1. Remove citizenship by birthright
2. Grant citizenship as a reward for national service
3. ???
4. MAGA

On the other hand out infrastructure is falling to pieces, our schools are understaffed, and our health care system is a shambolic mess

Interesting that when Americans think "service" the only service that comes to mind is blowing people up.

Once this thread calms down I'll share another similar topic, you all seemed to like this, so maybe it can be a thing.

Those are things better served by trained volunteers or professionals, Ogion. Forcing everyone to learn those trades and sacrifice their right to choose a career path at any point in their life is not only immoral but also ineffectual.

It's a military not a humanitarian organization, Ogion. The military's focus is defense and conscripting more people into it will not change the fact that they aren't experts in nation building (eg. Iraq).

Also, our failing infrastructure and failing healthcare system is a result of decades of failed policy. How is a compulsory national service gonna fix that?

Understaffed schools in Oklahoma are because there’s no money and teachers are going out of state. Trying to fix this with compulsory service would be akin to slavery.

TrPrado, you're too wide of the mark with your ridiculous hyperbole you're not worth responding to.

SLavery is forcing people to work without compensation, e.g., like requiring women to bear children for you. If you pay people to contribute to the community as part of the responsibilities that come with citizenship, then that's no more slavery than the draft. "sacrificing their career path" is typical bullshit. how about this. I have a law degree, why wouldn't my service be working as a public defender or in some form for public good? Bascially, nearly any career can be deployed for public benefit, so there's zero reason there'd be a conflict.

Mostly, I get the sense that what you really object to is the idea that citizenship comes with responsibility and hate the idea of citizens doing work for the public good.

Steven demonstrates the American military fetish. Who said service had to involve the military at all? I will point out that the US used to have a CIVILIAN service corps that did a lot of worthwhile things. Certainly, Teach for America demonstrates how a civilian corps with training can fulfill vital needs. The Conservation Corps did a lot of worthwhile work.

Whether it is worth the expense is a question we could take up. Frankly, much of the work would be worthwhile investment. As you point out we have decades of failed policy of underinvestment. Certainly relatively cheap labor to tackle some of these issues may have some merit.

At the end of the day, no doubt Americans generally would oppose the idea. Anything smacking of social consciousness and citizen responsibilities is very unpopular. the US isn't really a country. it's just a bunch of random individuals who happen to live near each other

Okay so the underfunded schools of Oklahoma suddenly are no longer understaffed. How do you intend to pay them? If there were decent pay going in to begin with, the crisis wouldn’t be going on in the first place.

“I have a law degree, why wouldn't my service be working as a public defender or in some form for public good? Bascially, nearly any career can be deployed for public benefit, so there's zero reason there'd be a conflict.”

And that was a choice. Just as I intend to choose to be a Congressional caseworker for some period in my career. There not being a choice in the matter is my objection.

“Mostly, I get the sense that what you really object to is the idea that citizenship comes with responsibility and hate the idea of citizens doing work for the public good.”

Partially because social contracts are bogus, partially because Rousseau was a raving lunatic.

Also really loving how
“Bascially, nearly any career can be deployed for public benefit,”

Can be more easily deployed for my argument than yours. It nearly any career can be deployed as such, then why should anyone have to be subject to compulsory service at all?

“Anything smacking of social consciousness and citizen responsibilities is very unpopular.”

Well, your idea of citizenship is borrowed from the most popular anti-liberal of the 18th century. Rousseau, a flaming misogynist of his day, was the guy to turn to about citizens giving up their rights for the public good as the foundation of a social contract. Most of democratic society after that point realized it was composed of heaps and bounds and piles of smelly bullshit.

conscript the lawyers and send them to the front lines along with the abortion doctors

Why do you think you have any credibility whatsoever, are Prado? You've adequately demonstrated you have nearly no notion of what you're talking about

(Can’t refute actual argument with real points.)
(Just claim he has no credibility.)

Why do I owe anything to a society I never chose to be a part of?

1). Obviously, taxes would have to cover the costs of national service. There is a whole bunch of people in a washington who develop this thing called a "budget" and can raise taxes for such purposes

2) the idea that citizenship comes with obligations predates Rosseu by, oh, nearly three thousand years. Societies have always had a list of various obligations to society. Read some Confucius. Even Jesus and Jewish thinking has emphasize responsibilities to others. Certain Roman and Greek phikosophers understood the concept

3) modern conservativism and especially libertarianism is beasically free loading dressed up in an ideology. You're happy to secure the many benefits of living in a society, but rebel at being asked to contribute. Everything you have exists because of society. That's just reality

4) just because nearly any career CAN be put to public benefit, thy doesn't mean many are. Many people will only work for the highest bidder because they will not do any work except for their own benefit. You want to suggest that's the moral view, but I think most would recognize it as a bit twisted

You haven't walked out. If that's what you think, walk out into the wilderness and never come back. Don't take anything with you you didn't make yourself from compnonenet you made yourself

Sure, you've already benefitted hugely even then. You have benefitted, yet you begrudge giving back. As I said, freeloading dressed as philosophy.

It's a good thing I don't know your parents, or I'd inform them that you don't feel you owe them a damn thing and would be just as happy to watch them starve on an iceflow since after all, you didn't choose to have them feed you as a baby (should have let you starve if you didn't sign a contract, silly them!) or clothe or house you or teach you any of the things they've taught you.

THAT attitude of "why should I?" Is precisely why I have so much disdain for conservatives. At the end of the day, it is the ideology of the ungrateful, irresponsible brat.

“If that's what you think, walk out into the wilderness and never come back.”

Presumption of tacit consent of citizens, who aren’t universally capable of leaving a society they did not choose to be born into, but thanks.

“If you don’t like it just leave” is a rallying call of conservatives calling out the “unpatriotic protesters” on FOX News.

Theres a concept in law that if you act as if there is a contract and you have assented, then you have. Otherwise it's called "unjust enrichment" or maybe "theft."

Actually, you are saying you don't consent to participate in society even as you sit yourself down to reap the benefits. If you truly don't consent and reject the offer, then you need to reject the offer. You can't just reap the benefits and then claim you never consented to participate. Your actions show you have, in fact, consented.

The clear point isn't the "you don't look like us so leave," but rather that your "rejection" of the social compact is utter falacy and tosh. It's a lie that you haven't consented. You consent evry damn day, and as you say, you're entirely free toleave it.

If the US had mandatory public service, you'd be free to denounce your U.S. citizenship and leave, so it isn't even "compulsory" but a choice you make by not opting out.

You're whole argument is rubbish. And always has been.
(Next, you'll say "blah, blah, blah, I can't hear you! it disproves nothing, once again.)

Everyone is capable of leaving. They just don't

You should read "The ones who walk away from Omelas"

"1). Obviously, taxes would have to cover the costs of national service. There is a whole bunch of people in a washington who develop this thing called a "budget" and can raise taxes for such purposes"

You missed the point 100%. If the money were there and being spent on these projects, even without forcing citizens to be part of them, the crises wouldn't exist. And if the crises didn't exist, then the claimed motivation for compulsory service is pointless.

"2) the idea that citizenship comes with obligations predates Rosseu by, oh, nearly three thousand years. Societies have always had a list of various obligations to society. Read some Confucius. Even Jesus and Jewish thinking has emphasize responsibilities to others. Certain Roman and Greek phikosophers understood the concept"

In the context of republics and "public good" Rousseau absolutely is the one to look at. And the other people you listed aren't particularly the minds of liberal philosophical traditions either.

"3) modern conservativism and especially libertarianism is beasically free loading dressed up in an ideology. You're happy to secure the many benefits of living in a society, but rebel at being asked to contribute. Everything you have exists because of society. That's just reality"

I mean I guess if you ignore the several times I said otherwise maybe you could have a point. But you're just slandering ideologies who think OTHER people should have CHOICE and that their PERSONAL CONSENT should be taken into consideration.

"4) just because nearly any career CAN be put to public benefit, thy doesn't mean many are. Many people will only work for the highest bidder because they will not do any work except for their own benefit. You want to suggest that's the moral view, but I think most would recognize it as a bit twisted"

And are you suggesting that if service is compulsory, everyone taking part wouldn't be doing it out of the personal benefit of not being arrested? People hold jobs they think are naturally good. Because people are by nature well-intentioned. You don't have to have a government job to be doing good things.

"It's a good thing I don't know your parents, or I'd inform them that you don't feel you owe them a damn thing and would be just as happy to watch them starve on an iceflow since after all, you didn't choose to have them feed you as a baby (should have let you starve if you didn't sign a contract, silly them!) or clothe or house you or teach you any of the things they've taught you."

Shut the fuck up about other people's personal relationships you know nothing about. A) If someone's parents treated them like shit over the course of them being raised, why should a child owe their deadbeat "caretakers" anything? B) My loving relationship with my parents were built over the course of several years. When I do something for them, it won't be out of OWING THEM SHIT, it's out of the care I have for them in my heart.

"Everyone is capable of leaving. They just don't"


UHHH NO THEY FUCKING DON'T, NOT EVERYONE IS A RICH ASS LAWYER

When did either of us sign a social contract? How on earth do benefits I had no say in and experienced at a time when I was too young to make personal decisions give me a debt I did not want? How is it possible by any logical reasoning for a social contract to extend beyond its first generation? The world is thrust upon me before I have any say in the matter, and without me being able to say what I want. This is not an exchange. If I throw a $100 bill at you and demand you do back-breaking labor for me, why is it reasonable for you not to be able to choose to refuse?

You don't get to tell anyone anything about their personal relationships. You don't get to tell anyone what they do or don't owe anyone. You don't get to devalue the choices people make.