No, Absolutely Not!

Conscription raises its ugly head once more.

All over Europe, compulsory military service has gradually been phased out, but – given recent terrorist attacks and an increasingly aggressive Russia – could it be time for a rethink?

There’s nothing to rethink. Conscription is just another word for slavery. The state has no place enforcing servitude of any kind at any time. If it is so threatened that it resorts to conscription to survive, then it was not worth saving. Any state so threatened should be able to call on sufficient volunteers. If it can’t, then tough, it goes. There is never, under any circumstance, a situation where enforced servitude is acceptable practice. We do not belong to the state, we do not owe the state any part of our lives or our service or our loyalty.

Ever.

Public opinion started to change following the Russian annexation of Crimea and the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris in 2015. In Switzerland, a referendum in 2013 revealed that 73 per cent favoured conscription; there, young people have a choice between joining the military or the civil protection force.

That doesn’t make it right, though, does it?

In France, polls show 80 per cent of the public would like compulsory military service to return (it ended in 2002), whereas in Germany only 36 per cent are in favour. The arrival of millions of refugees and an increasing number of attacks on civilians by groups claiming to be acting as part of an “army” in the name of radical Islam have placed new strains on security services, particularly in France and Germany.

Still doesn’t make it right. The issue is; does the state own our bodies? The answer to that is “no”. If 80% of French people favour armed service, then why are they not lining up outside the recruitment offices? Oh, yeah, of course, what we mean here is “other people” must serve.

In some EU countries, youth unemployment is so high that compulsory service has been proposed as a solution. Perhaps the UK might consider a different form of youth service – not military – which relies on volunteers, properly funded and lasting one or two years. It could be residential, but that’s not essential.

Yeah, because forcing unwilling recruits to serve would work so well. I know that if I was young enough to be faced with this, I would be as obstructive and uncooperative as I could. And I’m pretty mild-tempered and mannered. Conscription as a solution for unemployment is a solution favoured by the hard of thinking. That’s why David Cameron floated the idea about a decade ago.

At the moment, too many working-class boys are underperforming, lacking in motivation, technical and social skills. In short, many are unemployable. It’s all very well to create apprenticeships, but there aren’t enough and some of the jobs sound pretty grim. These young men need to learn confidence and the realities of life before we start urging them to become plumbers and electricians. In the meantime, they collect benefits and just fester.

So lets force them into some sort of pointless service and make them fester there, eh? And the armed forces have better things to do than babysit a bunch of recalcitrant youth who really don’t want to be there – likewise any civil arrangement.

A youth force might tackle jobs that councils are finding tough to finance, like litter clearance, helping with basic tasks in the production and delivery of meals on wheels, cleaning in old people’s homes, and maintaining parks and open spaces. This work needn’t be demeaning. A carefully targeted youth force paid the living wage could inspire leadership, provide education and create the leaders of tomorrow. Otherwise, where will the next generation of politicians come from?

Whut!!!

7 Comments

  1. The Government could always conscript the unemployed to do a 4 days a week military service for when the main military forces do their planned 3 days a week service. When you consider it takes a nurse 3 years of training to be qualified, a Police officer 2 years, a firefighter just as long, while a politician requires no qualifications at all, you can understand how these twonks come up with these ideas.

    • Really – I can clearly remember doing weeks and weeks at sea – dived usually. Could have done with the odd 4 day break.

  2. What an excellent idea! All these New Europeans will be given weapon and ordnance training care of the taxpayer, what possibly could go wrong?

    The ones that don’t want to move on to foreign service will be useful too as they can be used to restrain the Old Europeans that refuse to integrate! Didn’t Napoleon the pig have a similar scheme?

  3. From BH
    @golf charlie, Mar 2, 2017 at 11:25 PM

    Sweden is so peaceful, National Service is being reintroduced to deal with the surplus of regional happiness.

    Pcar: Hmm, I forsee some fatal consequences. Conscript RoP new “citizens” receive training in fighting, shooting, bombing, intel etc. What could possibly go wrong?

  4. I wonder if perhaps our European neighbours might be doing the right thing by considering conscription in thier own countries.

    I mean what with Brexit looming, and with that the possibility that the UK’s forces and intelligence may not be as available on demand as they have been previously to defend them, that Putin fella must be starting to look really big…

Comments are closed.