Sunday, November 02, 2014

Should service be required for citizenship?



The issue is debated in the movie cut above but the book is a far better and deeper dive into the issue.

Should service be required for citizenship?

63 comments :

  1. you mean like another form of "draft" ? can average american nowadays accept the comeback of draft ?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Replies
    1. So agreed. Hollywood had a time limit and a need for sensationalization, so was it really a surprise that it went that way?

      Another one I liked is David Gerrod's Chtorr series.

      Back to main topic, I really don't see anything wrong with benefits for service. After all, isn't it just an extension of things like military scholarships? Going to extreme might even be good, no President that is not a vet might make the leadership more mindful of the costs of military actions, yet know that sometimes it is necessary to stave off worse.

      Delete
    2. David Gerrod's Chtorr series was real good, too bad he never finished the other books.

      Delete
    3. The book and the movie were so much unalike to be about different subjects.

      Delete
    4. The movie was by that Verhoven dude who admitted that he never read the book. He grew up in occupied holland during ww2 so it isn't surprising he would have an anti-military bias. I enjoyed book and movie both though, for different reasons.

      Delete
    5. Movie was fun... but it was an satire of book... and that Book... is an epic thing on the Bible level.

      And lads... the Klendathu Drop is the most epic piece of music and scene in the history of cinema!

      Delete
  3. There has never been an egalitarian yet bifurcated society yet. Heinlein's solution to limited political enfranchisement is something that deserves a shot some day by some form of government. People often talk about the rights of citizens, but forget about the responsibilities of citizens. Plato even came to the conclusion that a "philosopher king" was better than pure democracy, and Heinlein's solution to creating a "philosopher king" (enlightened ruler) by limiting those who put their life on the line might be a more workable solution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. limited political enfranchisement.......isnt that what the Chinese are all about ?

      Delete
    2. Don't knock limited political enfranchisment. It was what made America great. We still lack "universal enfranchisement" because of the minimum age requirements for citizens to vote and hold office. The logic behind not letting kindergartners vote is that they don't have the experience and maturity to vote with seriousness and understanding. The logic behind people being 35 before holding some offices is that they have gathered enough life experiences at that point to be of value and use to their fellow citizens.

      This is just a different way of trying to go about the same logic, creating a pool of voters who are mature, thoughtful, and dedicated to the continuation of the society. The difference is a choice of service instead of being able to live to X number of years.

      Delete
  4. Service(military) for citzenship is a good idea, but i personally think that service (any kind of work) for citzenship is better.


    BTW, high caliber in WoT is fine, just got it yesterday,

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In Citizens Federation the service was not only in military but also in civilian branch that give you a right to vote.

      Delete
    2. Didn't read the book. I will try to find in a bookstore over here.

      Delete
  5. If you are not willing to serve and sacrifice your time, health and body for the state, you are not able to vote.
    Service in the Military, LEO, peace corps and merchant Marine as well as other national and state formations is what would be needed to become a full citizen.
    If you do not, your still a citizen and protected by and from the state and others you just do not get to vote in elections.
    To vote you must serve.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That would be about how I read it too. I would include elementary and high school teachers and probably medical workers too but that nurse up in Maine has me second guessing that lately...

      Delete
    2. If that happens then everyone will not be chasing the "Black" vote or the "Mexican" vote or the "White" vote. They will make a straight like for the Military/Police/Govt. vote. And belive me....in any democracy there will be vote chasing organizations and lobby groups which will specialize into sucking the vote/political milage out of a particular demographic and then infecting it with the kind of dirty politics that we can see today. If this Idea comes true.....the Military and Police can kiss professionalism goodbye. Forever. You'd be just like those Arab Armies specializing in killing domestic discord rather than external enemies becuase thats what Highly Politicaly Enabled Armies and Law Enforcement do.

      And yes, under this kind of a system a company like Lockhead Martin would have had absolutly no problem hiring the best "Vote Chasers" amongst the military...infecting you to vote yes for every little bit of that JSF-35.

      The cornerstone of Democracy.....not one fucking system/organization/collection of people/interest group takes precedence over another. Every organization that is choosen as a suitiable organization for "National Service for Citizenship" like Police, Military, Martial Arts sensie's, Boy Scouts, Fire Dept., Natural Disaster Rescue Organization, National Guard, Arctic Resource Explorers etc and Ice Road Truckers etc. will all get highly politicized and infected rather than cure the current system. They always have.

      Delete
    3. Please see my comments below...

      This is not a conscripted society, like the arab countries you refer to above, because the entire system is based residents opting-in and choosing to become a citizens through personal sacrifice. It would not be what we see today in bureaucracy, where it is a sanctuary for the fat, dumb, lazy and intellectually challenged. Democracy is the rule of the lowest common denominator. I say bull shit to your comment about LMC, because it true citizens where having to decide which weapons their brothers and sisters used in combat they would not be steamy piles of lighting shit. Steamy Piles of lighting shit is what you get when you compromise and spread out "jobs" to every state. The $225 million per copy doesn't buy you a shitty plane it buys you votes from high end non educated skill labor, leaders in the labor community. Read the book dumb ass.

      Delete
  6. The film was written under the title 'bug war', the starship troopers tie in was much later.

    Were I to found my empire, it would be ruled by me, as an absolute tyrant, with little interest in ruling the day to day.
    A limited national legislature, made up of 100 senators, elected by the citizenry in a single direct one man one vote election, who handle national level stuff.
    Powerful local (sub 10,000 civillians) governments elected by residents, with whatever powers they appoint themselves, with total control over local tax rates and near total over laws, (legalise FGM and I use my imperial powers to burn your region to the ground).

    Citizenship would be earnt by 20 years service in the Saurdakar, with a 5 year exemption per parent or grandparent who is a citizen, to a minimum of 5 years.

    The saurdakar would make up the technical/professional portions of the armed forces, airforce, armour, intelligence, command staff, ect

    Citizens would form the officer and nco corps of the residents militia
    The bulk of the militia would be everyone else
    Border provinces militia would be responsible for delaying enemy incursions long enough to evacuate the populace and for second line militia to deploy
    Second line province militia would be responsible for stopping the enemy attack at any cost.
    Third line militias, with support of the Saurdakar would be responsible for destroying all enemy forces within the empire and carrying out a counter invasion.

    So, yes, citizenship would be open to anyone and contingent on military service, however it would mean rather less than it does traditionally.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If service is required for citizenship, the ACLU would cry fowl and if Americans are required to serve in an unpopular war, the cries of First Amendment violations will be loud and clear. The claim will be that by serving in an unpopular war, citizens are being forced to endorse it.

    However, the idea of making immigrants serve prior to being granted citizenship as a proof of loyalty (like Ancient Rome) may go down much better

    ReplyDelete
  8. The problem with democracy is that we don't have democracy.
    The word comes from Demos and Kratos

    Demos is people, in a clanish racist nationalistic ethinic linguistic sense.
    Kratos is power.

    My town has three councilors, elected by my town. However they sit on a bourough council of 54 councilors, so the demos of my town has no kratos, local matters that only affect my town are decided by councilors I don't vote for.
    But it gets even worse
    Some matters, waste and transport off the top of my head, are dealt with at a multi borough level. Not only does my demos have no say over its transport, my elected representatives don't even sit in the same chamber as anyone who does.

    Power is always held above where anyone is accountable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. so you think that little of people that have worn the uniform? you believe that those who have done work that many wouldn't are as susceptible to stupidity as the lame and lazy who sit on their couches? you actually believe that there is no growth through travel, sacrifice and hardships? you think the 18 year old college student is the same as the 18 year old combat vet?

      amazing.

      to answer your question they can try but they will fail. if you knew what is asked of those that serve then you would know better.

      Delete
  9. On a related topic, I've seen Singapore citizens complain that once they get out of the army, other "permanent resident" non-citizens have an edge over them in the workforce. They are just starting when others have been ahead of them for 2 years, with seniority over those that have served. This seems to be generating a lot of discontent with complaints that the government is "pro-foreigner" and "anti-citizen". If you did this, how would you head off the discontent? I mean, a 5 year head start in your job vs the right to vote once every 6 years? I'd blow off the chance to pick the next figurehead for the pay raise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This sounds like a marketing fail by the government. The government needs to advertise the sacrifice its citizens make by serving in the military and create/reinforce its value to future employers. Those citizens that are complaining are full of shit, 20 years old workers with 2 years of experience are still 20 years and they are worthless in the workplace, unless it is manual labor, but try getting them to show up on time to work. Those fucks just don't want to serve. People generally suck as employees until they get closer to 25, so those 2 whole years make ZERO difference. In fact as an employer i would rather hire a 20 year old vet with zero experience than a 22 year old with 4 years of experience. Lazy as kids is what they are.

      Delete
    2. I have experienced the same while working in Singapore, but you can't make it an example since it isn't a real democracy, plus considering the type of foreign companies based in Singapore they would still give more jobs to expats.

      The solution is making the service not only military, so if you are pursuing a career in law you will work for the justice system or if going to pursue a medicine career in the health one. Plus you can put a quota on universities for "citizens".

      Delete
    3. Well, citizenship is optional under my system.
      You are conscripted in to the militia no matter what, although that would obviously be part time.
      5 years (or 10, 15, 20) is entirely optional, and 5 years is the length for a short service officer in the RAF, or was anyway.
      If you value your career more, that's your choice, but I would expect some soft power advantages to accrue to citizens, the fewer citizens, the greater the advantage.
      I would expect 20-30% to achieve citizenship, but that could be 3% or 90%

      Delete
    4. And what would you do with a population full of conscripts? way better a population that learns trough civil service the value of the state, of sacrifice etc... etc.. while keeping the economy going.

      Why would you enlist a top student if he would be way more productive as a public researcher.

      Delete
    5. Except in case of war, and I suppose some training, a researcher would be a researcher, a farmer a farmer and a ferris wheel owner a ferris wheelvowner .

      Delete
    6. Citizens do not teach elementary school, fight fires, arrest criminals, fight on the battlefield for money or fame, the true civil servants do it because it is a calling. Civil service jobs should be paid a fair yet not absorbent wage, because their reward is the fulfillment of their perceived duty. Most people do not understand this because they are inherently selfish. For example, being a parent to a child is job that you do not receive financial compensation for yet you are rewarded in intangibles and thus you are fulfilled. Conversely, if we pay people to become parents then you will have people doing it for cash flow, which is bastardizing all of the great things about being a true parent and you have people becoming parents for money instead of duty. This same philosophy applies to civil servants, and you are seeing the results of it your cities. In Orlando, Florida the average cop makes around $65k per year, that is a problem, because that is enough money for someone who is not called to the service to roll the dice, and now we/Orlando has individuals who place income above duty, so money will always enter into their thinking while they are working their job, not preforming a duty. Do you want your child's kindergarten teacher to be doing her job for the money or the love of educating children?

      Delete
    7. For that reason in civil service you normally have l'"argent de poche".

      P.S. I know "personally" both of your points, my father did his civil service in place of his brother and after that he choose to teach, that in italy is way an underpaid job(even if with his financial skills(as second job) he granted us a good quality of life that for example let my brother study at an Ivy league university.

      Delete
  10. I think the term "service" in this discussion always seems to get muddle, and individuals immediately associate service with the military, and i disagree with that assumption. I understand why that happens because in our polarized society serving in the military is seen as the only way one can serve, and that view is supported by Hollywood and the media, because it is dramatic. If anyone really read the book by RAH, they would understand that you could meet the service obligation in many different forms, and the infantry only accounted for a portion of the service members. Potential citizens could serve their nation by teaching, mowing grass, practicing medicine... The duty that you were assigned in service to your nation was based on personal aptitude, talent, age and need of the nation. So, you could essentially serve your term as a gardener at 65 years old and earn your citizenship. The idea is that everyone that is a citizen must contribute to the betterment of the society, and it would help to foster a tighter community bound. Every citizen would have something in common, there service, much the same way many of us share mutual bond now even though our military backgrounds differ. Paying tax is not a form of service it is a variable sunk cost, there is no duty implied because you can not legally opt out of paying taxes.
    Anyway what Heinlein wrote about was an individual's service or their sacrificing for the betterment of the nation, this is not fascist, btw. If some else compares that movie to that book I am going to murder their face, j/k, but i swear people have never read the book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There were varieties of service, and no one could be refused, but I'm not sure anyone got to spend their summers mowing the lawn in a country garden.

      Although a while since I read it.

      Delete
    2. "if you came in here in a wheelchair and blind in both eyes and were silly enough to insist on enrolling, they would find you something silly to match. Counting the fuzz on a caterpillar by touch, maybe."

      There ya go boys and girls, for those of you thinking that Heinlein was only talking about military service.

      I can tell you get it Will. Well said.

      Delete
  11. "We are going in with the first wave, means more bugs for us to kill. You smash the entire area, you kill anything with more than two legs. You get me!?"

    - Lieutenant Willy
    Company K, Third Regiment, First Mobile Infantry Division
    Operation Bughouse

    ReplyDelete
  12. What about people with physical disabilities, FDR would not have never been elected a president because he was not able bodied to serve.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is not about serving in the military it is about serving your country. The Service will find a position suitable to its needs and your desires and ability, this isn't about a dream job it is about serving your nation, should you choose to become a citizen. WTF, about FDR? Read the book. If you have no legs but are an account by trade, you would not be asked to be postman, you would be assigned to the IRS, and you have to have served to be elected to office, you don't have to have use of all of your body parts. Look at yourself for example despite the fact the you are unable to use your brain they would find a position for you as a door stop or something else similarly challenging.

      Delete
  13. So for people who do not meet the physical or mental requirements (or are told they don't anyways) will be controlled and lorded over by a group of people who do?

    And what do you think the underclass of people are not of the elite will do when they figure out they are being ruled over without their consent?

    What if they do meet the requirements, but there aren't enough spaces for all those who wish to serve? Is this military or national service organization going to select only the best of the best? Or are they going to do a lottery? Or are they going to find a place for everyone who serves?

    So many issues with this concept to find problematic AND objectionable.

    I vote no.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. amazing.

      no one is laying out a plan. no one is even coming up with implementation guidelines. all that's being done is asking a hypothetical question for further discussion.

      what happens?

      people take it where it isn't in order to shoot it down. just plain wow. and people WONDER why i hesitate to post what if articles and stuff like that.

      ITS BECAUSE PEOPLE ALWAYS WANT TO TRY AND PROVE HOW FUCKING SMART THEY ARE BY SHOOTING HOLES AND RUINING THE DISCUSSION.

      FUCK IT.

      Delete
    2. Solomon, dont knock it just yet. This is an amazing topic and thats why you are seeing a lot of activity here. Lets put a little direction to the discussion and hope for a better more concrete result.

      (Good God, this post makes me sound like a guy from HR or ethics class)

      Delete
    3. Lol... it's clearly look's like you never read the book.

      The Federal service recruitment officer said in the book, that even if you would be blind and without legs they would find a job for you because it is your right to serve. Even if that would be checking the integrity of tracks with your touch. Everyone can serve, no mater of his physical fitness, gender, color or religion.

      Delete
    4. but that's the book. We're talking about hypothetical plan and its execution which may differ from said book.

      I should point out that Heinlein never intended this book to be anything more than a book. His other work dealt with a variety of different political views as well.

      Sol, discussion go places where we don't always expect which is the point of having discussions.

      Delete
  14. Solomon, I get your above mentioned point. Just let me finish my Lunch Break and I shall break into some electoral Mathematics here. Food for thought. Now....wheres than Lunch.

    ReplyDelete
  15. But first lets gain consensus about what parameters and jobs would qualify as a Vote Earning Citizenship Jobs. My list-

    Military
    Police
    Bureaucracy
    Judiciary
    Public Office. (Highest to lowest...town councilor to President)
    Civilian Merit Award Holders including people on the Shortlist/Nominees who did not win.
    Public Utilities and Works Dept. Employees.
    Disaster Management. (Fire Dept. and other departments tasked with disaster relief. This would also get covered under Bureacracy since it is a Govt. Dept. and disaster Managemrnt is as of now a Govt. Monopoly)
    Medical Personnel. (Ambulance Driver all the way up to that fancy surgeon)
    The Teaching Community. (Kinder Garden all the way up to Doctoral and Post Grad and University)
    All people completing a National Service Corps or Peace Corps or Doctors without borders etc. tenure.
    Prison Sintches. (????)


    Solomon and others, please feel free to add and reduce any jobs from this list. Then depending on the list of Jobs we have...we can then go into the hardcore numbers and electoral pull/push of these groups.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also please note that once your job becomes a Vote Earning Citezenship Job you will not be allowed to form Unions because you can only owe alliegence to one cause. Cant seek another alternative discourse which uses extra-judicial pressure. If the above mentioned jobs and any other jobs mentioned here by other posters are allowed to still form unions, then it wont be different from our current political setup.

      Delete
    2. Have you read the book? Do you understand the core concept being discussed, please describe to me what you think is being asked, it is okay if you don't understand. Unions, who the fuck is talking about unions. The term is only for 2 years and you have to be asked stay. Two things, 1. people are called into service they are not there because they are not capable of finding a decent job like today and 2. unions are antiquated and are a bastion for the weak, they have no place in evolved society as the suck the life and ingenuity out of a productive economy. Read the book, it is one of RAH juvenile novels you should be able to comprehend the ideas written within.

      Delete
    3. Hopefully your lack of response is due to your efforts reading the book, good luck Singh.

      Delete
  16. Based on the comments here I can tell that most of you have not read Starship Troopers and do not understand the idea behind this sort of system whatsoever. The idea in general is that it is not a good idea for just anyone to have franchise, that most people are vein, pety, self-centered and generally uninformed, and that franchise is something that should have to be earned.

    That only those who are willing to fight for what they believe in, and put the welfare of the state before their own lives should be allowed the right of franchise. And service is not compulsary, the difference is that people who don't complete service have no franchise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The idea in general is that it is not a good idea for just anyone to have franchise..."

      That was very well said.

      and look at our society now where the "vein, pety, self-centered and generally uninformed" are voters...

      Delete
  17. Service should not be required for citizenship but being a immigrant should not make one exempt from conscription when one is a citizen.
    Though the funny part is that we rarely have people who served in other armies and even veterans in the boot camp.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You should read the book before dismissing the idea, in the book citizenship just means the rights to political franchise, as all of earth has been under a single world government since various military groups abolished national governments following a major world war, seized power, and formed a united earth government. (interestingly a similar thing happened with the british soldiers in africa during ww1 [or was it 2], they formed a soldiers parliament).

      Anyway who is going to vote for your conscription, that sounds like lots of hard work!

      Delete
    2. it would not come via votes unfortunately...

      Delete
    3. RE: JNZ
      Actually conscription has in some democratic countries like Israel, Finland and Switzerland majority support.
      Also I would rather go with the Swiss model with less taxes for those who serve.

      Delete
    4. And one of those countries is surrounded by countries that want it destroyed, and has a rather resilient indigenous resistance movement. The other, Finland is right next to Russia. Switzerland, well they are a different story, but even so there were people who tried to abolish the practice.

      Good luck getting that policy through in an english speaking country where all the electorate can think about is how they can get an extra handout from the government (no matter how much they earn, if they are a large farmer, or a middle income person). The only thing these elections we are having is producing, is more beneficiaries.

      Delete
  18. I have read Star Ship Troopers many times. I think I understand the concepts Heinlein put forward when it comes to the federal service. Please correct me if I am wrong.
    To be able to vote or run for higher public office you must spend 2 years in the federal service.
    The federal service is simply giving up 2 years of your life to be a poorly paid government employee. You cannot be rejected from the federal service. You will only be offered certain jobs in the federal services if you pass certain Physical, Psychological, Intellectual and ability standards. Where you come out on these standards is determined after you sign the papers joining the federal service.
    It is kind of like how in Germany after leaving Gymnasium you have to do a 2 year internship working at the lowest level of whatever profession you choose. My one friend form Germany did his working in a theater in Berlin as a stage hand.
    The difference is that in Star Ship Troopers the service is an option that if you don't take you can't vote.
    The difference is that the purpose of the Federal Service in Star Ship Troopers is to see if you are willing to sacrifice your time and possibly future career to gain the ability to have a say in how the country is run.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Heinlein didn’t just pull the idea out of thin air. Elements of the idea have been around since the ancient Greeks. Athens had citizen soldiers and Sparta had Soldier-citizens. Everyone has a rough idea of the lifelong military training of Sparta from the movie 300 (which admittedly had its share of historical flaws). Military service defined a male Spartan citizen. Women also received some combat training. In the first few Olympics, the Athenian women competitors whined that the Spartan women were as strong as Athenian men. In fact the only people who received tombstones were men who died in battle and women who died in childbirth (i.e. giving birth to warriors).
    But the Mobile Infantry’s citizenship is more like that given to the armies of Rome. While Republican Rome’s army was mostly citizen soldiers, the Imperial army was made up of volunteers from all over the empire. After serving 20 years they were given citizenship and land. If they progressed in rank, such as centurions, they could be granted or buy their citizenship earlier. In Troopers, they didn’t receive the Franchise till after their enlistment was up…not during service, only after once they had earned it by fighting not just showing up to get the college tuition money. Over the course of the Roman Empire, fewer and fewer Romans were actually in the army. They were being given the franchise at birth and didn’t appreciate it as much as the grunts who had to spend literally half their lives earning it. Eventually generals and even Emperors came from the “barbarians” rather than Rome. The real life inspiration for “King Arthur” was probably one of these retired soldiers turned citizen in Roman Britain.
    But don’t forget that the Mobile Infantry of Heinlein was also an ideal military. You couldn’t become an Officer unless you had already led men in battle. Can you imagine if our military did that? No REMF’s anywhere in the Pentagon? And since in Heinlein’s world you had to serve to be in politics, the majority of Congress would have been in the military and even probably seen combat. Maybe we wouldn’t be distracted by shiny toys like the F-35 and V-22 and we would be modern Higgins boats to take our next generation to the shores of Tripoli…which is in Libya and is a hot bed for Al-Caida and ISIS so we really might be going to the shores of Tripoli again.
    He also predicted in Troopers (published in 1958) that by the end of the century parents would stop spanking kids and street gangs made up mostly of teen thugs would be a worldwide problem. Sound familiar?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. absolutely outstanding! great addition. where is your blog...couldn't find it!

      Delete
    2. My blog is literally two days old and I haven't posted anything on it yet. And Wordpress is a bit wonky.
      When I get it up for real I'll let you know.

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.