Mandatory Public Service Vs. Male-only Military Conscription

[Revoltingest]

I'm all for mandatory service.

And, to not talk past each other as many here do, I mean a choice of the service (from the available ones) one likes to do. No mandatory military service.
We had "Zivildienst" for those who could convince a judge that they had a conscience that prevented them from doing military work (I failed). There are a lot of hospitals and other organisations like voluntary fire fighters who wish that we had mandatory service. So, it wouldn't be just "make-work jobs".

Sure they wish there were mandatory service.
They see it as free labor.

It's human nature that something tends to be valued
based upon its cost. I'm reminded of the Vietnam War.
In it, there was very little governmental regard for soldiers'
safety because leaders had a plentiful supply of cheap
conscripts. For every 1 that's put out of service by death
or injury, another will be drafted or sentenced to serve by
a court.
A friend who fought in that war said that US equipment for
grunts like him was hard to get. REMFs up the chain kept
the good stuff for themselves. He salvaged much of his
(eg, backpacks) from those he killed.

Nowadays, it's a volunteer army that's paid a good wage.
If they're mistreated, it would harm recruitment efforts.
The result is that government provides better equipment,
especially of the force multiplying kind so that fewer soldiers
are needed.

BTW, I've family in China, where compulsory services
was once required. As would be expected, the conscripts
typically did jobs that weren't productive, eg, 3 people
would do the work of 1.
Things go less well when the state owns you.

And I don't see it as "state slavery". When the mandatory service is introduced at the same time as UBI most people would see the reciprocity the service is. I guess 99+% people would be willing to sacrifice 2 years of their youth for a lifelong freedom of the threat of poverty or necessity to work a job they don't like. It's at least more freedom many have now.

The proposal is commonly about being forced to do
work for very low pay. "State slavery" seems a pretty
accurate term, although because it's of limited duration,
"slavery lite" is better.

Socialist & communist minded folk believe that serving
government is good for everyone. They make grand
pronouncements that we all become closer, kinder,
more empathic, more patriotic, & better people.
No evidence is offered....it's their dream...a dream
they'd force upon the unwilling.
I prefer that every individual decide what they study,
what field they work in, & which employer they choose.

 

[Heyo]

Why not?

Because it gets compensated and I'd say generously. A life's salary for a few years of service, that's like a politicians pension.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because it gets compensated and I'd say generously. A life's salary for a few years of service, that's like a politicians pension.

A lifetime of UBI's cost isn't covered by a brief youthful
period of forced public service. It's paid for by all who
work & pay taxes...a lot of taxes over their lifetime.
So there's a big disconnect, ie, the UBI is not
compensation for conscription of a couple years.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Because it gets compensated and I'd say generously. A life's salary for a few years of service, that's like a politicians pension.

Paid slavery is still slavery. Temporary slavery is still slavery.

Pretty much only two criteria matters in defining whether someone is a slave:

- what happens if the person refuses their work? Are they threatened with prison, death, whipping, etc.?

- did the person voluntarily accept the job in the first place?

If someone faces punishment for refusing to do a job they didn't freely consent to in the first place, they're a slave.

 

[Revoltingest]

Paid slavery is still slavery. Temporary slavery is still slavery.

Pretty much only two criteria matters in defining whether someone is a slave:

- what happens if the person refuses their work? Are they threatened with prison, death, whipping, etc.?

- did the person voluntarily accept the job in the first place?

If someone faces punishment for refusing to do a job they didn't freely consent to in the first place, they're a slave.

It's not "slavery" if it's called "the social contract of
universal public service". A glorious label hides the
fact that refusing a government imposed job with low
non-negotiable compensation will mean punishment
enforced ultimately by cops wielding guns.
They imagine that we'll all happily comply because
conscription makes us good citizens. So enforcement
isn't a concern to them.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Socialist & communist minded folk believe that serving
government is good for everyone.

I'm a socialist and oppose conscription and believe in being skeptical toward authority figures by default.

Your statement generalizes a bit too much.

 

[Heyo]

A lifetime of UBI's cost isn't covered by a brief youthful
period of forced public service. It's paid for by all who
work & pay taxes...a lot of taxes over their lifetime.
So there's a big disconnect, ie, the UBI is not
compensation for conscription of a couple years.

So, it's more like overcompensation. That's worse somehow?

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm a socialist and oppose conscription and believe in being skeptical toward authority figures by default.

Your statement generalizes a bit too much.

You should've inferred tendency.
If I meant all, I'd have used "all".

 

[Revoltingest]

So, it's more like overcompensation. That's worse somehow?

It's not compensation at all.
The UBI is unrelated to conscription.
BTW, I advocate the UBI here, yet
oppose conscription. It's easier to pay
for if everyone is working real jobs of
their own choice...not working low pay
slave jobs assigned by government.

 

[Heyo]

It's not "slavery" if it's called "the social contract of
universal public service". A glorious label hides the
fact that refusing a government imposed job with low
non-negotiable compensation will mean punishment
enforced ultimately by cops wielding guns.
They imagine that we'll all happily comply because
conscription makes us good citizens. So enforcement
isn't a concern to them.

Emigration is (should be) always an option.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So, it's more like overcompensation. That's worse somehow?

UBI isn't compensation at all. That's the whole point of a universal basic income.

A country implements a UBI program because of the benefits of the UBI program in its own right. It's not about paying someone for services rendered.

 

[Truth in love]

Earlier today, @Revoltingest and I took a sharp unwinning detour in a thread known for winning...I promised that I would later start a thread devoted to discussing the above proposals. So here goes!

The question at hand, at it's root in my estimation, is whether or not people should have mandatory service to their country/government as part of their responsibilities as good citizens. That is, along with such duties/responsibilities as obeying the law, challenging bad laws, being involved in the political process, including voting, asserting your own rights and recognizing and protecting the rights of others, serving on juries, paying taxes, etc., and so on.

I find myself agreeing with the Revolting One that Military Conscription is bad, made worse when it targets only the young males in the population.

However, I don't have a problem with mandatory service for citizens. I do, however, have a problem with military service being the only option for citizen mandatory service. Within that service to the public, people should have some choice about which form service they will enter, depending on their own preferences and desires. That currently conscription is done poorly most everywhere in the world is beyond doubt, and I do not defend 'male-only' for combat and other potentially hazardous roles in military service whether compulsory or volunteer.

Why don't I have a problem with mandatory public service? Because I see government and society as an agreement between the members, a social contract if you will, that obligates certain responsibilities on the members, as well as places certain limits on what government/the nation can ask of its members.

There is far more to society than the military, and the military receives way too much emphasis in my way of thinking. Therefore, public service should include options for individuals to choose between military service, and service toward other societal needs...public health, environmental maintenance and protection, social safety nets, and etc.

After high school, I seriously considered joining the Navy (it's a family thing), but realized I would be a very bad fit. Had there been an option for Park Service or Environmental Service, I probably would have been a much better fit for that, and much more likely to have enrolled.

okay, that's a start...[/

Several thoughts.
1. Is the war offensive or defensive. There is a long standing tradition of force into the army to defend the nation and while not ideal it is very different from making people join a foreign war.
2. Who decides who serves, when, where and for how long? This kind of power can easily be abused. “Your home zip code is in the bad political party you will clean the out houses, your from the good party you can test drive pedicure services.”
3. It has the potential to be a massive power grab.
4. If there is a gun to your head your not a volunteer and at lest in the US that would be unlawful.
5.The muscle of making good choices does not grow when forced. I think we could and should make helping others a more common social norm.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Emigration is (should be) always an option.

Well, no.

Everyone has a right to a nationality - their nationality - including the right to enter and remain in the country of their nationality.

OTOH, other countries don't have an obligation to accept another country's national as an immigrant.

Edit: and history has shown that countries that use conscription also generally don't recognize a right to emigrate to avoid being conscripted.

 

[Revoltingest]

Emigration is (should be) always an option.

The idea that emigration is the option to preserve
one's civil rights strikes me as fascist. Reminds
me of the Vietnam War era war monger chant....

 

[Heyo]

It's not compensation at all.
The UBI is unrelated to conscription.
BTW, I advocate the UBI here, yet
oppose conscription. It's easier to pay
for if everyone is working real jobs of
their own choice...not working low pay
slave jobs assigned by government.

I think working for the community by doing real work for the community, not just paying for it, has some quality of its own. It gives a more direct connection of work and community, it (can) build character, it can fill some positions that are hard to get people to do. It's like your parents making you do some chores.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think working for the community by doing real work for the community, not just paying for it, has some quality of its own. It gives a more direct connection of work and community, it (can) build character, it can fill some positions that are hard to get people to do. It's like your parents making you do some chores.

Arbeit macht frei, eh.

It's all personal preference.
Some want a hive society with rolls assigned
by government for the greater good.
I prefer individual liberty.
There is no reconciling these opposite values.

 

[Heyo]

Edit: and history has shown that countries that use conscription also generally don't recognize a right to emigrate to avoid being conscripted.

Rly? I know only of the former soviet states who didn't want people to emigrate.

I know you could leave Germany or the US to avoid conscription.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think working for the community by doing real work for the community, not just paying for it, has some quality of its own. It gives a more direct connection of work and community, it (can) build character, it can fill some positions that are hard to get people to do. It's like your parents making you do some chores.

An even better idea for building community, IMO: inspire people to volunteer. Tell them why their contribution is valuable.

People who help their community based on a real sense of connection to their community make better citizens than people who help their community (or, at least, do work that some government committee has decided will help their community) merely to avoid prison.

 

[Heyo]

Arbeit macht frei, eh.

It's all personal preference.
Some want a hive society with rolls assigned
by government for the greater good.
I prefer individual liberty.
There is no reconciling these opposite values.

I also prefer as much individual liberty as possible. But I also recognize a duty to the community that affords a lot of those liberties to me.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Rly? I know only of the former soviet states who didn't want people to emigrate.

I know you could leave Germany or the US to avoid conscription.

Plenty of American draft dodgers who fled to Canada still faced prosecution until Carter pardoned them en masse in 1977.