Mandatory Public Service Vs. Male-only Military Conscription

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I also prefer as much individual liberty as possible.

Your posts in this thread suggest this isn't true.

 

[Revoltingest]

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.

I see duty as chosen by the individual,
not assigned by government.

 

[Alien826]

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'm not sure why anyone would want to enforce the type of rolls that people eat.

OK, seriously, there are huge areas of compromise between those two extremes.

On the main subject, in the UK we had "National Service" for men between the ages of 18 and 20 for many years following WW2. I was just young enough to escape, to my eternal gratitude. It was eventually stopped, partly I believe because they were running out of things for the conscripts to do. I would have made a terrible soldier. I am not physically brave, and don't do well with activities that demand physical fitness. I would have been mercilessly bullied. I also seem to lack the gene that "rallies round the flag". You can see what a benefit the country gained by NOT recruiting me. I am though quite talented in other areas that contribute to the community.

How about this, though? Everyone works at whatever they enjoy most (and are best at, possibly the same thing). Everyone pays taxes commensurate with their income. We then pay soldiers, policemen, firefighters and so on enough to attract the best, and select and train carefully to eliminate those that want to do the job for ulterior motives.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm not sure why anyone would want to enforce the type of rolls that people eat.

The kind of people who want government to tell
you what to do, where to do it, whom to marry, etc
will also tell you what to eat.
And the consequences for disobeying are severe.

OK, seriously, there are huge areas of compromise between those two extremes.

On the main subject, in the UK we had "National Service" for men between the ages of 18 and 20 for many years following WW2. I was just young enough to escape, to my eternal gratitude. It was eventually stopped, partly I believe because they were running out of things for the conscripts to do. I would have made a terrible soldier. I am not physically brave, and don't do well with activities that demand physical fitness. I would have been mercilessly bullied. I also seem to lack the gene that "rallies round the flag". You can see what a benefit the country gained by NOT recruiting me. I am though quite talented in other areas that contribute to the community.

You would be a terrible soldier?
If a commander ordered me to charge a machine
gun nest, I'd shoot the commander. **** him!

How about this, though? Everyone works at whatever they enjoy most (and are best at, possibly the same thing). Everyone pays taxes commensurate with their income. We then pay soldiers, policemen, firefighters and so on enough to attract the best, and select and train carefully to eliminate those that want to do the job for ulterior motives.

I like it!

Welcome aboard.
Nice avatar, BTW.

 

[Alien826]

Welcome aboard.
Nice avatar, BTW.

Thanks!

It's actually a picture of me.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's actually a picture of me.

You'll be breaking some hearts here.