|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
|
|
On July 05 2020 05:21 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:11 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:05 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 04:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. For some people, 18 months lost at age 18 is a complete disaster. I know it certainly would have been for me. If you do anything that is very competitive and where your age really matters, you absolutely can't afford to lose 18 months. @Mohdoo that makes an awful lot if sense, even though it's pretty sad. Anti-intellectualism at its most crass... I like Nouar solution of a 3 months service. You don't completely screw people who are on a race against age and it doesn't cost the nation an absolute fortune. The problem with 3 months of service is that it is pointless. The whole point of a public service is to provide some service to society. But in any job, you need some training and some effort by people who know what they are doing before you start becoming useful. I think that quite often, you actually provide negative worktime for a month or two, simply because it takes time from experienced workers to teach you. If you are only there for three months, i think the place you are at might work more efficiently if you were never there in the first place. Furthermore, this leads to a situation where you have this three-months phase where everyone is overrun by 18 year olds doing their three months service after school, followed by 9 months of none of them being around. I cannot see how that is effective either. I guess you can have them do inventory, clean up some trash, or something like that. But that is hardly an efficient service to society. Yeah I understand. But I know that when they abolished the service in France, the military complained that they absolutely didn't need those kids, that one year was not enough to have them being useful whatsoever, and that it was not the army's job to educate kids. So the problem is kind of the same, no? On a totally useless side note, my dad did his service in the navy and was affected as junior officer. He got to loath marine officers (they are pretty hardcore in France) and the hierarchy on ships so much that he asked to get demoted simple crewman. The fellow officers thought he was raving mad and sent him to the navy psychologists, who concluded he was not dangerous. So he became crewman and learnt to loath crewmen too. He basically hates everyone since. So don't have pointless service at all. If you decide that every youth needs some kind of education which they don't get in school, set up some education for them. Having a service with the perceived goal of helping society, but which is actually a net negative to society sounds stupid and dishonest. I personally don't think that that is what they need. With regards to Nouar, yes, i understand that not everyone in the military is a frontline person doing in-person killing. The main purpose of the military, however, is that killing (or at least threatening with the ability to do the killing). So you have people doing the killing, and people supporting the people doing the killing to make the killing work more efficiently. And that is fine. We as a society have decided that we need such an organization, and that is probably true. I just don't think that that organisation should also have a second function in education. Educate the people you need to do the job as efficiently as possible. But i find it really strange to think that the military should also educate everyone who finishes school. And according to Biff, the military sees this the same way i do. If the problem is school dropouts having problems integrating into society, then i can think of a dozen better ways of handling that rather than forcing everyone to go through the military after school and waste a year of their lives.
Oh I agree with you (actually that was my point of departure - if you are going to invest a shitload of money in education, since that's what it is, why have the army do it - it's not its job at all) and I am actually rather anti-militaristic myself, but I can also hear the arguments of our pro-service friends here.
|
On July 05 2020 05:21 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:11 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:05 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 04:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. For some people, 18 months lost at age 18 is a complete disaster. I know it certainly would have been for me. If you do anything that is very competitive and where your age really matters, you absolutely can't afford to lose 18 months. @Mohdoo that makes an awful lot if sense, even though it's pretty sad. Anti-intellectualism at its most crass... I like Nouar solution of a 3 months service. You don't completely screw people who are on a race against age and it doesn't cost the nation an absolute fortune. The problem with 3 months of service is that it is pointless. The whole point of a public service is to provide some service to society. But in any job, you need some training and some effort by people who know what they are doing before you start becoming useful. I think that quite often, you actually provide negative worktime for a month or two, simply because it takes time from experienced workers to teach you. If you are only there for three months, i think the place you are at might work more efficiently if you were never there in the first place. Furthermore, this leads to a situation where you have this three-months phase where everyone is overrun by 18 year olds doing their three months service after school, followed by 9 months of none of them being around. I cannot see how that is effective either. I guess you can have them do inventory, clean up some trash, or something like that. But that is hardly an efficient service to society. Yeah I understand. But I know that when they abolished the service in France, the military complained that they absolutely didn't need those kids, that one year was not enough to have them being useful whatsoever, and that it was not the army's job to educate kids. So the problem is kind of the same, no? On a totally useless side note, my dad did his service in the navy and was affected as junior officer. He got to loath marine officers (they are pretty hardcore in France) and the hierarchy on ships so much that he asked to get demoted simple crewman. The fellow officers thought he was raving mad and sent him to the navy psychologists, who concluded he was not dangerous. So he became crewman and learnt to loath crewmen too. He basically hates everyone since. So don't have pointless service at all. If you decide that every youth needs some kind of education which they don't get in school, set up some education for them. Having a service with the perceived goal of helping society, but which is actually a net negative to society sounds stupid and dishonest. I personally don't think that that is what they need. With regards to Nouar, yes, i understand that not everyone in the military is a frontline person doing in-person killing. The main purpose of the military, however, is that killing (or at least threatening with the ability to do the killing). So you have people doing the killing, and people supporting the people doing the killing to make the killing work more efficiently. And that is fine. We as a society have decided that we need such an organization, and that is probably true. I just don't think that that organisation should also have a second function in education. Educate the people you need to do the job as efficiently as possible. But i find it really strange to think that the military should also educate everyone who finishes school. And according to Biff, the military sees this the same way i do. If the problem is school dropouts having problems integrating into society, then i can think of a dozen better ways of handling that rather than forcing everyone to go through the military after school and waste a year of their lives.
Please have a look at the link I gave about the SMA. It doesn't have to be only on small islands overseas, could perfectly be suited to the main country as well.
A short time would be if it's large scale and just to give a sense of what it's like (again, the focus is NOT on the military job itself, but just a common set of values and social boundaries), but if you restrict to drop-outs who don't care about an off-year, it could be the "full" 10 months (followed by 2 months of vacation for the staff) they use at SMA. It is enough to learn a craft (woodworks, hospitality, these kinds) and be helpful to these guys, and to society as a whole.
I wouldn't call an > 80% rate of immediately getting a job after that year a wasted year. Especially if you're already out of the system.
I do agree that a compulsory long period like it was in France (11months) or is in Korea (2years) is too much for a country at "peace" and pointless.
A generation getting values, or a smaller subset getting values+training when they need it the most, looks interesting to me, though I agree it should not be the job of the army. However, not having a choice sometimes does a lot of good to people who grew up without any referential. My mother was working as a teacher in a ZEP (basically poor suburbs), and most of those childs (10-14yo) could not even go home before 11pm to just sleep because there were too many people at home and/or the parents couldn't care less about educating them. It's a recipe for disaster, and an army training does instill values at a scary rate.
|
On July 05 2020 05:32 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:21 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 05:11 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:05 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 04:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. For some people, 18 months lost at age 18 is a complete disaster. I know it certainly would have been for me. If you do anything that is very competitive and where your age really matters, you absolutely can't afford to lose 18 months. @Mohdoo that makes an awful lot if sense, even though it's pretty sad. Anti-intellectualism at its most crass... I like Nouar solution of a 3 months service. You don't completely screw people who are on a race against age and it doesn't cost the nation an absolute fortune. The problem with 3 months of service is that it is pointless. The whole point of a public service is to provide some service to society. But in any job, you need some training and some effort by people who know what they are doing before you start becoming useful. I think that quite often, you actually provide negative worktime for a month or two, simply because it takes time from experienced workers to teach you. If you are only there for three months, i think the place you are at might work more efficiently if you were never there in the first place. Furthermore, this leads to a situation where you have this three-months phase where everyone is overrun by 18 year olds doing their three months service after school, followed by 9 months of none of them being around. I cannot see how that is effective either. I guess you can have them do inventory, clean up some trash, or something like that. But that is hardly an efficient service to society. Yeah I understand. But I know that when they abolished the service in France, the military complained that they absolutely didn't need those kids, that one year was not enough to have them being useful whatsoever, and that it was not the army's job to educate kids. So the problem is kind of the same, no? On a totally useless side note, my dad did his service in the navy and was affected as junior officer. He got to loath marine officers (they are pretty hardcore in France) and the hierarchy on ships so much that he asked to get demoted simple crewman. The fellow officers thought he was raving mad and sent him to the navy psychologists, who concluded he was not dangerous. So he became crewman and learnt to loath crewmen too. He basically hates everyone since. So don't have pointless service at all. If you decide that every youth needs some kind of education which they don't get in school, set up some education for them. Having a service with the perceived goal of helping society, but which is actually a net negative to society sounds stupid and dishonest. I personally don't think that that is what they need. With regards to Nouar, yes, i understand that not everyone in the military is a frontline person doing in-person killing. The main purpose of the military, however, is that killing (or at least threatening with the ability to do the killing). So you have people doing the killing, and people supporting the people doing the killing to make the killing work more efficiently. And that is fine. We as a society have decided that we need such an organization, and that is probably true. I just don't think that that organisation should also have a second function in education. Educate the people you need to do the job as efficiently as possible. But i find it really strange to think that the military should also educate everyone who finishes school. And according to Biff, the military sees this the same way i do. If the problem is school dropouts having problems integrating into society, then i can think of a dozen better ways of handling that rather than forcing everyone to go through the military after school and waste a year of their lives. Please have a look at the link I gave about the SMA. It doesn't have to be only on small islands overseas, could perfectly be suited to the main country as well. A short time would be if it's large scale and just to give a sense of what it's like (again, the focus is NOT on the military job itself, but just a common set of values and social boundaries), but if you restrict to drop-outs who don't care about an off-year, it could be the "full" 10 months (followed by 2 months of vacation for the staff) they use at SMA. It is enough to learn a craft (woodworks, hospitality, these kinds) and be helpful to these guys, and to society as a whole. I wouldn't call an > 80% rate of immediately getting a job after that year a wasted year. Especially if you're already out of the system.
Isn't it a problem that suddenly you have to define for whom it is compulsory and for whom it is not? Seems that it wouldn't be very popular and probably unconstitutional in most countries.
|
On July 05 2020 05:32 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:21 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 05:11 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:05 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 04:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. For some people, 18 months lost at age 18 is a complete disaster. I know it certainly would have been for me. If you do anything that is very competitive and where your age really matters, you absolutely can't afford to lose 18 months. @Mohdoo that makes an awful lot if sense, even though it's pretty sad. Anti-intellectualism at its most crass... I like Nouar solution of a 3 months service. You don't completely screw people who are on a race against age and it doesn't cost the nation an absolute fortune. The problem with 3 months of service is that it is pointless. The whole point of a public service is to provide some service to society. But in any job, you need some training and some effort by people who know what they are doing before you start becoming useful. I think that quite often, you actually provide negative worktime for a month or two, simply because it takes time from experienced workers to teach you. If you are only there for three months, i think the place you are at might work more efficiently if you were never there in the first place. Furthermore, this leads to a situation where you have this three-months phase where everyone is overrun by 18 year olds doing their three months service after school, followed by 9 months of none of them being around. I cannot see how that is effective either. I guess you can have them do inventory, clean up some trash, or something like that. But that is hardly an efficient service to society. Yeah I understand. But I know that when they abolished the service in France, the military complained that they absolutely didn't need those kids, that one year was not enough to have them being useful whatsoever, and that it was not the army's job to educate kids. So the problem is kind of the same, no? On a totally useless side note, my dad did his service in the navy and was affected as junior officer. He got to loath marine officers (they are pretty hardcore in France) and the hierarchy on ships so much that he asked to get demoted simple crewman. The fellow officers thought he was raving mad and sent him to the navy psychologists, who concluded he was not dangerous. So he became crewman and learnt to loath crewmen too. He basically hates everyone since. So don't have pointless service at all. If you decide that every youth needs some kind of education which they don't get in school, set up some education for them. Having a service with the perceived goal of helping society, but which is actually a net negative to society sounds stupid and dishonest. I personally don't think that that is what they need. With regards to Nouar, yes, i understand that not everyone in the military is a frontline person doing in-person killing. The main purpose of the military, however, is that killing (or at least threatening with the ability to do the killing). So you have people doing the killing, and people supporting the people doing the killing to make the killing work more efficiently. And that is fine. We as a society have decided that we need such an organization, and that is probably true. I just don't think that that organisation should also have a second function in education. Educate the people you need to do the job as efficiently as possible. But i find it really strange to think that the military should also educate everyone who finishes school. And according to Biff, the military sees this the same way i do. If the problem is school dropouts having problems integrating into society, then i can think of a dozen better ways of handling that rather than forcing everyone to go through the military after school and waste a year of their lives. Please have a look at the link I gave about the SMA. It doesn't have to be only on small islands overseas, could perfectly be suited to the main country as well. A short time would be if it's large scale and just to give a sense of what it's like (again, the focus is NOT on the military job itself, but just a common set of values and social boundaries), but if you restrict to drop-outs who don't care about an off-year, it could be the "full" 10 months (followed by 2 months of vacation for the staff) they use at SMA. It is enough to learn a craft (woodworks, hospitality, these kinds) and be helpful to these guys, and to society as a whole. I wouldn't call an > 80% rate of immediately getting a job after that year a wasted year. Especially if you're already out of the system. I do agree that a compulsory long period like it was in France (11months) or is in Korea (2years) is too much for a country at "peace" and pointless. A generation getting values, or a smaller subset getting values+training when they need it the most, looks interesting to me, though I agree it should not be the job of the army. However, not having a choice sometimes does a lot of good to people who grew up without any referential. My mother was working as a teacher in a ZEP (basically poor suburbs), and most of those childs (10-14yo) could not even go home before 11pm to just sleep because there were too many people at home and/or the parents couldn't care less about educating them. It's a recipe for disaster, and an army training does instill values at a scary rate.
I read your link, and it seems like a reasonable program. I don't quite understand why it needs to be part of the military.
As a side note, i found this quote fun: "provides help for the young ultramarines who face difficulties in building their future" FOR THE EMPRAH!
|
On July 05 2020 05:35 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:32 Nouar wrote:On July 05 2020 05:21 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 05:11 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:05 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 04:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. For some people, 18 months lost at age 18 is a complete disaster. I know it certainly would have been for me. If you do anything that is very competitive and where your age really matters, you absolutely can't afford to lose 18 months. @Mohdoo that makes an awful lot if sense, even though it's pretty sad. Anti-intellectualism at its most crass... I like Nouar solution of a 3 months service. You don't completely screw people who are on a race against age and it doesn't cost the nation an absolute fortune. The problem with 3 months of service is that it is pointless. The whole point of a public service is to provide some service to society. But in any job, you need some training and some effort by people who know what they are doing before you start becoming useful. I think that quite often, you actually provide negative worktime for a month or two, simply because it takes time from experienced workers to teach you. If you are only there for three months, i think the place you are at might work more efficiently if you were never there in the first place. Furthermore, this leads to a situation where you have this three-months phase where everyone is overrun by 18 year olds doing their three months service after school, followed by 9 months of none of them being around. I cannot see how that is effective either. I guess you can have them do inventory, clean up some trash, or something like that. But that is hardly an efficient service to society. Yeah I understand. But I know that when they abolished the service in France, the military complained that they absolutely didn't need those kids, that one year was not enough to have them being useful whatsoever, and that it was not the army's job to educate kids. So the problem is kind of the same, no? On a totally useless side note, my dad did his service in the navy and was affected as junior officer. He got to loath marine officers (they are pretty hardcore in France) and the hierarchy on ships so much that he asked to get demoted simple crewman. The fellow officers thought he was raving mad and sent him to the navy psychologists, who concluded he was not dangerous. So he became crewman and learnt to loath crewmen too. He basically hates everyone since. So don't have pointless service at all. If you decide that every youth needs some kind of education which they don't get in school, set up some education for them. Having a service with the perceived goal of helping society, but which is actually a net negative to society sounds stupid and dishonest. I personally don't think that that is what they need. With regards to Nouar, yes, i understand that not everyone in the military is a frontline person doing in-person killing. The main purpose of the military, however, is that killing (or at least threatening with the ability to do the killing). So you have people doing the killing, and people supporting the people doing the killing to make the killing work more efficiently. And that is fine. We as a society have decided that we need such an organization, and that is probably true. I just don't think that that organisation should also have a second function in education. Educate the people you need to do the job as efficiently as possible. But i find it really strange to think that the military should also educate everyone who finishes school. And according to Biff, the military sees this the same way i do. If the problem is school dropouts having problems integrating into society, then i can think of a dozen better ways of handling that rather than forcing everyone to go through the military after school and waste a year of their lives. Please have a look at the link I gave about the SMA. It doesn't have to be only on small islands overseas, could perfectly be suited to the main country as well. A short time would be if it's large scale and just to give a sense of what it's like (again, the focus is NOT on the military job itself, but just a common set of values and social boundaries), but if you restrict to drop-outs who don't care about an off-year, it could be the "full" 10 months (followed by 2 months of vacation for the staff) they use at SMA. It is enough to learn a craft (woodworks, hospitality, these kinds) and be helpful to these guys, and to society as a whole. I wouldn't call an > 80% rate of immediately getting a job after that year a wasted year. Especially if you're already out of the system. Isn't it a problem that suddenly you have to define for whom it is compulsory and for whom it is not? Seems that it wouldn't be very popular and probably unconstitutional in most countries.
There is already compulsory school up until a certain level, and getting all those who dropped, and/or don't have a (verified) plan (apprenticeship, job, sabbatical, travel or further studies) doesn't look very controversial to me.
SMA currently is voluntary only, it's fine as it is, but you wouldn't get all the dealers and gang members and these kind of people (that I believe the army and its strict rules are better suited at formatting than a regular environment).
Yeah, nothing is easy. I don't know about the constitutionality or drafting based on vagrancy status or something else.
On July 05 2020 05:40 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:32 Nouar wrote:On July 05 2020 05:21 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 05:11 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:05 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 04:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. For some people, 18 months lost at age 18 is a complete disaster. I know it certainly would have been for me. If you do anything that is very competitive and where your age really matters, you absolutely can't afford to lose 18 months. @Mohdoo that makes an awful lot if sense, even though it's pretty sad. Anti-intellectualism at its most crass... I like Nouar solution of a 3 months service. You don't completely screw people who are on a race against age and it doesn't cost the nation an absolute fortune. The problem with 3 months of service is that it is pointless. The whole point of a public service is to provide some service to society. But in any job, you need some training and some effort by people who know what they are doing before you start becoming useful. I think that quite often, you actually provide negative worktime for a month or two, simply because it takes time from experienced workers to teach you. If you are only there for three months, i think the place you are at might work more efficiently if you were never there in the first place. Furthermore, this leads to a situation where you have this three-months phase where everyone is overrun by 18 year olds doing their three months service after school, followed by 9 months of none of them being around. I cannot see how that is effective either. I guess you can have them do inventory, clean up some trash, or something like that. But that is hardly an efficient service to society. Yeah I understand. But I know that when they abolished the service in France, the military complained that they absolutely didn't need those kids, that one year was not enough to have them being useful whatsoever, and that it was not the army's job to educate kids. So the problem is kind of the same, no? On a totally useless side note, my dad did his service in the navy and was affected as junior officer. He got to loath marine officers (they are pretty hardcore in France) and the hierarchy on ships so much that he asked to get demoted simple crewman. The fellow officers thought he was raving mad and sent him to the navy psychologists, who concluded he was not dangerous. So he became crewman and learnt to loath crewmen too. He basically hates everyone since. So don't have pointless service at all. If you decide that every youth needs some kind of education which they don't get in school, set up some education for them. Having a service with the perceived goal of helping society, but which is actually a net negative to society sounds stupid and dishonest. I personally don't think that that is what they need. With regards to Nouar, yes, i understand that not everyone in the military is a frontline person doing in-person killing. The main purpose of the military, however, is that killing (or at least threatening with the ability to do the killing). So you have people doing the killing, and people supporting the people doing the killing to make the killing work more efficiently. And that is fine. We as a society have decided that we need such an organization, and that is probably true. I just don't think that that organisation should also have a second function in education. Educate the people you need to do the job as efficiently as possible. But i find it really strange to think that the military should also educate everyone who finishes school. And according to Biff, the military sees this the same way i do. If the problem is school dropouts having problems integrating into society, then i can think of a dozen better ways of handling that rather than forcing everyone to go through the military after school and waste a year of their lives. Please have a look at the link I gave about the SMA. It doesn't have to be only on small islands overseas, could perfectly be suited to the main country as well. A short time would be if it's large scale and just to give a sense of what it's like (again, the focus is NOT on the military job itself, but just a common set of values and social boundaries), but if you restrict to drop-outs who don't care about an off-year, it could be the "full" 10 months (followed by 2 months of vacation for the staff) they use at SMA. It is enough to learn a craft (woodworks, hospitality, these kinds) and be helpful to these guys, and to society as a whole. I wouldn't call an > 80% rate of immediately getting a job after that year a wasted year. Especially if you're already out of the system. I do agree that a compulsory long period like it was in France (11months) or is in Korea (2years) is too much for a country at "peace" and pointless. A generation getting values, or a smaller subset getting values+training when they need it the most, looks interesting to me, though I agree it should not be the job of the army. However, not having a choice sometimes does a lot of good to people who grew up without any referential. My mother was working as a teacher in a ZEP (basically poor suburbs), and most of those childs (10-14yo) could not even go home before 11pm to just sleep because there were too many people at home and/or the parents couldn't care less about educating them. It's a recipe for disaster, and an army training does instill values at a scary rate. I read your link, and it seems like a reasonable program. I don't quite understand why it needs to be part of the military. As a side note, i found this quote fun: "provides help for the young ultramarines who face difficulties in building their future" FOR THE EMPRAH!
The military due to the strict ruleset and learning to obey orders/respect a schedule as I said earlier. They have flag duty and all that stuff in the mornings. It's less "kind" than a normal school, but seeing as it is full every year including after increasing the amount of spots/year, I'd say it's appealing to them.
|
On July 05 2020 05:18 LegalLord wrote:
A better idea, perhaps, is to give everyone an indefinite waiver on said unnecessary "service." The upside is questionable and the downside is ubiquitous.
I feel like this was hashed out during the Vietnam war. These systems inevitably just funnel poor people into the blender and kids with affluent parents get waivers or cushy spots.
|
On July 05 2020 05:40 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:32 Nouar wrote:On July 05 2020 05:21 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 05:11 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:05 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 04:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. For some people, 18 months lost at age 18 is a complete disaster. I know it certainly would have been for me. If you do anything that is very competitive and where your age really matters, you absolutely can't afford to lose 18 months. @Mohdoo that makes an awful lot if sense, even though it's pretty sad. Anti-intellectualism at its most crass... I like Nouar solution of a 3 months service. You don't completely screw people who are on a race against age and it doesn't cost the nation an absolute fortune. The problem with 3 months of service is that it is pointless. The whole point of a public service is to provide some service to society. But in any job, you need some training and some effort by people who know what they are doing before you start becoming useful. I think that quite often, you actually provide negative worktime for a month or two, simply because it takes time from experienced workers to teach you. If you are only there for three months, i think the place you are at might work more efficiently if you were never there in the first place. Furthermore, this leads to a situation where you have this three-months phase where everyone is overrun by 18 year olds doing their three months service after school, followed by 9 months of none of them being around. I cannot see how that is effective either. I guess you can have them do inventory, clean up some trash, or something like that. But that is hardly an efficient service to society. Yeah I understand. But I know that when they abolished the service in France, the military complained that they absolutely didn't need those kids, that one year was not enough to have them being useful whatsoever, and that it was not the army's job to educate kids. So the problem is kind of the same, no? On a totally useless side note, my dad did his service in the navy and was affected as junior officer. He got to loath marine officers (they are pretty hardcore in France) and the hierarchy on ships so much that he asked to get demoted simple crewman. The fellow officers thought he was raving mad and sent him to the navy psychologists, who concluded he was not dangerous. So he became crewman and learnt to loath crewmen too. He basically hates everyone since. So don't have pointless service at all. If you decide that every youth needs some kind of education which they don't get in school, set up some education for them. Having a service with the perceived goal of helping society, but which is actually a net negative to society sounds stupid and dishonest. I personally don't think that that is what they need. With regards to Nouar, yes, i understand that not everyone in the military is a frontline person doing in-person killing. The main purpose of the military, however, is that killing (or at least threatening with the ability to do the killing). So you have people doing the killing, and people supporting the people doing the killing to make the killing work more efficiently. And that is fine. We as a society have decided that we need such an organization, and that is probably true. I just don't think that that organisation should also have a second function in education. Educate the people you need to do the job as efficiently as possible. But i find it really strange to think that the military should also educate everyone who finishes school. And according to Biff, the military sees this the same way i do. If the problem is school dropouts having problems integrating into society, then i can think of a dozen better ways of handling that rather than forcing everyone to go through the military after school and waste a year of their lives. Please have a look at the link I gave about the SMA. It doesn't have to be only on small islands overseas, could perfectly be suited to the main country as well. A short time would be if it's large scale and just to give a sense of what it's like (again, the focus is NOT on the military job itself, but just a common set of values and social boundaries), but if you restrict to drop-outs who don't care about an off-year, it could be the "full" 10 months (followed by 2 months of vacation for the staff) they use at SMA. It is enough to learn a craft (woodworks, hospitality, these kinds) and be helpful to these guys, and to society as a whole. I wouldn't call an > 80% rate of immediately getting a job after that year a wasted year. Especially if you're already out of the system. I do agree that a compulsory long period like it was in France (11months) or is in Korea (2years) is too much for a country at "peace" and pointless. A generation getting values, or a smaller subset getting values+training when they need it the most, looks interesting to me, though I agree it should not be the job of the army. However, not having a choice sometimes does a lot of good to people who grew up without any referential. My mother was working as a teacher in a ZEP (basically poor suburbs), and most of those childs (10-14yo) could not even go home before 11pm to just sleep because there were too many people at home and/or the parents couldn't care less about educating them. It's a recipe for disaster, and an army training does instill values at a scary rate. I read your link, and it seems like a reasonable program. I don't quite understand why it needs to be part of the military. As a side note, i found this quote fun: "provides help for the young ultramarines who face difficulties in building their future" FOR THE EMPRAH! Yeah pretty much every time that compulsory military service has come up in recent times, its nothing to do with helping the military but all about instilling discipline and order in the rebellious youth of today.
That's why its the military and not a social program.
|
On July 05 2020 05:10 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 04:48 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 05 2020 04:29 JimmiC wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. LOL definitely not! Gen Z and Gen Y do not think millennial's have respect for their elders or have drive. Mandatory service is somewhat easy to put in because basically all the voters who decide will be too old to have to do it  Well I meant Gen X into our generation. I agree with you on a broad scale about the millenials. Depending on how early you are in your thirties, you might just be a Millenial.
I know that. And fuck that noise. I refuse that title/moniker. Nope. Nah. Nuh uh.
On July 05 2020 05:15 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:09 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
If you do it like with Korean e-sports, then those in high competitive areas can get a waiver. And it doesn't have to be all at once. There are times where your season is over and you can use that time to to do your service. When your season is about to begin, you can go back and train to get back in shape. It's just an idea and would definitely need way more thought than I will admit I want to put into it. Yeah, but you would require a mountain of work to deal with all the particular cases. Say, you got a kid who is a chess prodigy and where every week of study count, or a ballet dancer who has ten years before retirement in a cut throat environment, or, as I was, a musician whose absolute golden years to learn are 18 to 23 years old and you have as many situations that require someone to look into and are an administrative nightmare to deal with. Unless you decide to just screw them all because who cares, but that's not quite fair imo.
Then you send them to places where they can actually do their service and participate in their field of study. You can dance ballet and be a public servant. Those aren't extreme circumstances where they can't still practice their craft, imo. I only mentioned sports because it was easier to make a point, even if not fully fleshed. I still feel that there are opportunities to get the athletes/dancers/chess players/ etc into areas where they can accomplish both their craft and their public service requirements.
-----
It can be aspects of both public service and military, though I don't know which aspects of the military you would want to try and use. In boot camp for me, it was competitive and even when I left, it remained competitive, to a lesser degree of course. Is there anything that get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? I really don't know. The military just keeps you ran down until you fall in line. And I'd say...85-90% always fell in line.
|
Is there anything that get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors?
Black Panthers had a pretty good thing going in that direction (without blind adherence to authority, especially the existing state), particularly for the 'at-risk' youth these types of programs seem aimed at.
Personally I'm a lot more worried about the damage from next generation (and this one) of Trumps (privileged folks these programs are meant not to inconvenience) than I am the tik tok teens.
Seems like we're looking in the entirely wrong direction imo.
|
On July 05 2020 05:42 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:35 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:32 Nouar wrote:On July 05 2020 05:21 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 05:11 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:05 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 04:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. For some people, 18 months lost at age 18 is a complete disaster. I know it certainly would have been for me. If you do anything that is very competitive and where your age really matters, you absolutely can't afford to lose 18 months. @Mohdoo that makes an awful lot if sense, even though it's pretty sad. Anti-intellectualism at its most crass... I like Nouar solution of a 3 months service. You don't completely screw people who are on a race against age and it doesn't cost the nation an absolute fortune. The problem with 3 months of service is that it is pointless. The whole point of a public service is to provide some service to society. But in any job, you need some training and some effort by people who know what they are doing before you start becoming useful. I think that quite often, you actually provide negative worktime for a month or two, simply because it takes time from experienced workers to teach you. If you are only there for three months, i think the place you are at might work more efficiently if you were never there in the first place. Furthermore, this leads to a situation where you have this three-months phase where everyone is overrun by 18 year olds doing their three months service after school, followed by 9 months of none of them being around. I cannot see how that is effective either. I guess you can have them do inventory, clean up some trash, or something like that. But that is hardly an efficient service to society. Yeah I understand. But I know that when they abolished the service in France, the military complained that they absolutely didn't need those kids, that one year was not enough to have them being useful whatsoever, and that it was not the army's job to educate kids. So the problem is kind of the same, no? On a totally useless side note, my dad did his service in the navy and was affected as junior officer. He got to loath marine officers (they are pretty hardcore in France) and the hierarchy on ships so much that he asked to get demoted simple crewman. The fellow officers thought he was raving mad and sent him to the navy psychologists, who concluded he was not dangerous. So he became crewman and learnt to loath crewmen too. He basically hates everyone since. So don't have pointless service at all. If you decide that every youth needs some kind of education which they don't get in school, set up some education for them. Having a service with the perceived goal of helping society, but which is actually a net negative to society sounds stupid and dishonest. I personally don't think that that is what they need. With regards to Nouar, yes, i understand that not everyone in the military is a frontline person doing in-person killing. The main purpose of the military, however, is that killing (or at least threatening with the ability to do the killing). So you have people doing the killing, and people supporting the people doing the killing to make the killing work more efficiently. And that is fine. We as a society have decided that we need such an organization, and that is probably true. I just don't think that that organisation should also have a second function in education. Educate the people you need to do the job as efficiently as possible. But i find it really strange to think that the military should also educate everyone who finishes school. And according to Biff, the military sees this the same way i do. If the problem is school dropouts having problems integrating into society, then i can think of a dozen better ways of handling that rather than forcing everyone to go through the military after school and waste a year of their lives. Please have a look at the link I gave about the SMA. It doesn't have to be only on small islands overseas, could perfectly be suited to the main country as well. A short time would be if it's large scale and just to give a sense of what it's like (again, the focus is NOT on the military job itself, but just a common set of values and social boundaries), but if you restrict to drop-outs who don't care about an off-year, it could be the "full" 10 months (followed by 2 months of vacation for the staff) they use at SMA. It is enough to learn a craft (woodworks, hospitality, these kinds) and be helpful to these guys, and to society as a whole. I wouldn't call an > 80% rate of immediately getting a job after that year a wasted year. Especially if you're already out of the system. Isn't it a problem that suddenly you have to define for whom it is compulsory and for whom it is not? Seems that it wouldn't be very popular and probably unconstitutional in most countries. There is already compulsory school up until a certain level, and getting all those who dropped, and/or don't have a (verified) plan (apprenticeship, job, sabbatical, travel or further studies) doesn't look very controversial to me. SMA currently is voluntary only, it's fine as it is, but you wouldn't get all the dealers and gang members and these kind of people (that I believe the army and its strict rules are better suited at formatting than a regular environment). Yeah, nothing is easy. I don't know about the constitutionality or drafting based on vagrancy status or something else. Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 05:40 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 05:32 Nouar wrote:On July 05 2020 05:21 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 05:11 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 05:05 Simberto wrote:On July 05 2020 04:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 05 2020 03:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It doesn't have to be military only. There's the Peace Corps as well. A mandatory public service initiative, say 18 months, would do good for people to be able to see the "real world" and hopefully enlighten them beyond the bubble they've grown up in. I joined the Marines voluntarily because I didn't have a direction (still don't). But the lessons I learned are still with me and shaped me a little bit. Being able to see parts of the world and hear stories from those who've gone further mentally and physically was inspiring.
But I don't agree with marketing or mandatory service. It should be completely voluntary to join the military. But I will cosign a mandatory public service initiative of some kind.
@ JimmiC: Probably ours? I'm early thirties. For some people, 18 months lost at age 18 is a complete disaster. I know it certainly would have been for me. If you do anything that is very competitive and where your age really matters, you absolutely can't afford to lose 18 months. @Mohdoo that makes an awful lot if sense, even though it's pretty sad. Anti-intellectualism at its most crass... I like Nouar solution of a 3 months service. You don't completely screw people who are on a race against age and it doesn't cost the nation an absolute fortune. The problem with 3 months of service is that it is pointless. The whole point of a public service is to provide some service to society. But in any job, you need some training and some effort by people who know what they are doing before you start becoming useful. I think that quite often, you actually provide negative worktime for a month or two, simply because it takes time from experienced workers to teach you. If you are only there for three months, i think the place you are at might work more efficiently if you were never there in the first place. Furthermore, this leads to a situation where you have this three-months phase where everyone is overrun by 18 year olds doing their three months service after school, followed by 9 months of none of them being around. I cannot see how that is effective either. I guess you can have them do inventory, clean up some trash, or something like that. But that is hardly an efficient service to society. Yeah I understand. But I know that when they abolished the service in France, the military complained that they absolutely didn't need those kids, that one year was not enough to have them being useful whatsoever, and that it was not the army's job to educate kids. So the problem is kind of the same, no? On a totally useless side note, my dad did his service in the navy and was affected as junior officer. He got to loath marine officers (they are pretty hardcore in France) and the hierarchy on ships so much that he asked to get demoted simple crewman. The fellow officers thought he was raving mad and sent him to the navy psychologists, who concluded he was not dangerous. So he became crewman and learnt to loath crewmen too. He basically hates everyone since. So don't have pointless service at all. If you decide that every youth needs some kind of education which they don't get in school, set up some education for them. Having a service with the perceived goal of helping society, but which is actually a net negative to society sounds stupid and dishonest. I personally don't think that that is what they need. With regards to Nouar, yes, i understand that not everyone in the military is a frontline person doing in-person killing. The main purpose of the military, however, is that killing (or at least threatening with the ability to do the killing). So you have people doing the killing, and people supporting the people doing the killing to make the killing work more efficiently. And that is fine. We as a society have decided that we need such an organization, and that is probably true. I just don't think that that organisation should also have a second function in education. Educate the people you need to do the job as efficiently as possible. But i find it really strange to think that the military should also educate everyone who finishes school. And according to Biff, the military sees this the same way i do. If the problem is school dropouts having problems integrating into society, then i can think of a dozen better ways of handling that rather than forcing everyone to go through the military after school and waste a year of their lives. Please have a look at the link I gave about the SMA. It doesn't have to be only on small islands overseas, could perfectly be suited to the main country as well. A short time would be if it's large scale and just to give a sense of what it's like (again, the focus is NOT on the military job itself, but just a common set of values and social boundaries), but if you restrict to drop-outs who don't care about an off-year, it could be the "full" 10 months (followed by 2 months of vacation for the staff) they use at SMA. It is enough to learn a craft (woodworks, hospitality, these kinds) and be helpful to these guys, and to society as a whole. I wouldn't call an > 80% rate of immediately getting a job after that year a wasted year. Especially if you're already out of the system. I do agree that a compulsory long period like it was in France (11months) or is in Korea (2years) is too much for a country at "peace" and pointless. A generation getting values, or a smaller subset getting values+training when they need it the most, looks interesting to me, though I agree it should not be the job of the army. However, not having a choice sometimes does a lot of good to people who grew up without any referential. My mother was working as a teacher in a ZEP (basically poor suburbs), and most of those childs (10-14yo) could not even go home before 11pm to just sleep because there were too many people at home and/or the parents couldn't care less about educating them. It's a recipe for disaster, and an army training does instill values at a scary rate. I read your link, and it seems like a reasonable program. I don't quite understand why it needs to be part of the military. As a side note, i found this quote fun: "provides help for the young ultramarines who face difficulties in building their future" FOR THE EMPRAH! The military due to the strict ruleset and learning to obey orders/respect a schedule as I said earlier. They have flag duty and all that stuff in the mornings. It's less "kind" than a normal school, but seeing as it is full every year including after increasing the amount of spots/year, I'd say it's appealing to them.
I am pretty sure that the second you make it not volunteer only, that success rate starts dropping hard. Teaching people who want to be taught is easy. Teaching people who are forced to be there and just want to get it over with is hard.
I am generally a bit sceptical about stuff where an older generation decides that a younger generation of adults needs to be taught "values". Quite often the younger generation does have values, just not the ones the older generation has.
Options and offers, and making them aware of the options and offers which exist is a far better way to help people carry themselves. Forcing everyone into some sort of service because you hope that that makes them obey authorities more, and that will help in the long term doesn't sound reasonable.
Making a forced service not totally universal is very bad thing. It means that the people who have access to doctors who write them documentation they are unfit, or parents who have connections so they can claim to have whatever is needed to not do the service don't do it.
I was amongst the last who were forced into service here in Germany. Out of my graduation class of about 70 people, i think maybe 5 went into some sort of service, military or civil. The others found the shittiest reasons to be declared unfit (too fat, too thin, thumb kinda hurts sometimes,...), or claimed to want to do the military kind of service, which gave them an 80% chance of not being selected because the military didn't want them.
Sadly, i was too honest to do that. So i ended up wasting 9 months in a completely pointless public service position. I was the third guy on a transport car for patients between two hospitals. My job was to sit there and be the third guy, because there needed to be three people on that car, and i was cheaper then someone actually educated to be useful. Sometimes i also got to sit around in the archives of the hospital. I took absolutely nothing useful out of that time, except maybe for the ability to sleep in a driving car, which i couldn't do before that experience.
If i am skeptical of a general service program, i am even more skeptical of anything that allows people with enough connections to weasel out of it. The rich and well-connected have enough advantages in life as it is, they don't need even more of them, like a year headstart because all the poor shmucks need to do military service.
|
On July 05 2020 07:30 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +Is there anything that get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Black Panthers had a pretty good thing going in that direction (without blind adherence to authority, especially the existing state), particularly for the 'at-risk' youth these types of programs seem aimed at. Personally I'm a lot more worried about the damage from next generation (and this one) of Trumps (privileged folks these programs are meant not to inconvenience) than I am the tik tok teens. Seems like we're looking in the entirely wrong direction imo.
This is the point where we hypothesize steps or what have you in determining how a program would be able to make it compulsory for everyone, regardless of status. Theory crafting is something that can bring about a spark to understanding each other and the various concepts we each hold.
And remember I said respect to elders/superiors. Not authority. That distinction must be made. Think of it as being a manager or supervisor at a firm of sorts. You're not someone with authority over the autonomy or freedom of another person. You are simply there to guide them.
|
On July 05 2020 09:36 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 07:30 GreenHorizons wrote:Is there anything that get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Black Panthers had a pretty good thing going in that direction (without blind adherence to authority, especially the existing state), particularly for the 'at-risk' youth these types of programs seem aimed at. Personally I'm a lot more worried about the damage from next generation (and this one) of Trumps (privileged folks these programs are meant not to inconvenience) than I am the tik tok teens. Seems like we're looking in the entirely wrong direction imo. This is the point where we hypothesize steps or what have you in determining how a program would be able to make it compulsory for everyone, regardless of status. Theory crafting is something that can bring about a spark to understanding each other and the various concepts we each hold. And remember I said respect to elders/superiors. Not authority. That distinction must be made. Think of it as being a manager or supervisor at a firm of sorts. You're not someone with authority over the autonomy or freedom of another person. You are simply there to guide them.
I was saying it shouldn't be compulsory? If someone is there to guide them without authority over their autonomy (like the Black Panther party was doing) then the US military/gov. (the one's who tried to systematically expunged them) shouldn't be involved at all imo.
Also that we're looking at trying to figure out how to make young adults less maladjusted to our morally repugnant society, instead of how to correct the parts of society they are appropriately maladjusted to, and that's bad imo.
|
On July 05 2020 09:59 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 09:36 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 05 2020 07:30 GreenHorizons wrote:Is there anything that get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Black Panthers had a pretty good thing going in that direction (without blind adherence to authority, especially the existing state), particularly for the 'at-risk' youth these types of programs seem aimed at. Personally I'm a lot more worried about the damage from next generation (and this one) of Trumps (privileged folks these programs are meant not to inconvenience) than I am the tik tok teens. Seems like we're looking in the entirely wrong direction imo. This is the point where we hypothesize steps or what have you in determining how a program would be able to make it compulsory for everyone, regardless of status. Theory crafting is something that can bring about a spark to understanding each other and the various concepts we each hold. And remember I said respect to elders/superiors. Not authority. That distinction must be made. Think of it as being a manager or supervisor at a firm of sorts. You're not someone with authority over the autonomy or freedom of another person. You are simply there to guide them. I was saying it shouldn't be compulsory? If someone is there to guide them without authority over their autonomy (like the Black Panther party was doing) then the US military/gov. (the one's who tried to systematically expunged them) shouldn't be involved at all imo. Also that we're looking at trying to figure out how to make young adults less maladjusted to our morally repugnant society, instead of how to correct the parts of society they are appropriately maladjusted to, and that's bad imo.
You're jumping around the conversation and including things that wasn't stated at all. Stick with what we're talking about. If you want to discuss the correcting of societal failures, that's another topic. A topic that we have broached previously and on numerous occasions that have not born any fruit from the parties invested in discussing them. I'm sure you're aware of this?
And again, mentioned that the military isn't something I'm okay with, but there are aspects of what they do that can be utilized and made better for this hypothetical. The rich being able to not be forced into this hypothetical was your comment. I am simply stating that there may be ideas that would make it impossible for it to be that way.
|
On July 05 2020 10:10 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 09:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 05 2020 09:36 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 05 2020 07:30 GreenHorizons wrote:Is there anything that get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Black Panthers had a pretty good thing going in that direction (without blind adherence to authority, especially the existing state), particularly for the 'at-risk' youth these types of programs seem aimed at. Personally I'm a lot more worried about the damage from next generation (and this one) of Trumps (privileged folks these programs are meant not to inconvenience) than I am the tik tok teens. Seems like we're looking in the entirely wrong direction imo. This is the point where we hypothesize steps or what have you in determining how a program would be able to make it compulsory for everyone, regardless of status. Theory crafting is something that can bring about a spark to understanding each other and the various concepts we each hold. And remember I said respect to elders/superiors. Not authority. That distinction must be made. Think of it as being a manager or supervisor at a firm of sorts. You're not someone with authority over the autonomy or freedom of another person. You are simply there to guide them. I was saying it shouldn't be compulsory? If someone is there to guide them without authority over their autonomy (like the Black Panther party was doing) then the US military/gov. (the one's who tried to systematically expunged them) shouldn't be involved at all imo. Also that we're looking at trying to figure out how to make young adults less maladjusted to our morally repugnant society, instead of how to correct the parts of society they are appropriately maladjusted to, and that's bad imo. You're jumping around the conversation and including things that wasn't stated at all. Stick with what we're talking about. If you want to discuss the correcting of societal failures, that's another topic. A topic that we have broached previously and on numerous occasions that have not born any fruit from the parties invested in discussing them. I'm sure you're aware of this? And again, mentioned that the military isn't something I'm okay with, but there are aspects of what they do that can be utilized and made better for this hypothetical. The rich being able to not be forced into this hypothetical was your comment. I am simply stating that there may be ideas that would make it impossible for it to be that way.
Not jumping around. I originally stated that the compulsory service debate happened in the Vietnam era and the conclusion was that it's a bad idea for a lot of reasons (simberto and others have mentioned some), not the least of which was that the people that legislate it build in loopholes for the people they want to (typically family and donors).
The purpose of this hypothetical program is to: get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Which is what The Black Panther party was doing (notwithstanding the 'respect for superiors' part) until the US government at the state and federal level attempted to (including Democratic strongholds) systematically expunge them.
So looking at how to form something like the Black Panther party without consideration for why they were systematically expunged and branded terrorists misunderstands the problem before us imo.
|
On July 05 2020 10:24 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 10:10 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 05 2020 09:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 05 2020 09:36 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 05 2020 07:30 GreenHorizons wrote:Is there anything that get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Black Panthers had a pretty good thing going in that direction (without blind adherence to authority, especially the existing state), particularly for the 'at-risk' youth these types of programs seem aimed at. Personally I'm a lot more worried about the damage from next generation (and this one) of Trumps (privileged folks these programs are meant not to inconvenience) than I am the tik tok teens. Seems like we're looking in the entirely wrong direction imo. This is the point where we hypothesize steps or what have you in determining how a program would be able to make it compulsory for everyone, regardless of status. Theory crafting is something that can bring about a spark to understanding each other and the various concepts we each hold. And remember I said respect to elders/superiors. Not authority. That distinction must be made. Think of it as being a manager or supervisor at a firm of sorts. You're not someone with authority over the autonomy or freedom of another person. You are simply there to guide them. I was saying it shouldn't be compulsory? If someone is there to guide them without authority over their autonomy (like the Black Panther party was doing) then the US military/gov. (the one's who tried to systematically expunged them) shouldn't be involved at all imo. Also that we're looking at trying to figure out how to make young adults less maladjusted to our morally repugnant society, instead of how to correct the parts of society they are appropriately maladjusted to, and that's bad imo. You're jumping around the conversation and including things that wasn't stated at all. Stick with what we're talking about. If you want to discuss the correcting of societal failures, that's another topic. A topic that we have broached previously and on numerous occasions that have not born any fruit from the parties invested in discussing them. I'm sure you're aware of this? And again, mentioned that the military isn't something I'm okay with, but there are aspects of what they do that can be utilized and made better for this hypothetical. The rich being able to not be forced into this hypothetical was your comment. I am simply stating that there may be ideas that would make it impossible for it to be that way. Not jumping around. I originally stated that the compulsory service debate happened in the Vietnam era and the conclusion was that it's a bad idea for a lot of reasons (simberto and others have mentioned some), not the least of which was that the people that legislate it build in loopholes for the people they want to (typically family and donors). The purpose of this hypothetical program is to: Show nested quote + get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Which is what The Black Panther party was doing (notwithstanding the 'respect for superiors' part) until the US government at the state and federal level attempted to (including Democratic strongholds) systematically expunge them. So looking at how to form something like the Black Panther party without consideration for why they were systematically expunged and branded terrorists misunderstands the problem before us imo.
Military service is compulsory in South Korea and they seem to be doing fine out of it.
|
On July 05 2020 10:24 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 10:10 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 05 2020 09:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 05 2020 09:36 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 05 2020 07:30 GreenHorizons wrote:Is there anything that get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Black Panthers had a pretty good thing going in that direction (without blind adherence to authority, especially the existing state), particularly for the 'at-risk' youth these types of programs seem aimed at. Personally I'm a lot more worried about the damage from next generation (and this one) of Trumps (privileged folks these programs are meant not to inconvenience) than I am the tik tok teens. Seems like we're looking in the entirely wrong direction imo. This is the point where we hypothesize steps or what have you in determining how a program would be able to make it compulsory for everyone, regardless of status. Theory crafting is something that can bring about a spark to understanding each other and the various concepts we each hold. And remember I said respect to elders/superiors. Not authority. That distinction must be made. Think of it as being a manager or supervisor at a firm of sorts. You're not someone with authority over the autonomy or freedom of another person. You are simply there to guide them. I was saying it shouldn't be compulsory? If someone is there to guide them without authority over their autonomy (like the Black Panther party was doing) then the US military/gov. (the one's who tried to systematically expunged them) shouldn't be involved at all imo. Also that we're looking at trying to figure out how to make young adults less maladjusted to our morally repugnant society, instead of how to correct the parts of society they are appropriately maladjusted to, and that's bad imo. You're jumping around the conversation and including things that wasn't stated at all. Stick with what we're talking about. If you want to discuss the correcting of societal failures, that's another topic. A topic that we have broached previously and on numerous occasions that have not born any fruit from the parties invested in discussing them. I'm sure you're aware of this? And again, mentioned that the military isn't something I'm okay with, but there are aspects of what they do that can be utilized and made better for this hypothetical. The rich being able to not be forced into this hypothetical was your comment. I am simply stating that there may be ideas that would make it impossible for it to be that way. Not jumping around. I originally stated that the compulsory service debate happened in the Vietnam era and the conclusion was that it's a bad idea for a lot of reasons (simberto and others have mentioned some), not the least of which was that the people that legislate it build in loopholes for the people they want to (typically family and donors). The purpose of this hypothetical program is to: Show nested quote + get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Which is what The Black Panther party was doing (notwithstanding the 'respect for superiors' part) until the US government at the state and federal level attempted to (including Democratic strongholds) systematically expunge them. So looking at how to form something like the Black Panther party without consideration for why they were systematically expunged and branded terrorists misunderstands the problem before us imo.
I meant your last paragraph but I digress. I get your point.
|
|
|
I don't think it does anything. Kanye "slavery was a choice" West isn't very popular among black people anymore, and he's not very popular with Trump voters either. Not sure what this is other than a publicity stunt. I fully expect Kanye to withdraw after there's 0 interest from anyone in a couple months.
|
On July 05 2020 10:24 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2020 10:10 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 05 2020 09:59 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 05 2020 09:36 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 05 2020 07:30 GreenHorizons wrote:Is there anything that get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Black Panthers had a pretty good thing going in that direction (without blind adherence to authority, especially the existing state), particularly for the 'at-risk' youth these types of programs seem aimed at. Personally I'm a lot more worried about the damage from next generation (and this one) of Trumps (privileged folks these programs are meant not to inconvenience) than I am the tik tok teens. Seems like we're looking in the entirely wrong direction imo. This is the point where we hypothesize steps or what have you in determining how a program would be able to make it compulsory for everyone, regardless of status. Theory crafting is something that can bring about a spark to understanding each other and the various concepts we each hold. And remember I said respect to elders/superiors. Not authority. That distinction must be made. Think of it as being a manager or supervisor at a firm of sorts. You're not someone with authority over the autonomy or freedom of another person. You are simply there to guide them. I was saying it shouldn't be compulsory? If someone is there to guide them without authority over their autonomy (like the Black Panther party was doing) then the US military/gov. (the one's who tried to systematically expunged them) shouldn't be involved at all imo. Also that we're looking at trying to figure out how to make young adults less maladjusted to our morally repugnant society, instead of how to correct the parts of society they are appropriately maladjusted to, and that's bad imo. You're jumping around the conversation and including things that wasn't stated at all. Stick with what we're talking about. If you want to discuss the correcting of societal failures, that's another topic. A topic that we have broached previously and on numerous occasions that have not born any fruit from the parties invested in discussing them. I'm sure you're aware of this? And again, mentioned that the military isn't something I'm okay with, but there are aspects of what they do that can be utilized and made better for this hypothetical. The rich being able to not be forced into this hypothetical was your comment. I am simply stating that there may be ideas that would make it impossible for it to be that way. Not jumping around. I originally stated that the compulsory service debate happened in the Vietnam era and the conclusion was that it's a bad idea for a lot of reasons (simberto and others have mentioned some), not the least of which was that the people that legislate it build in loopholes for the people they want to (typically family and donors). The purpose of this hypothetical program is to: Show nested quote + get a large group of 16-24 year olds together and teach them teamwork, critical thinking, maintaining mental and physical acuity, respect for elders/superiors? Which is what The Black Panther party was doing (notwithstanding the 'respect for superiors' part) until the US government at the state and federal level attempted to (including Democratic strongholds) systematically expunge them. So looking at how to form something like the Black Panther party without consideration for why they were systematically expunged and branded terrorists misunderstands the problem before us imo.
You don't need the Black Panthers, though. There are plenty of other organizations that include military aspects in their program. The Scouts are probably the largest, although I suspect you aren't a fan.
In any case, these are all voluntary programs, which misses the point mohdoo, zerocool and others were making when lamenting the lack of character in youths today. Which I'm fairy certain his grandparents said about his parents' generation, so I'm not quite sure why we skipped straight to mandatory military service before critically analysing the premise. Although maybe you were trying to get there with your point about looking at went military service was scrapped on the first place?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
