Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Tamas]

Also they'd be finding their own placements.

Really? How is that supposed to work? The mere thought is extremely naive. What if there are no vacancies where they want to go? They get to skip it?

And yes it is the same as community service. You are not allowed to say no, the state is forcing you to do it.

[HVC]

Is requiring children to go to school and do homework "forced labor"?

I know, a bit of a strawman...but if the idea of public education is to bring up productive, functioning adults...why does that concept of a social requirement being seen as a public good end when the age clock turns hits 18?

You can leave school when you're 16 and society deems you responsible for your actions. Before that blame giving responsibility of choices to the parents. I guess we can have parents sending their 15 and under kids to the gulags... I mean volunteer centres

[Sheilbh]

But more on the topic (the very idea of "National Service)...I think it is a bit of a mistake to try and combine the military aspect of that idea with a non-military one.

Certainly, conscription as was practiced by Western countries usually came about due to being seen as a vital necessity for national defense (and its rollback due to that necessity being seen as longer essential)...and should probably only be used if those skills/service are seen as a national necessity.

If the idea of a "peace time" national service is the goal...if anything, it should be entirely public/social works-oriented.  (with perhaps the military-oriented track being the alternate option for those who might want to consider that as a career anyway)

So they're policy is that they'll set up a Royal Commission to study this, make recommendations and implement something by the end of the next parliament. I don't want to say it's offensively back of a fag packet but....

Ultimately they're pitching the National Service bit to win Reform-curious voters, while the volunteering aspect and 30k cap in the military reflects the fact that the military don't really want and can't absorb a quasi-conscripts. Though, again, they'd only be working in areas like procurement, logistics, civil response, IT. So again it would be you can apply to the military (and they'll pick up to 30k - hopefully) or find a charity you want to volunteer with one weekend a month.

Having said that the Nordic and French schemes that the Tories have cited as a model include more of a military element. I believe Germany's defence minister is also pushing for a return of some form of national service. I think ultimately within a European context - facing the possibility of a Trump presidency - I'm not convinced there isn't an argument for a military element and that it perhaps needs to be larger. There is a reason France and Nordic nations have brought back some form of national service and Germany is considering it. It's another one of those things where something suggested in Britain is seen as wild and outlandish (like requiring kids to do maths until 18) when it is, in fact, relatively (or in this case increasingly) normal in a lot of the rest of Europe. I think I've already seen the "it's just imperial nostalgia" argument.

On the other hand there is a huge recruitment crisis in the British military right now and I think there could also be real benefit in using something like this effectively as a recruitment tool as much as anything else.

Of course they've also proposed paying for it by basically cancelling the levelling up money which makes it a particularly funny policy.

[Tamas]

I know this was proposed as a throw-away chew toy by the Tories but I am slightly stunned so many people seem to think it's ok. I guess if you haven't lived in a society which had, you might have rose-tinted ideas on what it actually means.

But... why not take the money intended to force young people to pause their lives and be forced conscripts in an age where even being an infantryman has an increasing skill requirement, and spend it on the navy and the airforce? We are, after all, an island. Heck, spend it on Trident, defense sorted.

[HVC]

I mean targeting the younger generation like this is a good way to turn them away from the right, so that's a plus

[Sheilbh]

I suspect the 18 vs 16 in this case is Anglo/American confusion. 

Our public schools run to age 18 in most cases...my understanding in the UK it can end at 16?

Yeah at the minute you can leave school (and join the forces) at 16. Although I think only non-combat to begin with.

Edit: But this government has actually increase the school leaving age to 18 - which is what I meant by it being a bigger shift.

Really? How is that supposed to work? The mere thought is extremely naive. What if there are no vacancies where they want to go? They get to skip it?

Then they work down the list. The policy is to have a Royal Commission but they've suggested that charities will basically register to say they're interested. As I say it'll be like work experience. You'll only get given something to do if you can't or won't find your own option. It's a mandatory DofE award without the camping.

I imagine that the local sports centre, or the arts centre will reach capacity pretty quickly, so you might end up with the St John's Ambulance or similar. But again, much like the military are facing a recruitment crisis, so are charities across the country - people are volunteering less as with the military I think there's probably some opportunity to use this for recruitment.

Personally I think it might be better if it was properly structured around a few core paths and a bit more mandatory in that sense.

And yes it is the same as community service. You are not allowed to say no, the state is forcing you to do it.

The state compels us to pay taxes and do jury duty - and indeed compels kids to go to school (we're pretty strict on home schooling too). The nature of the state is that it can compel.

But I think citizenship comes with rights and obligations. As long as this doesn't infringe on someone's rights (for example forcing someone to do something that is against their beliefs), I don't really have any principled issue to it as part of that bundled nature of citizenship.

I know this was proposed as a throw-away chew toy by the Tories but I am slightly stunned so many people seem to think it's ok. I guess if you haven't lived in a society which had, you might have rose-tinted ideas on what it actually means.

France, Finland, Sweden - the explicit examples the idea has been inspired by.

The government was denying they were considering anything like national service even last week in parliament. The reason people were asking was that earlier in the year former defence chiefs had said that given the recruitment crisis in the military and the security situation in Europe, we might need to consider (full fat) national service again, which this isn't. But I think that is important context (and also for why other European countries have been re-introducing it and others are considering it).

[Sheilbh]

I mean targeting the younger generation like this is a good way to turn them away from the right, so that's a plus

The Tories are already on 8% with the under 25s - but they could go lower

As I say I would not be surprised if this becomes a second term Labour policy. It's been promoted in the past by people on the Labour frontbench and think tanks close to the Labour leadership. And I'm not sure Europe's security situation is likely to get better in the next 4 years.

[Tamas]

I imagine that the local sports centre, or the arts centre will reach capacity pretty quickly, so you might end up with the St John's Ambulance or similar. But again, much like the military are facing a recruitment crisis, so are charities across the country - people are volunteering less as with the military I think there's probably some opportunity to use this for recruitment.

It is not recruitment. It is conscription. Why not then just force people to take up jobs where are shortages? Like, surely there are enough lawyers in this country, why should you not be driving an ambulance?

But I think citizenship comes with rights and obligations. As long as this doesn't infringe on someone's rights (for example forcing someone to do something that is against their beliefs), I don't really have any principled issue to it as part of that bundled nature of citizenship.

That is a very weak argument. Where you draw the line based on that is entirely arbitrary.

The biggest misconception you and other supporters have of this is that it'd be of any value. You'd have young people having their life -just as it starts- at the very least disturbed, just to gain the most unmotivated workforce possible to have. I am not against conscription in each and every possible theoretical scenario, but I am sure as hell against it in an island country that is one of the riches of the world. Whatever problems we are facing short of imminent invasion by a massive foreign army, conscription and forced labour are not the right answers for it

I liked, for example, that the podcast people highlighted Sweden as it is working and that it is good for society. Swedish society has had escalating gang wars for crying out loud. Are they saying without conscription there'd be civil war, or what?


The way I'd introduce forced "volunteering" is launch a petition for having it introduced. Then those who sign it get called up.

[Tamas]

And I'm not sure Europe's security situation is likely to get better in the next 4 years.

But how is conscription going to help with it? Do you really think we'll need to send a conscripted force to fight in Europe?

And if so, how is this proposal going to address that? Who, in their right mind, going to choose one year doing fuckall in the military, instead of having to clean toilets in a hospital for a few weekends? And why wouldn't those people sign up already to be reservists?

[Sheilbh]

It is not recruitment. It is conscription. Why not then just force people to take up jobs where are shortages? Like, surely there are enough lawyers in this country, why should you not be driving an ambulance?

I'm suggesting using it as a recruitment tool. So my suspicion is that the 30k in the military (less than 5% of the total) are probably people who might be considering a military career. So it should be used as a recruitment tool for that 30k. Similarly with charities struggling with volunteers - you've got 12 weekends to convince/inspire a small minority them to become a lifetime volunteer.

That is a very weak argument. Where you draw the line based on that is entirely arbitrary.

It's drawn by law and politics like everything else.

I don't think it's any weaker than hand wringing about the state's power to compel. That's what makes it a state and not a voluntary association.

The biggest misconception you and other supporters have of this is that it'd be of any value. You'd have young people having their life -just as it starts- at the very least disturbed, just to gain the most unmotivated workforce possible to have. I am not against conscription in each and every possible theoretical scenario, but I am sure as hell against it in an island country that is one of the riches of the world. Whatever problems we are facing short of imminent invasion by a massive foreign army, conscription and forced labour are not the right answers for it

I think there could be social value, in particular I think it could be used in people mixing who wouldn't otherwise - especially if (as I say) it was even more mandatory with well designed formal paths rather than a free for all

In relation to the military side. We are part of a Western alliance focused on our continent and one of the two major defence powers in Europe. The main underpinning of Europe's security is the US and I think it's very, very likely (I mean it's visible now) that it is not willing to maintain its current level of commitment to Europe. Trump might win and even if he doesn't I think the US feels that it must move on from Europe and focus on China's rising power (as you say, we're in one of the richest parts of the world - you can see why the Americans are frustrated). We have commitments in Europe (and elsewhere for that matter. You know, the navy's in the Red Sea, we helped shoot down Iranian rockets when they were fired at Israel, it is important that we continue to engage in the Pacific in order to build support from those countries on our interests in Europe and demonstrate to Americans that we appreciate their security concerns (again in the hope of maintaining their support in dealing with ours). We can't just retreat to a purely defensive force focused on defence against an invasion.

I'd add that I also suspect we will end up in the coming decades needing significant work on civil response/civil defence as I think climate shocks (floods, storms, droughts) that need emergency response will increase. At the minute we rely on the military for a lot of that. If, as I think is likely, the military becomes more necessarily focused on security than it has been in recent years. Again I think a national service system - especially with things like logistics would give young people practical working skills (the number one complaint of employers), possibly help on that response and possibly be a recruitment tool for it.

But how is conscription going to help with it? Do you really think we'll need to send a conscripted force to fight in Europe?

No. But I think we may need to be at a point of deploying significant forces to Europe, with allies, as a deterrent.

And if so, how is this proposal going to address that? Who, in their right mind, going to choose one year doing fuckall in the military, instead of having to clean toilets in a hospital for a few weekends? And why wouldn't those people sign up already to be reservists?

My guess - kids who are considering joining the military but not sure.

[HVC]

My guess - kids who are considering joining the military but not sure.

Best way to dissuade a kid who may be interested in joining the military is to force him into the military

[Tamas]

I am sorry I am going to sleep but I just want to say that being coerced to work at a charity, especially when people in charge of you who know you have no choice but to be there, is NOT going to convince a meaningful number of people to keep going back. :p

EDIT: HVC wrote it before me.

[Sheilbh]

I don't know I look back on being young and see lots of things I was forced to do that I didn't really like at the time that I either appreciate now or wish I'd been made to stick at.

Plus as I say the military bit is less than 5% of 18 year olds - people would be applying for it and there'd be minimum criteria

Separately just watched Angela Rayner Battle Bus clip and I really do like her

Edit: Also low key admire the Tory minister who's decided to not let the election interrupt his holiday. He's only got a majority of 4,500 so I assume he's probably written that off:

Speaking to The Mirror from Vasiliki, where temperatures hit 28C yesterday, Mr Baker admitted that some might have a problem with him jetting away. But he insisted he was working on his campaign and denied defying the PM.

The minister defended his decision not to cancel his holiday plans, stating: "The Prime Minister told everyone we could go on holiday and then called a snap election. So I've chosen to do my campaign work in Greece."

[HVC]

If someone forced you to be a grunt at a law firm, fetching coffee, shredding paper for hours on hours on your weekend, etc would you have chosen law as your profession? Or would you think lawyers are dicks and chosen another profession? How about your colleagues? How many would have opted out on stubbornness alone

And these unwilling unenthusiastic "volunteers" are not going to be treated like bright eyed interns at their place of servitude. A one off kid eagerly joining a charity or workplace is going to be treated way different then an army of forced "volunteers". They'll be a commodity. I doubt they'll get any meaningful real world experience. A lot of busy work is more likely. How you going to find enough meaningful learning experiences with the number of kids foisted into the system?

[HVC]

I am sorry I am going to sleep but I just want to say that being coerced to work at a charity, especially when people in charge of you who know you have no choice but to be there, is NOT going to convince a meaningful number of people to keep going back. :p

EDIT: HVC wrote it before me.

Tag team