-
Genuine question, what’s the main bug bear with the national service (military or civilian duties) idea?
The army don't want a bunch of people that don't want to be there, especially for only 12 months.
-
In this instance, it's not a serious policy proposal. It's aimed squarely at potential Reform voters, who like the idea of toughening up young people by making them do a year in the army, and is effectively an extension of the culture wars the Tories seem to think is a vote winner for them. It hasn't been costed, no-one who would need to administer it has been engaged with, and it clearly hasn't been given any serious thought about how it would work.
More generally, as others have already said, the idea of 'national service' should be a key component of the social contract between citizens and the government. If it was re-introduced then it needs to be attractive to young people as something that will be a positive experience for them, be beneficial to broader society, and offer a range of options beyond cosplaying as soldiers for a year.
-
Personally I'm not particularly against it. But it doesn't seem very practical and most places like France and Germany don't have it anymore which is telling.
You are reading a single comment by @C4r1s and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
jellybaby
andyp
hugo7
@C4r1s
Genuine question, what’s the main bug bear with the national service (military or civilian duties) idea? Is it that it’s mandated? Or that it’s a restriction in personal choice? That there are better ways to engage and build community and skills for the greater good? Or something else entirely.
Northern European/Nordic countries seem to have this (possibly just civilian?), as do Switzerland, South Korea; the latter two whilst possibly still quite traditional in cultural norms/set up are also often seen as fairly well off re living standards and overall pleasantness to live.