•  maporita   ( @maporita@unilem.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    14
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    There are two main reasons to conscript citizens. The first, to fight wars, has largely faded into irrelevance (barring exceptions for those waging war, like Russia, or those defending their country, like Ukraine). For the most part wars are better fought by paid professionals.

    It’s the second type of conscription that I will discuss. Many governments promote a system of national service for reasons of social cohesion, (the so-called Scandinavian model). It has much to recommend it. It creates a shared experience in otherwise fragmented societies, breaking down barriers of class, race and gender. It can be used to instil the values of a country in its population. It builds respect for the armed forces, teaching civilians that their freedom ultimately depends on others’ willingness to kill and be killed. And it subjects a pampered population to a bracing dose of spartan clean living, away from iPads and alcopops.

    The problem is in the implementation. Social service should not be confined to the young. One of the biggest divides in society is generational, and national service only for the young would not change that. Moreover it would do many older folks a lot of good to learn the value of inclusion and diversity.

    • For the most part wars are better fought by paid professionals.

      That only goes for dirty wars that you have no good reason to fight.

      It has much to recommend it. It creates a shared experience in otherwise fragmented societies, breaking down barriers of class, race and gender.

      The US would like to disagree.

      It can be used to instil the values of a country in its population.

      In other words… nationalist brainwashing.

      And it subjects a pampered population

      Only a boomer could think this.