Re: Obama's Mandatory National Service Plan is Socialist

Islander wrote:

Alan Lichtenstein wrote:

Islander wrote:

( previous post snipped-follow thread )

Many high schools now require so many hours of community service of
some kind as a requirement for graduation. My grandkids have
benefited from this -- they chose diverse groups to volunteer with.
And all of them have enjoyed their experiences.



I have to agree with the idea of compulsory public service for young people with no exceptions.

There are several reasons, IMV.

1. The all volunteer army has been a mistake. It creates a culture that supports military solutions to international problems and which is increasingly separated from mainstream American culture. That is a problem.

2. We all have a responsibility to our society that goes beyond simply paying taxes or donating money to a favorite cause. There is nothing quite so educational as hands-on participation in attempting to solve difficult problems.

3. There is always a tension and a questioning between generations. That is a good thing, IMV. If we always perpetuated the beliefs and opinions of the past, there would be no opportunity for constructive change. If we were to let young people prevail, however, we would have anarchy. The generational change is always a balance between these two extremes and a period of shared experience for our young people would help to moderate the extremes, IMV.


Apparently we disagree. The basis for our disagreement is found in your reason #2. You believe we have some kind of obligation to our society that goes beyond merely being a good citizen, which somehow has a prior call on our lives and time than we might otherwise choose to give, in the absence of an extreme national emergency. I don't. I feel, absent a national emergency, this is an unwarranted intrusion on individual rights. Requiring a person to donate a year or more of their life to some kind of collective notion of their obligation to society is not in keeping with our national philosophy as implied and/or stated in both of our most cherished national documents, those being the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

I feel this is somewhat corny, as I find myself in the curious position of having to take what on other circumstances, might be considered a right wing view, but I feel that the only obligation we have to our society and country is to be involved and good citizens, absent a call to duty for a national emergency. To require national service on a mandated basis, absent extenuating and extreme circumstances can almost rise to the level of indentured servitude.

As far as your comment about the all volunteer army, it has not, IMHO, been a mistake. The all volunteer army was designed to fight the wars of the 21st Century, in which technology would compensate for boots on the ground. When it was envisioned, a role for the United States as an aggressor nation, which would require a large force of occupation was never envisioned. It was only due to the misguided actions of the Bush Administration that we were forced into a role for which our armed forces did not envision, for very good reason. The all volunteer army has resulted in raising the standard of living as well as benefits for those enrolling, which would not have been possible under the previous draft constituted armed forces.

I had the good occasion to visit military facilities several times while working, and to speak with, at random, 'volunteers.' Almost to a person, they said they enrolled because of the benefits particularly for education that they could have after they completed their service. Again, almost to a person, they said that without those benefits, they would never have had the opportunity to even THINK of attending college.

If that volunteer service is to be used to wage wars of aggression, then it is not the fault of the planners, but rather ours, for going along with leadership which misuses those soldiers, sailors and airmen, such as has been done by George W. Bush, more affectionately know as 'Dumbya.' During this war of aggression, we hear time and time again of love of country and the loyalty by these volunteers, from their own mouths. Such volunteers are a credit to America, as they represent the finest people who have CHOSEN of their own accord, such service. it may be unfortunate that not all of our youth feels this way, but mandating national service isn't going to make them feel any different. Just perhaps more angry, because such is an intrusion on their life.

Regarding your reason #3, I can only say in response that when I was 17, I frequently wondered how my father ever got to live as long as he did, as he seemed to be so 'out of it.' When I got to be 21, I was amazed at how smart he had become in just 4 years. I offer that piece of wisdom in response to any perceived 'generation gap' which might be proposed.


Yes, we disagree.

While I would like to believe that there is a basic goodness in people, I fear that there are far too many who missed that part in the shaping of their lives.

That may indeed be true, islander, but that's a problem for them and their parents, not you. the decision of what basic goodness is accrues only to those people, not to some 'on high' entity no matter how well-intention such may be.

I am particularly critical of those who donate a few
bucks to charity and then pat themselves on the back for their good work. Yes, some have been very generous and many organizations could not do their good work without these donations. My only point is that giving of your *time* yields a vastly better understanding of the issues.

But that's YOUR view. Others may think that their time to them is more valuable. Why is YOUR view better than theirs? You see, fundamental philosophical differences cannot be resolved, as there can never be an affirmative answer to the question I proposed. Simply because YOU can never decide on the behavior of another person, so long as their behavior stops just short of your nose. That's the fallacy the anti-abortion forces make; they attempt to control the behavior of others, when the only one whose behavior they can rightfully control is themselves. YOU, with mandated national service, absent extreme conditions seek to do the same thing. And you do it by setting YOUR personal values above THEIRS. IMHO, that is the fatal flaw in the argument which supports and underlies your position. I still maintain, that no matter how noble or altruistic YOU think such service might be, looking at it from the prospective of the server, it borders on indentured servitude.

As to the all-volunteer army, I recommend that you read Bacevich's The New American Militarism. I would previously have agreed with you, but he changed my mind. My reasoning (and his) has nothing to do with military strategy or how we allow our government to abuse military power. It has to do with the creation of a subculture that is not healthy. Our military should represent a cross section of our culture rather than exist as a separate, self justifying culture. Bacevich is a West Point graduate and veteran of several wars including Vietnam. He speaks with considerable authority.

I have not read it, but from what you suggest, its premise is misguided. True, history has documented that citizen armies were frequently far more effective than mercenary forces, in battle. Because citizen forces were fighting for their common land. The all volunteer armed services doesn't go beyond the national boundaries; it still consists of citizen soldiers. Only the citizen soldiers may be more motivated, since they volunteered to service. And the only benefit would be to social egalitarianism, which if forced, IMHO, offers no benefit. Remember: With the all volunteer armed services no one enrolls who has not VOLUNTEERED, thus making it a CHOICE.

Regarding the abuse of Military power, IMHO, from what I have read, both in pronouncements at the time the draft was removed, was that there would be no need for masses of soldiers as had been the need in past wars. Technology would suffice. And given the nature of the United States to fight essentially defensive wars, that appeared to be accurate. Until Iraq. Recall that Colin Powell counseled Bush Senior to avoid going to Baghdad simple because out military was not designed to be an occupying power. For the reasons I mentioned.

Bush Senior listened; his son should have paid more attention. A problem exhibited by the inexperience and emotional involvement of youth. < G > ( See my last comment below ).

As to the generation gap, I agree that kids often come to realize that their parents were right about a lot of things. But, not everything. There is a reason that kids rebel that may even be rooted in evolution. Without questioning (and even rebellion) we would have no new knowledge. It can be pretty tough on us old folk, but it is necessary. Creating an environment where that can happen without producing anarchy would be a good thing, IMV.

I only offered my views to make the point that maturity plays a great role in mitigating the supposed effects of the generation gap. It is mature populations that bring about small incremental change, which is as it should be.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Obamas Mandatory National Service Plan is Socialist
    ... As far as your comment about the all volunteer army, it has not, IMHO, been a mistake. ... When it was envisioned, a role for the United States as an aggressor nation, which would require a large force of occupation was never envisioned. ... It was only due to the misguided actions of the Bush Administration that we were forced into a role for which our armed forces did not envision, for very good reason. ... I recommend that you read Bacevich's The New American Militarism. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Orphan Drug
    ... rather than whether they are taking a reasonable risk. ... I would like to see a sample consent form (odd, isn't it, that a sample form ... Absent any particular reason to think the waiter ... The trial volunteer whom you postulate is not ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: US soldier in america shoots himself to avoid returning to iraq AGAIN... the IRAQ war is taking
    ... IOW, they might not volunteer, but they sure do give ... that country in NATO. ... patriotism that a lot of nations instill in their citizens. ... nation the volunteer pool of adamant patriots might not be sufficient. ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: Wounded Vets cant pay bills
    ... emerging group of war veterans: ... every nation has a legitimate need for an armed ... I was once a volunteer for an armed force ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: RFD: Change to the moderation of uk.rec.cycling.moderated
    ... it's my belief that the only people you will find to volunteer ... The only reason ... http://www.journeyman.cc/~simon/:: PGP public key on home page ... ;; USER ERROR: replace user and press any key to continue ...
    (uk.net.news.config)