, then absolutely no.

if you're talking about "national" service with different options, like social service, then i'd definitely approve - but for both genders.

as a pacifist, i just wouldn't do military service.
but i do like the idea of having every young adult work for "the nation" and society for a year or so, as long as the work is fair and there are different options to chose from. a socialist society benefits greatly from it, and so do many young adults who aren't quite sure yet which education or job to pursue.
it would only make sense to have this apply to both genders, though. it beeing male only is a useless remain from when it was military only, and from when the military was male exclusive.

here in austria, healthcare and a few other social services would pretty much collapse without about half of all young men working in the fields for nine months, for little (although usually enough) payment.
officially you only get assigned to those, instead of military service for six months, if you won't be able to hold and use a weapon in good conscience, but in practise everyone can chose whichever they prefer.

[Deleted]

I dont really care. We have the draft here but most are voluntary so only a small number is drafted. Finland on the other hand drafts every boy.

The last part reminded me of another thing that's bullshit about drafting: only men have to become slaves for a few months, yay for sexism.

[Jackmoves]

Havind done the military service I can say nothing but good things about it.

I realize a lot of people have their own oppinions on it but let me try and put down some of the good things that the "mandatory" military service gave people who lived in Sweden(mostly guys, but that could be changed if the general public would be behind that idea)? Anyways couple of examples that I can think of offhand are:

- A break from the school's intellectual focus on abstract (but important) values and subjects.
- A moment of time to consider what one want to be and what to concentrate on in the future(maybe even continue on with a career in the military).
- Being close to nature, in both body and soul.
- The ability to fend for oneself in difficult situations, even lifesaving skills, at the very least first aid.
- The ability to do what is needed when it's needed without intellectualizing or fleeing(avoiding) from the problem.
- The ability to take on a lot of responsibility.
- The ability to express oneself clearly and to cut the crap.
- Friendships
- Morals
- Being there when needed, not when it is convenient

Not everyone learned the same things, nor the same way, but virtually everyone, I think, came out of the service as a better, stronger and more humble human being.
So what did Sweden gain on this? Sweden got:

- A stronger community. Rich kids sweat just as much as the poor. Even trust fund kids needs to take a shit. The service united those who worked together and lowered the mental barriers between different groups of people and it therefore reduced segregation. For the individual it also gave you friends from every corner of the country and every socioeconomic class.

- More people who wanted to do jobs such as an officer, mountain guide, survival expert, drivers of rescue dogs, rescue worker, teachers, social workers etc etc. Many who did the service found that they had a calling to serve sociaty, and that money isn't everything.

- People got a better grasp of their own core values.

- Doing the service meant our sociaty gained a lot of people who had been taught and trained to deal with small and large crisis situations, such as fires, storms, power failures, car accidents, etc. It made our society more robust and Rescue Services was not the only ones who could step up when shit went wrong. DIY mother fuckers, there is a reason IKEA was from Sweden lol.

- Anyone who has the knowledge has the ability to see things before it happens (for some). It gave people the ability to act before things had gone wrong...

- Less predjudice against other groups in our sociaty, tolerance and respect for other individuals is born out of shared trials more then anything els.